| 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: |
| Who Killed Lucy?; All the theories | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: 20 Apr 2014, 05:49 (367,909 Views) | |
| Professor Plum | 11 May 2014, 06:49 Post #441 |
|
I am pretty sure Nicks tattoo is of a Dove, and yes on the side of the neck, the right, I think. |
| Just livin' in perfect New Zealand! | |
![]() |
|
| david | 11 May 2014, 13:14 Post #442 |
|
I did a Google image search and found a few pictures showing Nick's tattoo, none of them very clear, but it could well be a dove or some other kind of bird. In fact, in a shot with him and Dotty (last appearance) it looked pretty faded. Yes it's on the right and quite a way back, but not really the back of his neck, although it might have been visible to someone sitting behind him in a car. I'm sure that in at least one of his earlier returns he had some kind of web much further forward. |
![]() |
|
| Hobsons | 11 May 2014, 14:07 Post #443 |
|
Did a search too - you're right the aren't many pictures - what I did notice sometimes there's no tattoo ... either makeup dept forgot to draw it or it fades or is washed off with perspiration under the studio lights
|
| |
![]() |
|
| MrJames | 11 May 2014, 19:59 Post #444 |
|
I know we all have our own theories but the questions yet to be answered on-screen are: - Who sent Max the picture of him and Lucy kissing? - Why did Whitney want to delete Lucy's message history with her? - What is the relevance of Jake watching Lee and Lucy kissing? Purely a red-herring? - Who gave Lucy the cocaine? - What did Ian do after his argument with Lucy? - What is the significance of Stacey's key? - How do Charlie, Nick and Les relate to Lucy, if at all? - Why did Masood glare at Lucy on the day she died? - What is the significance of Jake's movements on the night she died? - Where was Lee when he should have been at the party? Shaping up nicely I think. Billy and Linda are two character we need to keep our eye on as well I reckon. |
![]() |
|
| Mrs Peel | 11 May 2014, 22:30 Post #445 |
|
It's not sensationalist at all. It's people's interpretation of PR blurbs that are turning this into something contrived and sensationalist. If DTC does what I think he's doing, people will see that many of the seemingly disparate storylines in force before Lucy's murder come together in a nice package at the end. I keep saying: Read Agatha Christie. Or watch Broadchurch, which was very Christie-esque. What we saw Friday night was another staple of Christie's - the unreliable witness/narrator in Jake Stone. Stone remembers being in an unlicenced taxi with a driver who had a tattoo on the back of his neck, a tattoo of a woman's name. Nick Cotton's tattoo - a spiderweb - was on the side of his neck. Charlie Cotton is usually seen in public, wearing either a scarf around his neck, a high-necked shirt or a jacket with the collar turned up. One of the later turning points in this package will be when we see theh tattoo on the back of Charlie's neck. FWIW, I don't think Charlie was the one who struck the blow which killed Lucy, but he knows who did and helped transport the body to the common. A woman killed Lucy Beale, and it's a woman we've seen very little of lately, aside from the two brief and incongruous scenes shown in the Vic on the night she was killed. |
![]() |
|
| Mrs Peel | 11 May 2014, 22:49 Post #446 |
|
Many you pose won't be answered until near the end of the story, itself. Some aren't relevant at all.
Jake. Why? Because Max played the moral high ground over Jake, a married man, getting involved with Lauren, Max's daughter, irrespective of the fact that Lauren's mother had also broken up a marriage when she was Lauren's age - Max's. Jake is confronting Max with the hypocrisy that drives him.
Because Whitney and Lucy have never been that fond of each other as people. In fact, Lucy always looked down her snobby nose at Whitney and was surprised that Whitney and Lauren had become such close friends when she went away. I would imagine Whitney had been leaving snotty messages on Lucy's page and may even have left something childishly mean on there after her death. She wouldn't want to be a troll, but Lucy's death does seem to be bringing out the petty, childish meanness in most people, judging by what Ian as said to Bobby and about Denise, and what Peter has said to both Lola and Lauren.
Entirely a red herring, but it also proved to Jake that whilst Max was a hypocrite, Lucy was a Class A DickTease.
My guess? First Carl, then Ronnie. At the time of her death, Ronnie was Lucy's dealer.
Probably sniff around Jane.
Stacey has something that Charlie wants. People forget that the father of Stacey's child is a drug dealer, himself. And a thief. And a murderer.
Nick, not at all. I would be surprised if he even knew about this. Les was used by Charlie as an unwitting drug mule. Charlie is involved directly with Lucy's death. I don't think he killed her, but he helped move her body to the Common.
Because he was pissed off that Jane was spending too much time obsessing over Ian's kids, that's all. Not every scene is a cryptic clue.
Jake thought he was meeting Lauren and Lucy showed up. His movements will become very important when his mind sobers up to remember something that he shouldn't have and confronts one of two other people who intruded upon his meeting with Lucy or who were there to begin with. Jake is leaving Walford in a box.
Probably snogging Whitney. Lee is another red herring.
Why? Billy Mitchell is many things, but he isn't a murderer. He was caught on CCTV telling Heather that he'd "kill" her if she told Janine he was using her credit card illegally. That came to nought. Billy was the first red herring suspect dished out because Lucy nicked Janine's business from under him. I think a Mitchell killed Lucy, but it wasn't Billy. And why would Linda be a killer? She's only just joined and is landlady of the Vic - a sidelined landlady, yes, but are you suggesting that Linda killed Lucy and Lee removed her body? |
![]() |
|
| foiledagain | 11 May 2014, 22:53 Post #447 |
|
Hello. I'm assuming Lee's DNA brings him back into the storyline. |
![]() |
|
| MrJames | 11 May 2014, 23:03 Post #448 |
|
How on earth did you get that from 'we need to keep our eye on Billy and Linda?' We've been told time and time again that this story isn't just about discovering who killed Lucy, but who was involved with her before her death and who has secrets in relation to her. I don't for one second think Billy or Linda killed Lucy (which I never suggested) but I have a suspicious feeling that they may somehow be involved. Suspicion. Not a concrete opinion. A similar thing with Masood. I think it is safe to say that he knows something, however tiny, about Lucy. They didn't throw that scene in there just because they had a few seconds spare. Again, it is highly improbable that Masood had anything to do with Lucy's death but I do not think that it is absurd to guess that he has information regarding her. e.g. Maybe he saw Lucy with her dealer? As I said at the very beginning of my post, I realise that we all have our own theories and I was merely rounding up the questions that we are yet to find the answers to on-screen. The very nature of us all having different theories means that not all of us will have the same answers to the questions that I laid out. |
![]() |
|
| Dan | 11 May 2014, 23:18 Post #449 |
![]() ![]()
|
Max and his affair with Lucy is not largely relevant to this murder. The email was probably sent from Jake and probably has nothing to do with why Lucy was killed. Max is a red herring. The police will find out that and Lucy were lovers and they will find her blood in his office and he will be the first arrest. He and David may also be punished for perverting the course of justice but it won't be Max who killed Lucy. Whitney is either completely self-absorbed and wants to remove her messages because she thinks it will look bad to the police or she doesn't want her friends affected with her negative feelings towards Lucy. People remember the good when people die suddenly and unexpectedly and I don't think Whitney would want to drag her and Lucy's issues up now of all times. I also think Whitney is genuinely shocked and saddened, she might not have been close with Lucy as they both tolerated each other for Lauren's sake but she didn't want her dead. It definitely won't be her either. Jake is embroiled in something incredibly deep and he may be cracking because he knows he is missing something that could be vitally important. He is struggling to face the Beales, knowing that he may well have been one of the last people to have seen Lucy alive. He knows something is off about the entire situation and isn't quite sure what at the moment. As and when he gets a recollection, he might not get out alive. This will be how this goes from potential manslaughter/accident, perhaps the accidental killing of a young girl to an incredibly dark murder plot. |
![]() 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! | |
![]() |
|
| Mrs Peel | 12 May 2014, 00:16 Post #450 |
|
Of course it will. Lucy and Lee had sex in the restaurant the night before she died. The morning of her death, they were discovered. In the short space of time between the discovery and Ian and Peter confronting her at home, she'd run through the Square, gone home and quickly got dressed for work. One of the first things forensics would have done with her body is to have taken vaginal swabs to determine if she'd had sex anytime immediately before her death. My guess is that they found sperm evidence that matched Lee's DNA. |
![]() |
|
| Mrs Peel | 12 May 2014, 00:26 Post #451 |
|
When DTC said "everyone would be involved," he didn't mean everyone would be involved. A lot of this storyline is, like Broadchurch, a character study in people who were associated, however tangentially, with Lucy Beale. Just because Masood glares at Lucy doesn't mean he knows something about her. Until that point, Jane had been leading Masood to believe that she wanted a relationship with him, yet at every opportunity, she's sneaking off to Ian's to commiserate with him about the restaurant or his problems with his kids. As Masood has informed her, quite rightly, apart from Bobby, whom she's adopted, Ian's other children are not her concern. Cindy Williams is even less of her concern, yet there she was interfering with Cindy's status with Cindy's legal guardian. Masood's glare at Lucy was from exasperation, because Jane had been dancing a jig to Ian's tune about his kids to Masood ever since she'd returned. Masood even subtly informed her that she was undermining Denise's position. This is nothing to do with Masood harbouring a secret and everything to do with the subsequent scene where he accused Ian, again, quite rightly, of using his child's death to get inside Jane's knickers. Ian's used tragedy before, and tragedy with Lucy, to get a woman into his bed. Billy was just the first red herring suspect thrown at the audience. When the EP said this storyline would involve everyone, he simply meant there were going to be deeper character studies into people who came into contact with this storyline. |
![]() |
|
| *Betty* | 12 May 2014, 00:33 Post #452 |
![]() ![]()
|
I think their is potential in the idea that someone hurt Lucy, Lucy left fine but later collapsed in the company of someone else who didn't touch her and in a panic that person moved the body. So it's the person who dealt the blow that ultimately killed Lucy, but the person who moved her body was the last person to see Lucy but ultimately did not kill her. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Ross | 12 May 2014, 11:39 Post #453 |
![]()
I'm in the kitchen eating a biscuit
|
And you know that for sure how?
|
Massive thanks to NickM for this wonderful signature! ![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| Mrs Peel | 12 May 2014, 12:36 Post #454 |
|
Think critically. How could everyone, I mean everyone be involved with the death of one person? What he was referring to didn't mean everyone would be treated as a suspect or even carry some secret about Lucy, but he's meaning that a death in a community has reverberating effects. This is a character study of most of the main characters in the show vis-a-vis Lucy's death. We've already seen the worst brought out in Ian. We've actually seen him imply to his youngest child that Bobby bears no way near the importance that Lucy bore to him, simply because Bobby's mother wasn't Cindy. In fact, Cindy Williams is more important to Ian, it appears. Ian ran, crying, after the car which took her away. He didn't do that when Jane left with his youngest son. We've seen the death of Lucy cause her uncle to think about his lost girl from years ago and want to get to the bottom of who killed her. David has never referenced Joe this time around, and to hear him speak of Karen was quite astounding. The Carters will become involved in this mess when Lee's DNA crops up on Lucy's body, and how much that will divert their attention from their rising problems is anyone's guess. These are character studies, mixed in with the occasional clues being dropped here and there that will lead to the twist in the tale around about Christmas time, and the denouement up until the anniversary episode. An Executive Producer of a programme like EastEnders wouldn't deal with a storyline this big in the literal sense. |
![]() |
|
| Jade | 12 May 2014, 19:52 Post #455 |
|
I don't watch much tv bar EE so never seen broadchurch. I have read many Agatha Christie novels and so far it doesn't seem like one of those either. I mean her novels usually have a detective of sorts (Marple, Poirot etc) multiple suspects with secrets which all slowly come out and then at the end gathers them all to solve it. Doesn't take nearly a year either. Maybe that will change over time, never seen broadchurch so I cant compare it to that. |
|
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". | |
![]() |
|
| WalfordE20 | 12 May 2014, 20:40 Post #456 |
![]()
|
So many hints and clues from tonight's episode and extra scene: Charlie's involved in a high-profile case which requires him to have a separate identity- supposedly There's no record of a taxi taking Lucy and Jake back to Walford One of Lucy's earrings was found in the flat, and traces of her blood in the kitchen |
![]() |
|
| Ennui | 12 May 2014, 20:41 Post #457 |
![]()
I've got my eye on you
![]()
|
Exclusive Scene: Police interview Jake Stone http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/4wkxZhByDz1gNxrfyYNcp3q/exclusive-scene-police-interview-jake-stone So, Lucy's blood was found in Jake's flat.
|
|
You can't just come bounding in here like John Wayne on a Spacehopper! | |
![]() |
|
| Eastend boy | 12 May 2014, 20:43 Post #458 |
![]()
|
Wager Nick is the killer? |
![]() |
|
| MrJames | 12 May 2014, 20:54 Post #459 |
|
I really commend the effort they are putting in. Plenty more questions posed than answered in that clip, which I love. |
![]() |
|
| Professor Plum | 12 May 2014, 21:37 Post #460 |
|
Broadchurch has just started playing here, we had the first episode Sunday night. I made a point of watching it, as it had been referenced on here before. I was rather surprised at the similarities. but getting back to Lucy. Her coat. I am so certain she was wearing it, when she ran off down the street, the last time we saw her alive. Has anyone got a clip of this? I know it has been seen hanging in the wardrobe since, but I am certain she was wearing it when we last saw her. |
| Just livin' in perfect New Zealand! | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · EastEnders Current & Future · Next Topic » |
















7:46 PM Jul 11