Sorry to ruin it for you all, but I've worked it out.
ANAGRAMS
It's all to do with the Queen Bee reference.
'Capitalist Bee' is an anagram of Celia Baptiste, Julien's wife. She clearly sells children for money.
'Honey's Thug' is an anagram of Tony Hughes. He stole his own son on the orders of Celia.
'Target Iran' is an anagram of Ian Garrett. Ollie was shipped to Iran by Garrett to become a suicide bomber. He's due to appear in the next season of Homeland.
'Large Ski' is an anagram of Karl Sieg. This was the transport method.
Maybe, but the same argument would apply if they were part of a paedo gang. If they are snatching kids staying at their hotel why wouldn't the cops make a simlar connection? The house and Karl Sieg suggest the Caid de Cité role to me rather than the paedo one. But then again, why is Vincent Bourg still featuring so prominently in this series if he's not involved? Who knows other than the writers?
Don't think they are snatching. The abuse is of local/their own kids. Taking piccies to share. That is why the abduction of Ollie is not linked to this paedophile ring directly. Bribed to get involved maybe but done for their own ends - no.
Sorry to ruin it for you all, but I've worked it out.
ANAGRAMS
It's all to do with the Queen Bee reference.
'Capitalist Bee' is an anagram of Celia Baptiste, Julien's wife. She clearly sells children for money.
'Honey's Thug' is an anagram of Tony Hughes. He stole his own son on the orders of Celia.
'Target Iran' is an anagram of Ian Garrett. Ollie was shipped to Iran by Garrett to become a suicide bomber. He's due to appear in the next season of Homeland.
'Large Ski' is an anagram of Karl Sieg. This was the transport method.
Unknown characters in final episode will no doubt ruin it.
Also, if it becomes apparent that a major red herring was part of the story only to fool the
Viewer, that will stick in the throat too.
Remember Line Of Duty this year. The ending was ridiculous.
No it wasn't. It was all well explained. Some viewers didn't like the idea of using a flashback sequence to explain the main suspects behaviour and justice wasn't seen to be done in her case, which left a bad taste in some people's mouths. But that didn't make it ridiculous.
No it wasn't. It was all well explained. Some viewers didn't like the idea of using a flashback sequence to explain the main suspects behaviour and justice wasn't seen to be done in her case, which left a bad taste in some people's mouths. But that didn't make it ridiculous.
Didn't watch this but I suspect if Tony doesn't go down for murder of Garrett there will be an outcry from some.
Don't think they are snatching. The abuse is of local/their own kids. Taking piccies to share. That is why the abduction of Ollie is not linked to this paedophile ring directly. Bribed to get involved maybe but done for their own ends - no.
Ollie was snatched/abducted. No doubt about that. Also he wasn't local either. So why would the paedo gang decide to make an exception? Not enough time for the hotel owners to be 'bribed to get involved'. This all happened very quickly. The only known paedo connection was Garrett/Bourg and neither of them allege they were involved, although interestingly the journalist claimed that Garrett took Ollie (because Bourg told him??)
On a separate note. Does anyone think it would have been useful to have had a date shown in the top right of screen with the timeline. It was flashed up sometimes not others when scene moved from 2006 to 2014. I think the contrast in shots (helped by move from summer to winter) and the change in the characters appearance helps but particularly in the early episodes I spent too much effort keeping up with the timeline. When I have re watched the episodes I have understood and picked up so much.
On a separate note. Does anyone think it would have been useful to have had a date shown in the top right of screen with the timeline. It was flashed up sometimes not others when scene moved from 2006 to 2014. I think the contrast in shots (helped by move from summer to winter) and the change in the characters appearance helps but particularly in the early episodes I spent too much effort keeping up with the timeline. When I have re watched the episodes I have understood and picked up so much.
Or is it just me!
That would have been extremely useful, I got confused quite a bit between the timelines, despite the characters appearances being different.
I dont think there was any reference to the disturbed spot in 2006.
I found it absolutely strange that Baptiste honed into that exact spot because the concrete did nit look level at the spot. Writers prerogative i accepted.
They never also explained why there was a ban on searching the house. What possible reason could there have been, especially after a prominent builder was missing from there.
The reason is explained at the very beginning of the series when Garrett
gives all the builders involved in renovating his house a pep talk.
he tells them he demands nothing but the best, it will be hard but that's the way i want. Babtiste knows he is a builder and wouldnt allow cowboys working on his property.
The disturbed concrete looked like shody work, Garrett would of tore into the builders if he would have seen it, it's shows the wrong attitude..
No it wasn't. It was all well explained. Some viewers didn't like the idea of using a flashback sequence to explain the main suspects behaviour and justice wasn't seen to be done in her case, which left a bad taste in some people's mouths. But that didn't make it ridiculous.
From memory (I've forgotten the precise details) the most ridiculous aspect for me was that the truth would have emerged when she was put on trial. They gave the impression that she would have been tried and convicted, then things would continue as they left off. A decent defence team would have blown everything wide open, and she didn't seem the type to just roll over.
Although Baptiste reaction when Garrett was revealed as a paedo was strange. He looked scared rather than relieved that a connection was made.
Fancy size of house Baptiste has, did he buy a run-down place and develop it? How did he know at Garrett's holiday home that Garrett was a stickler for standards?
Ollie was snatched/abducted. No doubt about that. Also he wasn't local either. So why would the paedo gang decide to make an exception? Not enough time for the hotel owners to be 'bribed to get involved'. This all happened very quickly. The only known paedo connection was Garrett/Bourg and neither of them allege they were involved, although interestingly the journalist claimed that Garrett took Ollie.
Because Ollie was not the intended target. This was planned. The house was ready to take him to. He was kept in the house by the Romanian gang.
Malik only made the assumption that Garrett took Ollie as he had hacked Tony phone in 2009 and heard him confess to doing in Garrett. Malik book was about exposing Tony murdering the abductor of his child.
What's more interesting is who tipped off the Caide de Cité that Baptiste was going to rendezvous with Leon at the station. Even though he suspected him I doubt that it was Ziane as he had no links with them, and he only passed stuff on to the journalist because he was being blackmailed. Other than that he was a diligent cop. That leaves either Mark who knew about the meeting, possibly Laurence or it was just random that Leon was killed just as Baptiste arrived.
I was thinking the same, as far as we know the bent cop is only passing info to Malak. thought it might be Mark but he redeemed himself this week so the only other person left you would think is the Mayor, he is following the investigation closely and looks like he is connected to the Caid de Citadel
I was thinking the same, as far as we know the bent cop is only passing info to Malak. thought it might be Mark but he redeemed himself this week so the only other person left you would think is the Mayor, he is following the investigation closely and looks like he is connected to the Caid de Citadel
Because Ollie was not the intended target. This was planned. The house was ready to take him to. He was kept in the house by the Romanian gang.
Malik only made the assumption that Garrett took Ollie as he had hacked Tony phone in 2009 and heard him confess to doing in Garrett. Malik book was about exposing Tony murdering the abductor of his child.
If that's true, someone must have paid the Romanians a lot of money. Not wishing to go into the unpleasant subject, but I can't imagine a young English boy would be worth that much to the gang. I don't know much about paedophile rings either, but I can't imagine they would pay a fortune for a specific boy.
That suggests a similar scenario to the 2009 case, with custody the motive. Alternatively, a rich couple who are unable to have a child. Which further suggests that Ollie could still be alive.
Yes.trouble is with Mark, i find it hard to believe he is a liaison officer and a detective and he just so happens to be on holiday in a small town where the abduction takes place, how handy, then again i cant believe he would be allowed to take his son if he was there on official business. can only think it was a coincidence.
If he would even had to take a short train ride then that would be fine, I suppose it's just another thing the writers have thrown in to confuse us.
From memory (I've forgotten the precise details) the most ridiculous aspect for me was that the truth would have emerged when she was put on trial. They gave the impression that she would have been tried and convicted, then things would continue as they left off. A decent defence team would have blown everything wide open, and she didn't seem the type to just roll over.
I dont want to give too much away as others might still want to see this so...
She was tried and convicted of conspiracy to murder. The accused, DI Lindsey Denton was very much out on a limb. We only know what really happened in the ambush because of that flashback. Otherwise here was someone accused of taking part in an ambush, and later on was found to have a large sum of cash in a bag found in her house who couldn't explain where it came from. That's what finally did for her in the end.
The person who gave it to her was dead (DCS Jane Akers), One of the killers was murdered by his accomplice, and the surviving killer was given immunity from prosecution, so his evidence wasn't admissible nor could he be put on trial. Denton also lied about contacting the nurse in the ITU at the hospital where the only surviving witness was killed shortly afterwards. So no jury member given all that could seriously believe she was just an innocent bystander.
If Mark/James was unimportant to the overall story, surely they would have just had Mark turn up at some point in the first episode as liaison and not have the less 'believable' aspect of him being randomly on holiday at the same time in the same small town with his very similar son?
The problem I have with some peoples theories on here is that they are literally fitting the programme around their theory instead of trying to figure out the programme. Baptiste being guilty for instance would make no logical sense considering he's battled to re open the case and then battled against the mayor to keep it open. No wonder people get so disappointed when they build themselves up for things that are so far fetched to happen.
This thread is reminding me of when Mr Monk and I went on a murder mystery weekend.
We stayed up 'til four o'clock in the morning working on our conclusion. It was so complicated that it was virtually a flow chart showing X murdered Y which resulted in Z murdering A.
When the murderer was revealed it was very disappointing that it was the most obvious person who had been our first suspect that we discounted at once because it was too obvious.:(
Still loving the thread and The Missing and would like to book my place on the Baptiste Bateau:D
Comments
How's Mary?
Oh yes. Keeley Hawes was fantastic, never guessed she was capable of playing a part like that to be honest. But the ending was dire.
Sometimes she is and sometimes she's on a boat. ;-)
If Ollie is alive he's likely to be with Alain, his daughter or miles away in another country.
Don't think they are snatching. The abuse is of local/their own kids. Taking piccies to share. That is why the abduction of Ollie is not linked to this paedophile ring directly. Bribed to get involved maybe but done for their own ends - no.
Same with Happy Valley and Sarah Lancashire. Never thought she would be able to play that part so well. That ending too left a lot to be desired.
Didn't watch this but I suspect if Tony doesn't go down for murder of Garrett there will be an outcry from some.
I must have a lapse of memory. Who's the undercover cop's girlfriend?
Rini, the ex druggie who is now the schoolteacher.
Or is it just me!
That would have been extremely useful, I got confused quite a bit between the timelines, despite the characters appearances being different.
gives all the builders involved in renovating his house a pep talk.
he tells them he demands nothing but the best, it will be hard but that's the way i want. Babtiste knows he is a builder and wouldnt allow cowboys working on his property.
The disturbed concrete looked like shody work, Garrett would of tore into the builders if he would have seen it, it's shows the wrong attitude..
From memory (I've forgotten the precise details) the most ridiculous aspect for me was that the truth would have emerged when she was put on trial. They gave the impression that she would have been tried and convicted, then things would continue as they left off. A decent defence team would have blown everything wide open, and she didn't seem the type to just roll over.
Fancy size of house Baptiste has, did he buy a run-down place and develop it? How did he know at Garrett's holiday home that Garrett was a stickler for standards?
Because Ollie was not the intended target. This was planned. The house was ready to take him to. He was kept in the house by the Romanian gang.
Malik only made the assumption that Garrett took Ollie as he had hacked Tony phone in 2009 and heard him confess to doing in Garrett. Malik book was about exposing Tony murdering the abductor of his child.
Classic writers ploy ;-)
If that's true, someone must have paid the Romanians a lot of money. Not wishing to go into the unpleasant subject, but I can't imagine a young English boy would be worth that much to the gang. I don't know much about paedophile rings either, but I can't imagine they would pay a fortune for a specific boy.
That suggests a similar scenario to the 2009 case, with custody the motive. Alternatively, a rich couple who are unable to have a child. Which further suggests that Ollie could still be alive.
Yes.trouble is with Mark, i find it hard to believe he is a liaison officer and a detective and he just so happens to be on holiday in a small town where the abduction takes place, how handy, then again i cant believe he would be allowed to take his son if he was there on official business. can only think it was a coincidence.
If he would even had to take a short train ride then that would be fine, I suppose it's just another thing the writers have thrown in to confuse us.
The person who gave it to her was dead (DCS Jane Akers), One of the killers was murdered by his accomplice, and the surviving killer was given immunity from prosecution, so his evidence wasn't admissible nor could he be put on trial. Denton also lied about contacting the nurse in the ITU at the hospital where the only surviving witness was killed shortly afterwards. So no jury member given all that could seriously believe she was just an innocent bystander.
This thread is reminding me of when Mr Monk and I went on a murder mystery weekend.
We stayed up 'til four o'clock in the morning working on our conclusion. It was so complicated that it was virtually a flow chart showing X murdered Y which resulted in Z murdering A.
When the murderer was revealed it was very disappointing that it was the most obvious person who had been our first suspect that we discounted at once because it was too obvious.:(
Still loving the thread and The Missing and would like to book my place on the Baptiste Bateau:D