Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Walford Web, the online home of EastEnders' discussion since 1997. We cover EastEnders news, discussion and spoilers. Join the discussion and make your voice heard! We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're wondering what EastEnders is, click here to see what all the fuss is about.

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Who Killed Lucy?; All the theories
Topic Started: 20 Apr 2014, 05:49 (367,821 Views)
Winters
Member Avatar

Nick might have originally been planned to be involved in the killing, to let him get caught and arrested at the time of the anniversary, would be all kinds of nostalgic/historic. But Ian has been in the show for just as long, and much more, and it would be powerful in a different way.

Though, to be honest if it was Nick I would have laughed, I don't know if they could have done something so obvious.

Maybe in a different time when people were new to TV and more simple-minded. It would be a very fairy-tale like ending.
Edited by Winters, 6 Jan 2015, 02:34.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TimWil
Default Avatar

I was tempted to actually place a bet on Max being the killer at William Hill last week but glad I didn't since Jake Wood pulled that stunt at a darts tournament a few days ago, holding a placard which read "I Killed Lucy Beale." The odds narrowed significantly, right? I suspect this is more than cheekiness on Wood's part. He's apparently not able to go out on the Strictly Come Dancing tour which could have earned him a significant chunk of change. And he's probably not too happy about THAT.
Edited by TimWil, 6 Jan 2015, 05:55.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Winters
Member Avatar

I wonder could Nick first have been set to be Lucy's hidden dealer? I would have jumped out of my skin if they had done it well but it wouldn't have been realistic. Though making out he was dead also fits in with that to throws us off.

It just wouldn't have had much lasting impact and people would quickly have forgotten about it. Anything with Nick is always purely survival-driven or for financial gain. I think he will get his in the end but it will be a side plot.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jade
Member Avatar

My problem is what Emma said on NYD.

"Its still murder"
She actually said each word very precisely as well.

Had this been a lay person I wouldn't take issue many don't know what murder means. But murder is "the unlawful killing of a life in being with the intent to commit GBH or murder".
The mens rea (mental thought) needs intent. Had it been an accident or they didn't know they killed her that's not murder. Instead Emma could have been more ambiguous and said.
"You still killed her"
I know we all joke how stupid Emma is but she is still a police officer investigating a murder she would know what murder was. An accident or not knowing isn't murder. There needs to be some premeditation and some intent to cause that harm. Neither can be fulfilled if the person either didn't know at the time, was accident or didn't plan it. I wish they had left it more ambitious because killing can mean many things including murder, whereas murder is much more specific.
Your approval is neither desired nor required.

Julia Smith "We decided to go for a realistic, fairly outspoken type of drama which could encompass stories about homosexuality, rape, unemployment, racial prejudice, etc., in a believable context. Above all, we wanted realism".

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Shamelessness
Member Avatar


TimWil
6 Jan 2015, 05:54
I was tempted to actually place a bet on Max being the killer at William Hill last week but glad I didn't since Jake Wood pulled that stunt at a darts tournament a few days ago, holding a placard which read "I Killed Lucy Beale." The odds narrowed significantly, right? I suspect this is more than cheekiness on Wood's part. He's apparently not able to go out on the Strictly Come Dancing tour which could have earned him a significant chunk of change. And he's probably not too happy about THAT.
He would have known this before he signed up to Strictly.
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TimWil
Default Avatar

No, he didn't, Shamelessness. He had the rug pulled out from under him. Someone connected with production told me he's livid.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MrJames
Member Avatar

He doesn't really have any right to be livid. He's contracted to EastEnders first and foremost. If his EastEnders contract doesn't allow him to go on tour then that's that. He shouldn't or wouldn't have expected to go on tour in the first place because of EastEnders, so he can't be that annoyed about it. You can't make a year-long commitment and then complain about it later.

Plus, the tour will clash with rehearsals for the live episodes of which Max will probably be a pivotal part. Not only is it essential that Jake should be present for that, but it also strikes me that he would hate to NOT be present for the 30th anniversary. He continually expresses a genuine love and enthusiasm for the show.
Edited by MrJames, 6 Jan 2015, 15:20.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
soetmo
Member Avatar

Look at all the others who are given extended time off for other projects....Ritchie, Womack, McFadden, Wallace......i'd be annoyed too.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jade
Member Avatar

How do we know he is annoyed? He hasn't said anything of the sort and I am certain his joke was just that a joke and nothing more. He is a professional after all.
Your approval is neither desired nor required.

Julia Smith "We decided to go for a realistic, fairly outspoken type of drama which could encompass stories about homosexuality, rape, unemployment, racial prejudice, etc., in a believable context. Above all, we wanted realism".

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jade
Member Avatar

Soetmo
6 Jan 2015, 15:32
Look at all the others who are given extended time off for other projects....Ritchie, Womack, McFadden, Wallace......i'd be annoyed too.
He does get extended periods off when he does the Geico adverts where his short stints there probably pay him more than an entire year at EE. Certainly would make a joke out of a Strictly tour money wise. So I doubt hes that bothered, I haven't seen him complain.
Your approval is neither desired nor required.

Julia Smith "We decided to go for a realistic, fairly outspoken type of drama which could encompass stories about homosexuality, rape, unemployment, racial prejudice, etc., in a believable context. Above all, we wanted realism".

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
soetmo
Member Avatar

He does tend to have a summer break every year, it's true, but I thought he did his Geico recordings over here?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jade
Member Avatar

Soetmo
6 Jan 2015, 16:07
He does tend to have a summer break every year, it's true, but I thought he did his Geico recordings over here?
Nope he flies to America to do them. He has mentioned in this in interviews in the past. I am pretty sure he said he does them in New York but don't quote me on that but he defiantly goes over there and gets paid a lot more than EE. So like I said I doubt the Strictly tour and the pennies it would in comparison would bother him that much.
Your approval is neither desired nor required.

Julia Smith "We decided to go for a realistic, fairly outspoken type of drama which could encompass stories about homosexuality, rape, unemployment, racial prejudice, etc., in a believable context. Above all, we wanted realism".

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
WalfordFanatic
Member Avatar

Jade
6 Jan 2015, 15:52
How do we know he is annoyed? He hasn't said anything of the sort and I am certain his joke was just that a joke and nothing more. He is a professional after all.
I'm with you on this one, Jade. There is nothing in the media to suggest Jake is annoyed with the show. I saw the whole "I killed Lucy" sheet at the Darts as a joke, you could see him laughing, nothing more. Some of the cast and team are walking around with t-shirts saying it.
Posted Image

Thanks Nick
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Shamelessness
Member Avatar


If Jake did think he would get time off to do the tour he must've been delusional. He gets time off to do his insurance adverts in the US every year and has had a load of time off to take part in Strictly. If he wanted to do the tour he should've quit EastEnders, but he knows which side his bread is buttered.
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TimWil
Default Avatar

Wood was aware that his EE/BBC contract superceded his Strictly/BBC contract but he apparently still thought something could be worked out but it wasn't. And he's pissed.

Max being the killer would have the biggest impact on more characters than any other suspect. Lauren and Peter would realize they couldn't be together, Peter probably goes off to New Zealand and Lauren goes to be with Tanya. Abi probably goes to live with Carol and skulks off to Cora's when it suits her. And then there's the matter of Max's business-perhaps he'll leave it to Stacey to run despite her obvious inexperience? Maybe she'd bring someone in to help her. Cue new love interest...

I just wonder if they'd make it so epic that Max would actually die (suicide?) on the fifth anniversary of his son's death.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Shamelessness
Member Avatar


I doubt very much that Jake would leave voluntarily. He has a young family to support and has spoken recently about his commitment to the show. The SCD tour may pay well but it has no longevity in it like EE does. If what you're saying is true, he has no right to be pissed off, especially if nothing was actually agreed in the first place.

Can't see Max being the killer either. He might have helped move the body and protect the killer, but I don't think it will be him who did it.
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan
Member Avatar


Max has gone way down in my list of suspects behind Ian, Jane, Lee, Whitney and even Abi. I can't see it being him.

As for Jake, he needs to be there for the anniversary. It's inconvenient for the show that Jacqueline Jossa can't do it but people get pregnant, it happens. If he didn't, Jake should have known beforehand that the tour clashing with the 30th anniversary meant it was one or the other and that his EE contract had to come first.

Posted Image

Walford is about to change, lives are about to be destroyed, alliances will begin and the residents will never be the same again. Welcome to "Dungeon". New fan fic, coming soon...

Thanks Nick M for the brilliant sig!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Swirly
Member Avatar

I have been thinking Lucy and Emma's deaths may have been similar. I'm sure things were said that made me think Lucy could have been hit by a car (can't remember what now) but then thought surely the police would have mentioned this as an option but maybe it's not always that obvious if someone has been run over.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jade
Member Avatar

Swirly
6 Jan 2015, 19:09
I have been thinking Lucy and Emma's deaths may have been similar. I'm sure things were said that made me think Lucy could have been hit by a car (can't remember what now) but then thought surely the police would have mentioned this as an option but maybe it's not always that obvious if someone has been run over.
If Emma met with the killer then it cant be an accident or not knowing they did it. Because after listening to what the killer had to say. Emma clearly said "Its still murder" not you still killed her but murder. As a police officer she knows the difference. A murder needs to have intent and premeditation.
If they go down the route of accident or not knowing then DTC shouldn't have signed off that script not when it could have been so easily changed. The line was very definite.
We could say the killer lied to show intent and premeditation but that would be nonsense that line really bothered me.
Edited by Jade, 6 Jan 2015, 19:18.
Your approval is neither desired nor required.

Julia Smith "We decided to go for a realistic, fairly outspoken type of drama which could encompass stories about homosexuality, rape, unemployment, racial prejudice, etc., in a believable context. Above all, we wanted realism".

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Swirly
Member Avatar

Jade
6 Jan 2015, 19:17
Swirly
6 Jan 2015, 19:09
I have been thinking Lucy and Emma's deaths may have been similar. I'm sure things were said that made me think Lucy could have been hit by a car (can't remember what now) but then thought surely the police would have mentioned this as an option but maybe it's not always that obvious if someone has been run over.
If Emma met with the killer then it cant be an accident or not knowing they did it. Because after listening to what the killer had to say. Emma clearly said "Its still murder" not you still killed her but murder. As a police officer she knows the difference. A murder needs to have intent and premeditation.
If they go down the route of accident or not knowing then DTC shouldn't have signed off that script not when it could have been so easily changed. The line was very definite.
We could say the killer lied to show intent and premeditation but that would be nonsense that line really bothered me.
I know....could quite easily have been hit with a car intentionally.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Enjoy forums? Start your own community for free.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · EastEnders Current & Future · Next Topic »
Add Reply