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 (367,868 Views)
Mr Branning
Member Avatar

I just still can't believe Ronnie and Charlie are in cahoots and knew each other before their initial meeting. I know they both have psychopathic tendencies but to have the amount of scenes they've had together and to not even hint they knew each other before, let alone had a part in their neighbour's death, is a stretch of credibility.

I actually wouldn't be surprised if Ronnie was DTC's initial choice, before it was changed to come from the heart. There are some implausibilities in it being Lola (who my money's still on) but far fewer than it being Ronnie or Charlie.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Professor Plum
Default Avatar

With Martin coming soon, I assume he will be on the vege stall, that leaves Peter without a "home".
We know Ben Hardy is not sticking round forever.

What is starting to bug me now, is everyone knows Lucy is dead. Even if someone had a fight and she died by accident, that person still hasn't come forward.
That makes it hard for it to be a tragedy. If they had come forward, even a month or two after, and said "look, I know this looks bad, but this is what happened, I didn't mean to kill her, things just got a bit out of control"
I can understand that. But the longer this goes on, he harder it is going to have any sympathy for the person that did it.

Apart from a flippant remark by Ronnie to Carls parents, she has not given it a second thought.
Again why haven't the keystone cops been round talking to her?
Just livin' in perfect New Zealand!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mrs Peel
Member Avatar

Mr Branning
8 Nov 2014, 06:42
I just still can't believe Ronnie and Charlie are in cahoots and knew each other before their initial meeting. I know they both have psychopathic tendencies but to have the amount of scenes they've had together and to not even hint they knew each other before, let alone had a part in their neighbour's death, is a stretch of credibility.

Even if they didn't know each other before, and they probably didn't, there's more of a possibility for them to have been involved with the killing than the likes of Abi or Lola. Ronnie's killed before, and both have psychopathic tendencies.

Quote:
 
I actually wouldn't be surprised if Ronnie was DTC's initial choice, before it was changed to come from the heart. There are some implausibilities in it being Lola (who my money's still on) but far fewer than it being Ronnie or Charlie.


There are a fair few people on whom no suspicion has lain since the death who could very well have killed Lucy, and moved her body to the Common. Ronnie could have killed Lucy, and Charlie helped her move the body. Why? Then there's Peter. No one's bothered to find out where he was on that night. You could just as easily assume DTC changed his mind about Peter being his original choice for the killer, thinking that would totally diminish and demolish the Beales.

And Lee Carter has to figure in.

And Jane, as some people have observed.

The tagline, which we haven't heard so much of lately, was "Walford will never be the same." A Mitchell, aided and abetted by a Cotton, killing a Beale? Walford would never be the same.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mrs Peel
Member Avatar

Professor Plum
8 Nov 2014, 20:54
With Martin coming soon, I assume he will be on the vege stall, that leaves Peter without a "home".
We know Ben Hardy is not sticking round forever.

My thoughts exactly.

Martin can only be on the stall, which means that Peter is leaving. Whoever killed Lucy is leaving the Square. After the fiasco of revealing Archie's killer to the audience for the 25th, then having a false atonement via an escape delayed until Christmas 2010, did the show no favours. This time, everyone has to know who killed Lucy, revealed in the anniversary episode and either her killer leaving in a box of being arrested.

If you've noticed, apart from Timothy West leaving - and he was never going to stay beyond his contract - we've had no announcements of anyone leaving in the early part of the year, and I think that's deliberate.

Quote:
 
What is starting to bug me now, is everyone knows Lucy is dead. Even if someone had a fight and she died by accident, that person still hasn't come forward.
That makes it hard for it to be a tragedy. If they had come forward, even a month or two after, and said "look, I know this looks bad, but this is what happened, I didn't mean to kill her, things just got a bit out of control"
I can understand that. But the longer this goes on, he harder it is going to have any sympathy for the person that did it.

Apart from a flippant remark by Ronnie to Carls parents, she has not given it a second thought.


Again why haven't the keystone cops been round talking to her? [/quote]

There's no reason for the police to suspect Ronnie of anything. Carl's mother and brother are criminals, themselves. The last thing they would do after Carl's death and Ronnie's behaviour is contact the police. But, having said that, I don't think we've seen the last of the Whites.

But then, the police did exactly the same thing when investigating who shot Phil a month ago, that they did when investigating Jane's shooting back in 2007 - they shrugged and walked away.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
WalfordE20
Member Avatar

Let's not forget Stacey's key has once again slipped under the radar.

I also can't wait to see where Peter's new story leads.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mr Branning
Member Avatar

Mrs Peel
8 Nov 2014, 23:01
Mr Branning
8 Nov 2014, 06:42
I just still can't believe Ronnie and Charlie are in cahoots and knew each other before their initial meeting. I know they both have psychopathic tendencies but to have the amount of scenes they've had together and to not even hint they knew each other before, let alone had a part in their neighbour's death, is a stretch of credibility.

Even if they didn't know each other before, and they probably didn't, there's more of a possibility for them to have been involved with the killing than the likes of Abi or Lola. Ronnie's killed before, and both have psychopathic tendencies.

Quote:
 
I actually wouldn't be surprised if Ronnie was DTC's initial choice, before it was changed to come from the heart. There are some implausibilities in it being Lola (who my money's still on) but far fewer than it being Ronnie or Charlie.


There are a fair few people on whom no suspicion has lain since the death who could very well have killed Lucy, and moved her body to the Common. Ronnie could have killed Lucy, and Charlie helped her move the body. Why? Then there's Peter. No one's bothered to find out where he was on that night. You could just as easily assume DTC changed his mind about Peter being his original choice for the killer, thinking that would totally diminish and demolish the Beales.

And Lee Carter has to figure in.

And Jane, as some people have observed.

The tagline, which we haven't heard so much of lately, was "Walford will never be the same." A Mitchell, aided and abetted by a Cotton, killing a Beale? Walford would never be the same.

But I don't think Lucy's death was the work of a psychopath. I think it was something which got badly out of hand, tragically resulting in Lucy's death.

DTC's reasoning for changing the killer was that their original choice 'didn't come from the heart'. He's emphasised that they're not going for the shock factor with this and a Ronnie/Charlie reveal would achieve just that. A character with whom Lucy has never had any association and another she had never even met teaming up to kill a girl embroiled in a drugs plot we've heard nothing about. I know they're holding things back but that seems a little far-fetched.

DTC has said the suspects will soon be narrowed down. I think the suspicion is going to start falling on those closer to home in the coming months. The police are watching the Brannings, Jane is coming back and now Peter is going to get involved in drugs. I think, come New Year, we're going to find out Lucy's killer mixes in one of those circles.

And the tagline still stands. Whether Ronnie, Peter, Lola or even Dexter killed Lucy, the daughter of the show's longest-serving character has been killed and Walford will almost certainly not be the same again. Whoever's killed her, and whatever clan they belong to, there are going to be massive repercussions.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
leobeast
Member Avatar

Is Ryan going to play any part in this? For some reason I find it hard to believe that brief glimpse of him a couple of months ago was the last we'll see of him.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mrs Peel
Member Avatar

Mr Branning
9 Nov 2014, 04:52
Mrs Peel
8 Nov 2014, 23:01

Quoting limited to 2 levels deep
But I don't think Lucy's death was the work of a psychopath. I think it was something which got badly out of hand, tragically resulting in Lucy's death.

DTC's reasoning for changing the killer was that their original choice 'didn't come from the heart'. He's emphasised that they're not going for the shock factor with this and a Ronnie/Charlie reveal would achieve just that. A character with whom Lucy has never had any association and another she had never even met teaming up to kill a girl embroiled in a drugs plot we've heard nothing about. I know they're holding things back but that seems a little far-fetched.

DTC has said the suspects will soon be narrowed down. I think the suspicion is going to start falling on those closer to home in the coming months. The police are watching the Brannings, Jane is coming back and now Peter is going to get involved in drugs. I think, come New Year, we're going to find out Lucy's killer mixes in one of those circles.

And the tagline still stands. Whether Ronnie, Peter, Lola or even Dexter killed Lucy, the daughter of the show's longest-serving character has been killed and Walford will almost certainly not be the same again. Whoever's killed her, and whatever clan they belong to, there are going to be massive repercussions.
But whoever, whoever killed Lucy is leaving the Square, and I don't think they'd redux 2010 and have someone whisper to another character that he/she killed Lucy, with a wait until Christmas for someone to flee. Again.

In truth, we don't know who originally started out being the murderer or when the producer changed his mind. Or why. But the fact still remains that Ronnie killed a man. However much anyone might think this inconsequential because Carl's character was axed, no one is ever murdered in EastEnders without the murderer atoning for the crime.

It's my opinion, but I'm thinking that Nick's reappearance will somehow, indirectly, be linked to Lucy's death. It would be as big a cop-out revealing Nick as the murderer as it would Dexter. Three families will be affected by Lucy's death, and they will be three of the most established families on the Square - the Beales, the Mitchells and the Cottons.

I haven't ruled Peter Beale out as a suspect, but were he the killer, that would decimate the Beale family and tragically affect them forever. I haven't ruled Lee Carter out as a suspect, and at one time, given the prospect of PTSD, he may have been a viable one. Now, I just think this would be another way of involving a Carter in the most touted storyline of the year, when Lee's connection with Lucy, considering his behaviour in the wake of her death, was shallow and transient.

The Beales, the Mitchells and the Cottons, even their satellites (Sharon and Max Branning), would all find their interpersonal relations, which go back years, affected if a Mitchell and/or a Cotton were responsible for Lucy's death.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jamie Fowler
Member Avatar

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VygRk7BECJQ

Peter the day after Lucy's death. I really don't know, that phonecall to her when he was buy himself seemed just so genuine; unless he was doing it to cover tracks?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRIU9TxrENo

And then there's this of course.
Edited by Jamie Fowler, 12 Nov 2014, 12:55.
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kim
Default Avatar

I think Peter's reaction could be taken either way; either the intense grief of losing a twin, or because he had an altercation with her that might have lead to her death. Maybe that's why he was so desperate to get involved himself rather than let the investigation run its course; if he established that someone else saw her after he did, then he could ease his conscience with the belief that they killed her and not him.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TellyAddict
Member Avatar


I think with Peter though that his reaction in that scene would still make sense if he had killed Lucy by accident, which is what the initial blurb about the story seemed to imply. I reckon the two of them crossed paths again after they both left the house and Lucy had an accident similar to the one in the car lot, only this time it proved fatal. Could it be that the two of them parted ways with Lucy still alive, only for her to collapse at the common? His continued frustrations with the police and their attempts to gain leads could either be explained by him having a hunch that he was somehow responsible and too afraid to come clean, or if it did turn out that Lucy was alive when he last saw her that he genuinely doesn't believe he caused her death.

It reminds me of the aftermath of Archie's death when we had Peggy storming into the Vic and her look of almost disbelief at the sight of Archie's body lying on the floor made me suspect her as the killer pretty much instantly, and I would've been right if it hadn't been for those meddling writers and storyliners.

I know there's some opposition to Peter being the killer but if it were to pan out something like that then I think it could work - I wouldn't see it as them writing Peter into a corner as they did with Stacey in 2010, and it would tally up with DTC wanting the reveal to be upsetting and rooted in truth. What would be more tragically ironic than having followed Peter through his months of grieving (not that I'm condoning him behaving like an prat towards Lola, mind) only for it to be revealed that he was ultimately responsible for the death of his sister?
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan
Member Avatar


The police stated that Lucy's body was moved to the Common and she had an open head wound. The theory that Lucy was attacked, walked off and collapsed would only be applicable if she died from a closed head wound like Pauline Fowler did.

Head wounds bleed profusely (even minor ones) and if Lucy had staggered off, there would a trail of blood leading to where she was even if we stretch credibility and say Lucy's killer never noticed this.

I could buy that a character was perhaps in a psychotic state and can't remember what they did but not that Lucy walked off and died. She was definitely dumped there.

Edited by Dan, 12 Nov 2014, 15:59.
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
 
MrJames
Member Avatar

Lucy was either killed in her own home or in the middle of the Square. I am convinced of that.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
WalfordE20
Member Avatar

TellyAddict
12 Nov 2014, 13:32
I think with Peter though that his reaction in that scene would still make sense if he had killed Lucy by accident, which is what the initial blurb about the story seemed to imply. I reckon the two of them crossed paths again after they both left the house and Lucy had an accident similar to the one in the car lot, only this time it proved fatal. Could it be that the two of them parted ways with Lucy still alive, only for her to collapse at the common? His continued frustrations with the police and their attempts to gain leads could either be explained by him having a hunch that he was somehow responsible and too afraid to come clean, or if it did turn out that Lucy was alive when he last saw her that he genuinely doesn't believe he caused her death.

It reminds me of the aftermath of Archie's death when we had Peggy storming into the Vic and her look of almost disbelief at the sight of Archie's body lying on the floor made me suspect her as the killer pretty much instantly, and I would've been right if it hadn't been for those meddling writers and storyliners.

I know there's some opposition to Peter being the killer but if it were to pan out something like that then I think it could work - I wouldn't see it as them writing Peter into a corner as they did with Stacey in 2010, and it would tally up with DTC wanting the reveal to be upsetting and rooted in truth. What would be more tragically ironic than having followed Peter through his months of grieving (not that I'm condoning him behaving like an prat towards Lola, mind) only for it to be revealed that he was ultimately responsible for the death of his sister?
I love this theory. Peter is my main suspect, but I've maintained all along that he doesn't seem aware of his guilt- and yet some things don't add up. Your idea, however, makes a lot more sense than him being naive enough to falsely believe he's innocent.

Let's not forget Peter's mysterious phone call to Emma before he tried to flee Walford on Phil and Sharon's wedding day. What phone call, you ask? Exactly. It was never mentioned again.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
WalfordE20
Member Avatar

MrJames
12 Nov 2014, 19:43
Lucy was either killed in her own home or in the middle of the Square. I am convinced of that.
Intriguing. Why are you so sure? Dom has said the reveal is upsetting and this would certainly fit that description.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Professor Plum
Default Avatar

Peter does look a little uncomfortable in the clip above (thank you Mrs Peel), but I think the he is basically honest enough to have come forward by now.
If this was going to be solved within a few weeks, then I would suspect Peter or Lola, but I think they are both honest enough that their conscience would get the better of them by now.
Yes, Lola has the excuse that she would lose Lexi again, but I like to think she is a truer person, and would face that, as Stacey did.

Ronnie is good at keeping secrets, and so is Jay.
I have just watched the Halloween episode, and OMG, Abi! I know shes been getting more and more stroppy these past few episodes (leading up to it), but didn't she just snap?
But then she also showed some remorse afterwards, and the two sisters talked. I think we would have seen some more signs if it was her.
But she also made that comment about "no one ever notices me" and the fact that she doesn't actually have any friends.

that would be pretty sad and tragic if it is her. A young girl, had good friendships with Ben (when they were children), and then latched onto Jay, who outgrew her, her mother moved
away, not that she took much notice of her in the first place..... we can see she is boiling about her life.
Yep. Def in the frame. Moreso that Peter I think.
Edited by Professor Plum, 12 Nov 2014, 22:52.
Just livin' in perfect New Zealand!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mrs Peel
Member Avatar

Kim
12 Nov 2014, 13:20
I think Peter's reaction could be taken either way; either the intense grief of losing a twin, or because he had an altercation with her that might have lead to her death. Maybe that's why he was so desperate to get involved himself rather than let the investigation run its course; if he established that someone else saw her after he did, then he could ease his conscience with the belief that they killed her and not him.
The meme of the killer helping investigators to "solve" the crime and find the killer isn't new, and is a very real fact of life.

Google Leopold-Loeb or Wayne Williams. Leopold and Loeb and Williams were highly intelligent young men, two of whom killed a child and the third a serial killer of children, and all of them helped the police organisations to "find" the perpetrators of these crimes, which were, of course, they.

Could be the same for Peter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mrs Peel
Member Avatar

TellyAddict
12 Nov 2014, 13:32
I think with Peter though that his reaction in that scene would still make sense if he had killed Lucy by accident, which is what the initial blurb about the story seemed to imply. I reckon the two of them crossed paths again after they both left the house and Lucy had an accident similar to the one in the car lot, only this time it proved fatal. Could it be that the two of them parted ways with Lucy still alive, only for her to collapse at the common? His continued frustrations with the police and their attempts to gain leads could either be explained by him having a hunch that he was somehow responsible and too afraid to come clean, or if it did turn out that Lucy was alive when he last saw her that he genuinely doesn't believe he caused her death.

It reminds me of the aftermath of Archie's death when we had Peggy storming into the Vic and her look of almost disbelief at the sight of Archie's body lying on the floor made me suspect her as the killer pretty much instantly, and I would've been right if it hadn't been for those meddling writers and storyliners.

I know there's some opposition to Peter being the killer but if it were to pan out something like that then I think it could work - I wouldn't see it as them writing Peter into a corner as they did with Stacey in 2010, and it would tally up with DTC wanting the reveal to be upsetting and rooted in truth. What would be more tragically ironic than having followed Peter through his months of grieving (not that I'm condoning him behaving like an prat towards Lola, mind) only for it to be revealed that he was ultimately responsible for the death of his sister?
People keep forgetting that Lucy was dead by the time her body was dumped on the common. The police established that. She had a head wound - not the bang on her forehead at her hairline she received at Max's office, but an open would, probably at the back of her head. And it bled.

The fact that the police told the Beales that there was a total absence of blood on the Common meant that her wound was open and that she bled out elsewhere. But where?

Ronnie was cleaning and disinfecting her house the morning after the party ...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Professor Plum
Default Avatar

Ronnie is my emotional hot fav (although I must admit, now we have stopped the sucking on the lips and pouting so much, she is growing on me again)

But don't forget the comment Max made to Abi, the night after the Halloween episode

something along the lines of "we keep what we did on Good Friday between the two of us" What is he confessing to?
Lucys body was left in a postion by someone who cared for/about her. Max did, in his own fashion.
Just livin' in perfect New Zealand!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan
Member Avatar


I'm not sure I really buy that. I saw it that she was simply taken there, put on the floor and left.

Lucy was likely struck with someone around the back of the head or she was thrown or hit with such force that she fell backwards and smashed her head on something. I don't think this could have been at the Beale house as Denise was in all night after visiting Libby and Ian and Cindy also returned home that night. I don't think the killer would have time to completely clean the property of any evidence without anyone noticing.

I think she was killed in the killer's place of residence.





Edited by Dan, 13 Nov 2014, 21:36.
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
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · EastEnders Current & Future · Next Topic »
Add Reply