|
FredMSloniker posted:My current theory: Sherlock did steal the necklace, and the reason is connected to whatever he took from the bishop's chest. For that matter, don't we only have his word for it that he had an appointment with the bishop to begin with? Maybe, when he saw the necklace, he realized he needed to get to the bishop as swiftly as would not arouse suspicion... but someone beat him there... I'm willing to get behind anything that discredits the monkey theory.  A trained monkey cut open the case with a diamond! Then accidentally set the room on fire. Then accidentally summoned the servants. Then got spooked trying to escape and accidentally murdered a fish when it dropped the necklace. Then it silently hid behind a screen and quietly left in shame. What the christ Holmes?That's really what we're going with? Maybe the monkey was also a wizard? Or maybe it had multiple personalities (one of whom is extremely competent and the other is a loving idiot). I do like copying the trick from the BBC for the investigating though.
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2014 00:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 24, 2024 02:35 |
|
|
Bruceski posted:When you have eliminated the impossible whatever remains, however improbable, is still absurd unless you can find some solid evidence like monkey fur or something. Clearly we are dealing with a highly-trained mute schizophrenic pyromaniac homicidal furless monkey with a crippling shyness complex. Can't you blathering simpletons make even the most elementary deductions? 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2014 02:19
|
|
|
Good Lord Fisher! posted:At least one of those words is correct. Well I’m ironing out the wrinkles in another possible theory. I can’t get into the specifics, but let’s just say “Twitch Plays Monkey Burglar”.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2014 19:41
|
|