going into this 2nd episode, haffner was my prime
suspect. his fondness for lisbon seems to give him the best reason
for keeping her alive, when killing her appears to be a pretty
obvious and immediate way to hurt jane. maybe red john is constantly
'playing' with jane in order to humiliate him – to show he's
'unworthy' of lisbon, and/or the other women in his life? haffner
seems to me the most likely person to be able to walk through cbi's
halls, and poison rebecca after she was caught killing bosco's team.
he's shown an interest in playing agents off other agents, as when he
unsuccessfully appealed to cho to spy on jane. that could be a way to
squeeze increasingly suspicious cbi ron into the plot – as one of
haffner's moles. right now the only compelling thing working against
my suspicion of haffner, for me, is the whistling thing. it seems too
'apparent' as to be purposely misleading. i may be in the minority,
but even after how weird it was for lisbon to go into the house alone
in the premiere, i actually DID enjoy lisbon at the hospital saying
to haffner 'turns out red john's not that tough,' which was obvious
baiting. it shows she's willing to put herself in harm's way if it
would mean uncovering red john's identity, which is noble,
courageous, and the last f%$#ing thing I would do. ;)
it probably doesn't make any sense, but i either feel like haffner
is the most likely red john candidate, OR the most likely person to
be the next victim of red john. i just have this vision of him in a
pool of blood calling to lisbon, with a subsequent subplot of her
feeling 'guilty' that she suspected him. i believe he's the only
person on the list, after partridge, that lisbon would feel guilty
about suspecting.
when rigsby and cho are talking in the truck, it shows how
everyone thinks red john is someone with “influence,” because of
the mysterious things he can do. but we get one 'mystery' solved when
we learn he used the psychiatrist to learn about jane's memory. i
think heller's comment about being disappointed at red john's
identity has more to do with the general nature of storytelling. the
reveal is never as fun as the mystery. we'll be disappointed to find
red john is only a man, when he has perpetuated such heinous crimes
and clever manipulation. but in reality, his biggest asset is that no
one looking for him knows who the hell he is. that's how he can hide
his tracks: no one knows whose tracks they are trailing. so while
they mention stiles and bertram as being the most influential men, it
seriously makes me question them as viable suspects.
my strong hunch after episode 6.02 is that we can eliminate
everyone in bertram's office as being red john: bertram, mcallister,
and smith. i'm guessing the plot line will be that they are somehow
crookedly involved in the drug ring which they pretend to fight.
kirkland sounded similarly suspicious asking bertram of lisbon, 'can
we trust her?' so he may also be in on it.
they might want to be kept informed on the red john case either 1) to
jump in at the last minute and take the glory, as a cover for their
shady dealings, or 2) just because knowing the red john case is over
means jane would likely stop working at cbi. they want jane gone so
that he doesn't figure out their illegal activities, because he's so
perceptive. maybe suspects on that “fake list” in upcoming
episode 4 are dying because kirkland is 'speeding the process' of
whittling down the list, in order to 'solve' the red john case for
jane, so he goes away and doesn't discover the “crooked cop”
ring. i guess i haven't ruled out that they are working for red john.
drugs could more meaningfully tie into his story. we already know
speed was floating around the red barn...
lack of faith part one: i'm not sure i trust rosalind harker's
description, because she loves red john. the whole series we've been
shown crazy, damaged people who seem normal on the surface, but will
do dark things out of their 'love' for red john...including killing
themselves. maybe he's using drugs as part of that control process. i
really want more explanation on that part – not how he gets the
disciples, because we already know he either charms them, or finds
them in states of vulnerability that he occasionally creates. but the
actual turning process.
the last of the 3 men working the red barn, the one that the 16
year old daughter is shown to shoot in the flashback to protect her
mother, could have been an early 'experiment' in mind control. he was
so amped up he shot the pig in the heat of an argument. maybe red
john killed the other 2 men because they proved less tractable. the
drugs were given to him by that small town sheriff, whose 'scary
people' suppliers were connected to the drug ring that bertram and
company perpetuate.
lack of faith part two: thing is, i don't completely trust the
psychiatrist's comments at the end of 6.02, either. red john has been
shown, either through disciples or his own efforts, to be reasonably
tech-savvy. i find it hard to believe he'd miss a tape recorder in
her desk's top drawer. it could be manipulated information, meant to
be found. we don't know what he did to her before decapitating her.
she may have made the recording under duress.
it is genuinely fun to watch how lisbon, jane, and the team try to
act 'naturally' around the suspects. but 2 episodes into the season,
a very strong suspect has seemingly been eliminated, and the writing
is going out of its way to make everyone left appear extra
suspicious. i understand that's part of the 'fun' for us to figure it
out, but it seems like some sort of collective red herring. while
we've been told partridge is dead, seen a body bag, and been told
that it was partridge's blood on lisbon's face, i just can't take him
off the list. i know that is lame, but it's fun. i support the 'network of individuals' theory for the same reason. plus, red john has
made bodies disappear before. maybe i've read too many comic books
where the characters come back from the dead. ;)
but my third lack of faith is: i don't trust bruno heller. in the
interests of a good story, i suspect he'd lie. not my original line,
but it has been said, “all writer's are liars.” :)