|
|
Post by barbarama on Apr 10, 2013 3:33:19 GMT
Barb had another good theory I think, which was that Gillies had hypnotized Julia! Which means that she did make that phone call, did show up to Darcy's house, did touch the bullet, and possibly even killed him, unknowingly of course. The reason why there is no record of the husband and wife is NOT because they used fake aliases but rather because they really never existed! They were just suggestions made to her while under her deep hypnosis. So she never was in Port Credit, which is how she was at his house! But then if all of this is true, it would be next to impossible to prove Julia's innocence without a full confession from Gillies. Well thank you Cosmic Cavalcade to put my idea out there  however I never said that she might have killed Darcy even in an hypnotized or drugged induce state, I refuse to believe that. It is just an idea but that would explain why the neighbor would have recognize her walking into the house. I'm sure Gillies was the one pulling the trigger but I'm just trying to figure out that trip which I believe never happened, it was all forced into Julia's mind by Gillies (so far that is what I think but I might be wrong) |
|
|
|
Post by hannikan on Apr 10, 2013 3:50:04 GMT
But Julia was in Port Credit with her patient, Mrs. Penelope Irvin during the time of Darcy's murder. I think Gillies created these fake people, Mr. and Mrs. Irvin, since the constables find no record of either of them. I think Gillies sent a woman to Julia's asylum to pose as Mrs. Irvin, a woman who supposedly had an abusive husband, which set up a patient-therapist relationship with details that Julia couldn't divulge. It meant that it looked like she was hiding where she was during the murder, making her look very suspicious. I think that was all part of setting her up for Darcy's murder.
|
|
|
|
Post by CosmicCavalcade on Apr 10, 2013 4:30:06 GMT
Yes but how do you KNOW that Julia was in Port Credit? There is no physical evidence and no alibi to suggest that she ever was there. If Gillies did an inception type thing to her, then she would have believed whatever he told her. Unless someone claims to have actually seen this woman at the asylum, it could still be possible. But I am starting to see people's points about it not being so likely that she would fall prey to being hypnotized.
And yes, it could also be a way to have set her up further. Gillies could have hired some starving actress or something to lure Julia out there and then conveniently disappear when needed for her alibi. My only issue with the woman who entered the house NOT being Julia is that, the neighbour saw her. So either she has terrible eye sight or hates Julia enough to only 'think' she had seen her or it doesn't make sense. But then who was the woman? Darcy's mistress? She claims to have an alibi. So if Murdoch can poke holes in that, then I guess that could lead to something, but you would have thought they would have already tried this considering she was the only other viable blonde suspect...then again, they did get kicked off the case...I guess we shall see.
|
|
|
|
Post by hannikan on Apr 10, 2013 6:23:18 GMT
Gillies leaves nothing to chance though. He would have an army of people working for him to carry this off, which could include the carriage driver who took Julia to Port Credit. Just like I believe he created the Penelope Irvin character to ruin Julia's alibi, he could also have used one of his stooges as her carriage driver. The neighbor didn't seem to see "Julia" from the front, only the back of her head and the side/profile and not up that close. What we saw, was what she saw, I think. So theoretically, it could be Gillies who dressed as Julia, too. Gillies dressed as "a woman" before, but not as a specific woman. I think he could have been the one to pose as Julia, but I think the mistress is more likely. He couldn't just put on a bad wig and look like her. Even from a distance his face would look nothing like her, while the mistress from a distance/not a clear angle could. Even though she didn't seem to see "Julia" from the front, she easily could have. He'd need to cover his bases, just in case. So I think it needed to be someone who could pass for Julia if you didn't see her clearly. IDK, I hope they don't do a it was really Julia hypnotized that killed Darcy. That would really be over the top for me. Even Julia hypnotized to be Gillies sidekick while he killed Darcy would be too weird for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by murdochic on Apr 10, 2013 10:30:21 GMT
Gillies leaves nothing to chance though. He would have an army of people working for him to carry this off, which could include the carriage driver who took Julia to Port Credit. Just like I believe he created the Penelope Irvin character to ruin Julia's alibi, he could also have used one of his stooges as her carriage driver. The neighbor didn't seem to see "Julia" from the front, only the back of her head and the side/profile and not up that close. What we saw, was what she saw, I think. So theoretically, it could be Gillies who dressed as Julia, too. Gillies dressed as "a woman" before, but not as a specific woman. I think he could have been the one to pose as Julia, but I think the mistress is more likely. He couldn't just put on a bad wig and look like her. Even from a distance his face would look nothing like her, while the mistress from a distance/not a clear angle could. Even though she didn't seem to see "Julia" from the front, she easily could have. He'd need to cover his bases, just in case. So I think it needed to be someone who could pass for Julia if you didn't see her clearly. IDK, I hope they don't do a it was really Julia hypnotized that killed Darcy. That would really be over the top for me. Even Julia hypnotized to be Gillies sidekick while he killed Darcy would be too weird for me. It's a possibility she was hypnotized but I don't believe that is the solution. I believe like you it was an plan involving Gillies minions. |
|
|
|
Post by CosmicCavalcade on Apr 10, 2013 14:36:58 GMT
Yes, yes you guys are probably right but I tend to gravitate to the more unusual theories. If this is some huge orchestration, I bet even the jury or some of the jury was paid off too. But my only problem with tons of people being involved is that it's that much easier for things to fall apart when examined in greater detail. All it would take is one person to crack and the whole frame up is found out. Besides, Gillies tends to operate on his own ever since his first partner failed him. I've been studying frames of the woman who exited the carriage (cuz I'm an obsessive geek) and I not surprisingly can't make a definitive judgement. They were very careful with the angles and lighting. One close up DOES look an awful lot like Helene's profile but I can't be certain. And there is the other matter of their height differences as well. Julia is the same height as Murdoch, and the mistress is clearly shorter when Murdoch confronts Darcy in the street. Now, if we assume the carriage heights of the one the woman in green got out of and the one Julia gets out of later are the same, the woman in green is clearly much shorter. So most likely it isn't Julia, meaning the hypnotism theory is out. Darn! Also, I'm confident that it wasn't Gillies dressed up.  |
|
|
|
Post by hannikan on Apr 11, 2013 1:41:58 GMT
I think it would be impossible for Gillies to carry this off alone. In Murdoch in Toyland, he paid off the guard to pose as his own dead body, so he was really an accomplice, too. Any large scale frame up murder(s) requires several people. Even those we never see/know about. Yeah, the mistress is shorter than Julia, but from a distance that wouldn't necessarily be noticeable. From the back of her head/hair do, it looks like it has to be a woman's real hair, not a wig.
|
|
|
|
Post by renaissancegirl on Apr 11, 2013 2:05:39 GMT
Wow--what an intense episode. It sure had me on edge the whole time! I've been throwing around some ideas, and I think that Miss Melanie Shropshire is involved in some way. Her sudden appearance seems suspicious. One thing that is bothering me is that we don't know what her true relationship to Darcy was. In all appearances, she seems like she could have been Darcy's mistress, but considering it would have been scandalous for a man in his position during that time to be openly having an affair while still married (and still is today), I can't see how he would risk his reputation at the hospital and in the community by going arm and arm in the street with her, or escorting her out of a hotel. It seems too obvious. Also, the fact that Darcy seemed excited to take Julia back, and considering that all the testimonies from his housekeeper, neighbour and colleagues describe what an upstanding person Darcy was, leads me to believe that she wasn't a love interest. So I wonder who she really is? A "client?" Something I thought of as well; we don't see Julia and Melanie ever meeting. Could she be the "patient" that Julia was helping out? After all, no one seems to have checked out Melanie's alibi yet.
Some of the ideas presented here on the fingerprints are definitely intriguing! It's hard to say if Gillies found a way to lift Julia's fingerprints or if Julia's record was changed, however, I'm leaning toward the latter. One idea I thought of is how Julia's record could have been switched, as I'm sure it would not be an easy thing to do. What if it was an inside job? If I had to suspect someone, I was thinking Constable Jackson. He seems to have taken more of a prominent role this season. If one also recalls, he is prone to taking bribes and switching sides (remember the baseball game?), so what if he was bribed by Gillies? Anyway, these are some thoughts that have popped into my mind over the past couple of days and may be far fetched, but the episode sure has been keeping me thinking about the ways in which Gillies could have orchestrated the whole thing!
|
|
|
|
Post by hannikan on Apr 11, 2013 5:16:15 GMT
Darcy wouldn't have had to worry about his reputation once Julia's "affair" with William became public. He didn't take up with his mistress until William and Julia had already gotten out. Julia was considered a fallen woman by that point and Darcy was within his rights to find "comfort" elsewhere. It did not go both ways. If Darcy had had an affair first, it would not have been socially acceptable for Julia to take a lover. She would have been expected to put up with it unless he was additionally beating her. She could try to get a divorce on the grounds of adultery, but it was far more difficult for a woman to win in those cases than vice versa. Men could carry on affairs with MUCH less social fall out than women could. Many high-powered men in that era had mistresses with no negative impact. I thought of the mistress being Julia's patient, too. She couldn't be in two places at the same time. So either she is "Penelope Irvin" or she posed as Julia when Darcy was killed. She can't be both because "Mrs. Irvin" was in Port Credit with the real Julia when "Julia" entered Darcy's house.
|
|
|
|
Post by renaissancegirl on Apr 11, 2013 6:37:09 GMT
I had recently done archival research on Dr. Frederick Banting and when his wife, Marion, had an affair, it was quite a public scandal (and this is Toronto during the 1930s). There was concern about how a divorce would affect his position as a doctor and medical researcher at the University of Toronto. While matters were being settled during the divorce, Dr. Banting was seeing another woman, but there was also quite the concern about anyone knowing about this as it was considered unacceptable while he was still married, so they had to be discreet. I therefore find it hard to believe that Darcy would be walking around with Melanie out in the open, or be seen leaving a hotel at the same time in 1900, considering things were still rather difficult 30 years later. However, the writers are not always historically accurate and may have been a bit sloppy on this part...
|
|
|
|
Post by jj1 on Apr 11, 2013 11:18:00 GMT
i think its an inside job
and gillies has payed a copper of from the station and we will be very surprise at who it is
also melanie is the on who pulled the trigger
gillies will not only finish with setting up julia he'll set up others at the station house
and then escape to finish the job off in season7
|
|
|
|
Post by LaurenMurdoch on Apr 11, 2013 13:17:49 GMT
I don't know if Melanie Shropshire will be back next episode, but if she is, I'd say she's involved. As for Constable Jackson being on Gillies' side, that would maybe explain why he switched Stationhouses early on. We never did get a reason for that. He will be in the finale.
Also, I was rewatching this episode and I was looking very closely at the people in the courtroom and its pretty clear Gillies only shows up at the end. Goof on filming part, or on purpose?
As for Gillies being the one in the green dress...meh, I don't know, it could be, one does not know. The hair color was a strawberry blond, so that means it wasn't Julia. It was someone else with that hair color, or someone with a wig. And why did Emily say she's seen Julia wear that dress before? I certainly don't recall her wearing that dress.
|
|
|
|
Post by CosmicCavalcade on Apr 11, 2013 14:15:33 GMT
But didn't Jackson only switch after Gillies escaped?
Some people have been thinking Giles is involved. I don't believe this in any way, shape or form. It might be shocking but it's also nonsensical. Why would he help frame an innocent woman in order to get back at Murdoch for breaking the law? Then he'd be even worse than Murdoch!
It's not a goof, Gillies was never there earlier because he never was there. He was only imagined by Murdoch. His subconscious solved the puzzle before he did himself.
It's definitely not Gillies in the green dress. I've looked at enough frames to determine that.
True about the dress though. Maybe she's seen her wear it in the past when Murdoch was in the Yukon?
|
|
|
|
Post by CosmicCavalcade on Apr 11, 2013 14:23:37 GMT
Hmm, that's an interesting idea. If the mistress was Julia's patient, then who entered the house? Some people, myself included, have been speculating that Sally Pendrick is involved. On my part is more wish fulfillment though as I want to see her get caught finally! The other blondie with a grudge that we know of is Enid. |
|
|
|
Post by renaissancegirl on Apr 11, 2013 17:44:03 GMT
Interestingly, the actress who plays Miss Shropshire is still not listed to appear in the next episode, so I wonder if this is just an oversight or if she indeed has no other role in the story and is just a red herring. Although that doesn't mean that she still can't appear in season 7, especially if they leave us with a cliff hanger. I can't wait to find out what happens next week!
|
|
however I never said that she might have killed Darcy even in an hypnotized or drugged induce state, I refuse to believe that. 
