Peter Beale is the killer 100% he disappeared quick after hearing Ian say Lucy was the one and Lucy tried to go after him but couldnt find him. Lucy is then walking off out of the square and Peter obviously is angry and jealous from what he just heard so hes been watching her and he followed her to whereever she was going and killed her and then dumped her body in the woods. To cover his albi he would of gone back home or gone to Roxy's party with everyone. Remember this everyone for next year
Does DTC actually know who the killer will be? as with filming 3 months ahead we will find out at Christmas who it is since in December there filming the February scenes so it will come out then. I hope he has the killer planned out otherwise it will look very stupid and very anti climax if this isnt done right considering this is gonna be 10 month storyline
Allegedly they do have a chosen killer, whether it stays that person I guess we'll never know.
It will turn out to be cleverer and with many more layers than normal soap murders. I suspect that every little odd unexplained thing will be brought in and fitted together like a jigsaw.
They're senior members of the crew though. If they reveal anything, they're only ruining it for themselves - It's their storyline, why ruin it? It's not like a random member of cast knows, it's the runners behind the plot. They won't want to destroy the story.
However, I'm sure Alex Lamb (Story Producer) knows who the 'killer' is. On twitter, he's being, in my opinion, dangerously vocal. He's already pretty much confirmed their will be flash backs, and he's also favourited a tweet discussing the link with Stacey's key, and has too retweeted a tweet mentioning that Nick Cotton is alive and linked to the murder. Maybe he's just trying to interact with fans of the show, but to me, he's not being vague enough.
Or he could be encouraging red herrings to muddy the water further. Retweeting isn't the same thing as confirming - more wanting viewers to discuss and focus on those points.
Or he could be encouraging red herrings to muddy the water further. Retweeting isn't the same thing as confirming - more wanting viewers to discuss and focus on those points.
This. I think he is probably just enjoying reading people's theories.
They're senior members of the crew though. If they reveal anything, they're only ruining it for themselves - It's their storyline, why ruin it? It's not like a random member of cast knows, it's the runners behind the plot. They won't want to destroy the story.
However, I'm sure Alex Lamb (Story Producer) knows who the 'killer' is. On twitter, he's being, in my opinion, dangerously vocal. He's already pretty much confirmed their will be flash backs, and he's also favourited a tweet discussing the link with Stacey's key, and has too retweeted a tweet mentioning that Nick Cotton is alive and linked to the murder. Maybe he's just trying to interact with fans of the show, but to me, he's not being vague enough.
Is he not just retweeting every tweet he gets with theory's.
They're senior members of the crew though. If they reveal anything, they're only ruining it for themselves - It's their storyline, why ruin it? It's not like a random member of cast knows, it's the runners behind the plot. They won't want to destroy the story.
However, I'm sure Alex Lamb (Story Producer) knows who the 'killer' is. On twitter, he's being, in my opinion, dangerously vocal. He's already pretty much confirmed their will be flash backs, and he's also favourited a tweet discussing the link with Stacey's key, and has too retweeted a tweet mentioning that Nick Cotton is alive and linked to the murder. Maybe he's just trying to interact with fans of the show, but to me, he's not being vague enough.
He could either be spoiling it or dropping fake hints. I think DTC should of only told another producer and thats it having all these writers know something is bound to get out
Well correct me if I am wrong but from what I read months ago this is supposed to not be a "who done it" but rather a "what killed her" which hasn't been done before apparently. So I am confused why everyone is on about "who" killed her? There was nothing saying she was murdered by anyone. Just that she died and no one knows why. Although for this to drag on until next year.... well considering how a post mortem should be done to find out cause of death then a year is a bit much to wait for the results.
I think there is an undiagnosed medical condition that killed her and no one else was involved. Although the little things like the banging her head in the car office and taking drugs probably triggered what did kill her. Possible heart condition?
I disagree. While they need Lucy's death and the outcome to have a massive impact on the Beales and change their dynamic forever, they also need to be salvageable to continue after the storyline. If Peter is forced to leave because he was responsible for Lucy's death then that means only Bobby and Cindy are left to continue the next generation of Beales. Cindy isn't really a Beale and Bobby is still only a child, so it wouldn't work if Peter was eliminated as a character.
And yeah, he seemed very fed up with the Beale family and Jane's involvement. Although, she's their mother figure so I would have thought he'd be understanding of that? Masood seemed like he wanted to drag Jane away from the Beales and have her attention to himself - as shown when he said "they're not your problem" when Jane was worried about the twins. We also saw him witness Lucy upset and distressed in the square when she dropped her paperwork and he knew she was having problems that lead her to drug use and he chose to ignore it instead of alerting Jane so she could help.
Well correct me if I am wrong but from what I read months ago this is supposed to not be a "who done it" but rather a "what killed her" which hasn't been done before apparently. So I am confused why everyone is on about "who" killed her? There was nothing saying she was murdered by anyone. Just that she died and no one knows why. Although for this to drag on until next year.... well considering how a post mortem should be done to find out cause of death then a year is a bit much to wait for the results.
I think there is an undiagnosed medical condition that killed her and no one else was involved. Although the little things like the banging her head in the car office and taking drugs probably triggered what did kill her. Possible heart condition?
I'm guessing the ''what killed her'' refers to the motive the person had. After watching the episode I can't really say someone had a clear, definite reason to kill. Yes, Lucy pissed off a few people but she was no Archie Mitchell - or even Phil!
The fact that we only found out she did coke in her penultimate episode indicates we never really knew Lucy Beale at all. At this point, I don't really care who killed Lucy. I'm more interested in the story they tell in revealing who the victim actually was.
But I do think they shot themselves in the foot by revealing when the storyline will conclude...
Comments
Allegedly they do have a chosen killer, whether it stays that person I guess we'll never know.
Or he could be encouraging red herrings to muddy the water further. Retweeting isn't the same thing as confirming - more wanting viewers to discuss and focus on those points.
I doubt Daran Little knows. I think it's between Alex, Alison, Manpreet and Sharon.
Daran Little and Dominic Treadwell Collins seem really close so I wouldn't be surprised if Daran knew.
No she doesn't she's said so in a couple of articles i've read
He could either be spoiling it or dropping fake hints. I think DTC should of only told another producer and thats it having all these writers know something is bound to get out
I think there is an undiagnosed medical condition that killed her and no one else was involved. Although the little things like the banging her head in the car office and taking drugs probably triggered what did kill her. Possible heart condition?
That's what OH said - that it was the bang on the head that did it.
I hardly watch EE these days so shouldn't really comment :kitty:
Welcome to DS! ^_^
And yeah, he seemed very fed up with the Beale family and Jane's involvement. Although, she's their mother figure so I would have thought he'd be understanding of that? Masood seemed like he wanted to drag Jane away from the Beales and have her attention to himself - as shown when he said "they're not your problem" when Jane was worried about the twins. We also saw him witness Lucy upset and distressed in the square when she dropped her paperwork and he knew she was having problems that lead her to drug use and he chose to ignore it instead of alerting Jane so she could help.
I'm guessing the ''what killed her'' refers to the motive the person had. After watching the episode I can't really say someone had a clear, definite reason to kill. Yes, Lucy pissed off a few people but she was no Archie Mitchell - or even Phil!
The fact that we only found out she did coke in her penultimate episode indicates we never really knew Lucy Beale at all. At this point, I don't really care who killed Lucy. I'm more interested in the story they tell in revealing who the victim actually was.
But I do think they shot themselves in the foot by revealing when the storyline will conclude...