Someone already posted this, but here it is anyway:
http://www.cbspressexpress.com/cbs-entertainment/releases/view?id=37009
Looks like Kirkland is dead and Partridge isn't returning, which was obvious.
I am still sticking by McAllister.
Someone already posted this, but here it is anyway:
http://www.cbspressexpress.com/cbs-entertainment/releases/view?id=37009
Looks like Kirkland is dead and Partridge isn't returning, which was obvious.
I am still sticking by McAllister.
Heller said there was a big clue in the first episode of season 6. I've read the most of the theories, most people think it is about the pigeons. But what if the clue is maybe the phone call? The way Red John and McAllister talk is always in a relaxing matter. The voice tone is only different, I tried to listen to the phone calls in episode 1 and 3, it sounded pretty much the same. And they both mention Patrick Jane always by his first name.
I really like some of the theories on this site, they are really fun and thoroughly researched. I honestly think Heller is going to surprise us with many new plot twists in the last season. I just love this show!
I had thought it was Kirkland, but he is out after this week so I looked
a little more and now I am pretty sure that it is McAllister.
It
has been stated several times over the years that RJ has been on the
show since the beginning, but would be hard to find. McAllister appears
in 1.02 and is not seen again until this year. Partidge was 1.01 and was
thrown out there as a very obvious suspect, but tucking the real RJ
into the much more forgettable second episode as a potentially creepy,
but otherwise forgettable small town sheriff would keep him well hidden,
still there all along. It should also be noted that McAllister looks
very much middle aged in his first appearance, which is the basis for
many people eliminating him as a suspect based on his current appearance
(maybe another diversion?).
The clues are subtle, but every time he
has appeared on an episode, he sneaks up on someone very effectively. In
RJ's appearance (2.23) he seems to leave, but sneaks around PJ for one
last word. RJ also sneaks behind Lisbon in 6.01. If the theory is right,
the birds will tie into it somehow.
I'M ACTUALLY STRESSING OUT OVER READING THESE THEORIES! I DO NOT GET WHAT PEOPLE READ OR WATCH? DO PEOPLE REALLY THINK PARTRIDGE IS ALIVE??? ANOTHER THING. I KEEP HEARING MARSHALL McALISTER??? HE IS NOT A MARSHALL??? HE IS A SHERIFF. MARSHALLS ARE PEOPLE WHO ESCORT PRISONERS. WHAT IS SO DIFFICULT ABOUT THIS? RED JOHN IS SHERIFF McALISTER. I WILL POST THIS FOR THE FINAL TIME. RED JOHN HAD TO MAKE HIS APPEARANCE IN SEASON #1 BECAUSE THEY SCRIPT WAS WRITTEN AS IF THE SEASON WOULD NOT RENEWED. DOES ANYONE REMEMBER ORVILLE TANNER? RED JOHN WAS AROUND THE SAME AGE. IT HAS TO BE McALLISTER. LAST THING. WATCH STRAWBERRIES & CREAM. WATCH THE GUY IN THE RED SHIRT WITH BLACK STRIPES WEARING A HAT TALKING TO THE GIRL AT THE COFFEE STAND. HE ALWAYS HAS HIS BACK TURNED. YOU WILL SEE HIM 7X. WATCH IT CAREFULLY. TIMOTHY CARTER LOOKS AT HIM 2X. ONCE WHEN HE GETS THE CALL AND ANOTHER AFTER HE TURNS TO LEAVE JANE. ALSO WATCH AFTER CARTER IS SHOT. LOOK AT THE LAST PERSON TO RUN BY. ITS McALLISTER. WATCH CAREFULLY. TRUST ME. THIS WAS PLANNED LONG AGO.
My original pick for RJ was Minelli, but since the release of the list, (assuming its real...not so sure!), I've been a McCallister girl. I LOVE Xander Berkeley - he's great. I also love the idea of Rock, Paper, Scissors as the handshake (each literally shakes his fist, then lays out RPS. ) So clever, plus it was on screen, plus it was the kind of playful battle of wits RJ would be interested in. Plus, McCallister is a potentially charming character and I love the idea of RJ being established early in the series. Adds such "symmetry" to the series.
So many great theories recently have discussed the many clues hinting at McCallister. I'll add to the mix...maybe he is mar...he is Marshall McCallister...unfinished! yes! but Marshall is another title for sherriff. The Tyger, Tyger puzzle piece is tougher to explain. I can only imagine that the symmetry here lies in their background, perhaps. Was RJ a victim of parental abuse, a kid who was raised in foster homes...or maybe RJ was a victim of a crime pre-Red Barn that turned him into a killer, or is the symmetry simply that by killing PJs family, RJ is turning PJ into a killer (like him)? Because PJ is certainly still emphatically stating his intent to kill RJ. That's certainly symmetry.
Other predictions:
PJ will not kill RJ, but Lisbon will.
Hightower is back in the picture because of some kind of pressure...possibly someone swipes her kid
Kirkland is a victim of RJ and has considered PJ to be a legit suspect for nine years...hence the surveillance by Homeland.
Kirkland will be killed
One or both of the newlyweds, Rigsby and VP will be killed (sorry, short honeymoon)
An event at the Red Barn was the genesis of RJ and it involved Visualize. Stiles knew about it, but was building Visualize and looked away, not thinking RJ would grow into RJ, now, too late.
Haffner and Bertram and Reede Smith are good guys, but there is something inside the CBI that ain't legit.
The clue in Epi 1? Ack. Not sure...the birds or the clown face. And where in the world is Sean Barlow? And is Kristina Frye a total loss/dead end? Anybody have any thoughts?
Anyway...that my pennies and while I like McCallister for it :), if Partridge rises from the dead, it wouldn't surprise me, so rock on Partridge fans. LOL. At this point, nothing would. Can't wait til Sunday.
Regarding Sheriff McAllister, just a small point for those focused on a strict interpretation of Loreli's handshake comment:
Isn't playing rock-paper-scissors essentially "handshaking?" In fact, given the playful nature of the Jane-RJ relationship, in story-telling terms, isn't this better than a formal handshaking?
In other words, doesn't the fact that McAllister and Jane played rock-paper-scissors say something even more telling than if they were to "shake" hands as normal people would?
And to those who will point out that Jane beat McAllister every time, isn't losing (and therefore seeming less than cunning) a great first move on RJ's part?
Just a few things to think about. Hope all of you are well.
Just a question...Heller said that we can trust the list; does anyone remember if he said RJ is on the list? Thank you.