Shelton98 said:

---

This episode pretty much steered us in the direction we figured it would... after stewing on it for a day I have two questions about it...

1. If they were trying to make it look like Tom offed himself on the tower.... why was he missing one of his shoes? Sloppy framing work or will it pop back up in the finale?

2. How in the wide wide world of sports did Hoyt know what Hays/West did to Harris James? Was GPS even available outside of the military in 1990?

---

1. other person answered it but Hays passed it on a lower stair on the way up. it fell off.

2. they could have easily been followed they were not even looking behind themselves they were so focused on Harris. now why would they not stop it - well for Hoyt that clears up another loose end why would he care if Harris dies and it gives him dirt on Roland and Hays. just some possibilities. Recall that in that timeline Hays and Roland had just gone to talk to Harris alerting Hoyt that they were snooping around again. And then Tom showed up at the Hoyt place and Harris got rid of him. If Hoyt has any brains he might have figured they would come after Harris for revenge and be watching for him. They were sitting right outside the factory waiting. Not too hard to follow them yourself.

CorpsAg11 said:

---

Shelton98 said:

---

1. If they were trying to make it look like Tom offed himself on the tower.... why was he missing one of his shoes? Sloppy framing work or will it pop back up in the finale?

---

I think I saw it on one of the lower stairs as they were climbing up. It just fell off and landed below.

---

Yeah, I saw where the shoe was. I just don't understand why they left it there. They could have done it to lead investigators to believe he was drunk.... but the autopsy would have shown that. A shoe found several levels below the deceased should put up a red flag that maybe he was dragged up there.... and they had to have passed it on their way back down. Just seems a little strange to me.

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

Red flag to who - the police big wigs and DA were all in on burying the case and closing it fast.

A little misplaced shoe is nothing.

Plus personally it doesn't raise any red flags for me - by itself - the note moreso and the head trauma not caused by the gunshot do. but again the powers that be were shutting this down.... again.

---

I think I figured out what it means...

Just catching up on this thread. As far as the mystery being mostly solved, you guys might be right but most of you seem to have forgotten that we still need to find out what exactly happened to Will and why.

Belton Ag said:

---

Just catching up on this thread. As far as the mystery being mostly solved, you guys might be right but most of you seem to have forgotten that we still need to find out what exactly happened to Will and why.

---

I doubt we get much more of an explanation than the theory that's already been established that Will was hurt when trying to stop the abduction.

For anyone who needs to catch up on the thread, just skip page 18. Woof.

Bunk Moreland said:

---

For anyone who needs to catch up on the thread, just skip page 18. Woof.

---

It's more depressing than the show.

And remember, just because we saw Harris sneak up behind Tom at Hoyts, doesn't mean that Tom didn't leave and go shoot himself on the tower. We don't know for sure what really happened.

Southlake said:

---

And remember, just because we saw Harris sneak up behind Tom at Hoyts, doesn't mean that Tom didn't leave and go shoot himself on the tower. We don't know for sure what really happened.

---

That's actually a pretty good point and would certainly qualify as a final episode twist.

Harris sneaks up on Tom in the pink room.

Tom wants answers as to what happened to his daughter. After a fight (in which Tom receives a blow to the head), Harris drops the bomb (to him) that Lucy isn't his daughter (which is supported by Lucy telling him to stop looking for her and that he's not her real father). Tom leaves alive.

Tom, who was already in a pretty dark place, goes and offs himself.

Hays and West abduct Harris (while being monitored by Hoyt or someone in his circle), and kill him in the struggle.


That would explain A) Why West is so angry about "what we did" and B) Why Hays would have dropped the investigation at Hoyt's request and/or threat of exposing that he killed a (somewhat) innocent man.

Hoyt would presumably have the surveillance video of whatever transpired between Harris and Tom.

That might prove Harris' innocence if that is the case.

Although anything could have happened after he left the Hoyt house. So they still could have killed him.

Sure would be nice to locate the typewriter used for the note - but nobody was investigating after that.

What are the odds they release the last episode on Saturday because of the Academy Awards conflict? They did for the Super Bowl so I think it's possible if not probable.

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

Hoyt would presumably have the surveillance video of whatever transpired between Harris and Tom.

That might prove Harris' innocence if that is the case.

Although anything could have happened after he left the Hoyt house. So they still could have killed him.

Sure would be nice to locate the typewriter used for the note - but nobody was investigating after that.

---

It seems to lineup though:

1) We know Hoyt was never brought to justice and the Hoyt family was never implicated (based on present timeline)...

2) So we know in middle timeline that Hays and West did not pursue him, despite them already establishing from the Harris confrontation that they suspect Hoyt is behind it.

3) Since there's been no mention publicly of the Hoyt family even being implicated, it's unlikely it was a scenario where Hays/West knew they were right but couldn't prove it so they kept quiet (even though different season, different characters -- when a similar situation presented itself in S1 we had Rust break-in to the Tuttle mansion and steal the damning video tape).


So if Hoyt doesn't need to be brought to justice, it stands to reason the was no true kidnapping/abduction. It was their illegitimate child that he couldn't risk acknowledging due to family/company reputation, but he took her out of a ****ty homelife and compensated the mother with hush money. A crappy and illegal thing to do, but not something that the two detectives will find worth pursuing at the cost winding up disgraced and in jail if Hoyt reveals that they killed a dirty, but (somewhat) innocent man in Harris.

Only thing left to really wrap up would be what happened to the boy, which I think we'll find is likely pinned on the dead-eye-man and woman, or if they want to make us feel a bit better about what Hays/West did -- they'll say Harris played a role in it.

So screw it - I kept trying to post this and cannot get the spoiler tags right to hide the link.....

It is certainly a "spoiler" of sorts - but not anything about who did what really certainly not in 1980 and not even in 1990 - but it is too coincidental to not be true in some respect. It's more like something that was there (a few episodes back) but almost nobody noticed.


*WARNING - BUT There is what I would call a real spoiler further down within this - don't go past where it says SPOILER in flashing letters on an image - it contains info that can be gleaned from IMDB cast listings.


One episode to go - what the hell - it doesn't change anything for me in terms of anticipation for the finale.

I guess though we will need to discuss it only in spoiler tags. a couple of people saw it when I tried to post it and then deleted it and have DMed me - it was interesting to them too but not really spoiling anything.

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/02/ardoin-true-detective-season-3-who-is-gardener-killer-pink-room-hoyt

Since this is the last episode, why don't we post our best guess answers:

1) Who accidentally killed Will?
2) Tom's death: suicide or murder? By whom?
3) When and how did Amelia die?
4) Are Becca and Hays really estranged? If so, why?
5) Will we see 1990 Julie? Or 2015 Julie?
6) How did Julie escape?
7) Who is in the car watching the house?
8) Will Roland and Hays pay for their crime?

benchmark said:

---

Since this is the last episode, why don't we post our best guess answers:

1) Who accidentally killed Will?
2) Tom's death: suicide or murder? By whom?
3) When and how did Amelia die?
4) Are Becca and Hays really estranged? If so, why?
5) Will we see 1990 Julie? Or 2015 Julie?
6) How did Julie escape?
7) Who is in the car watching the house?
8) Will Roland and Hays pay for their crime?

---

1) The dirty cop, Harris.
2) Murder - Harris
3) Maybe 2010 or so. Cancer
4) No, they are not.
5) No, won't see Julie in 1990. We will see Julie in 2015.
6) I think Julie left the Hoyt house when Isabel dies. She possible has help or lives for awhile with an old friend.
7) Julie is in the car.
8) No.

benchmark said:

---

Since this is the last episode, why don't we post our best guess answers:

1) Who accidentally killed Will? Hit his head running from dead-eye man.
2) Tom's death: suicide or murder? By whom? Suicide with coaxing from Harris.
3) When and how did Amelia die? Heart-condition or something equally non-pertinent to the case.
4) Are Becca and Hays really estranged? If so, why? Don't know, but I don't think it really matters.
5) Will we see 1990 Julie? Or 2015 Julie? Aside from pictures, no.
6) How did Julie escape? Didn't really need to escape, just left the home as a runaway when she got older.
7) Who is in the car watching the house? Whichever political figure is the reason the whole case is being brought up again in present time.
8) Will Roland and Hays pay for their crime? No. The two will uncover the room and piece together the whole mystery but there won't be anyone left that can connect them to Harris killing.

---

My best guesses.

benchmark said:

---

Since this is the last episode, why don't we post our best guess answers:

1) Who accidentally killed Will?
2) Tom's death: suicide or murder? By whom?
3) When and how did Amelia die?
4) Are Becca and Hays really estranged? If so, why?
5) Will we see 1990 Julie? Or 2015 Julie?
6) How did Julie escape?
7) Who is in the car watching the house?
8) Will Roland and Hays pay for their crime?

---

1. self inflicted accident but was being chased or chasing someone
2. murder by Harris
3. natural causes/illness around 2000 before becca went to college
4. yes, something happened with her at college and caused a rift
5. 2015 yes, 1990 maybe but they won't find her then just like a flashback to where she was
6. she grew up, and with Lucy and Isabel and Hoyt all dead she just went off on her own.
7. Julie
8. No it'll all get buried a third time

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

So that was uh........ enlightening.

So as expected Roland and Hays killed Harris and buried him.
Harris killed Lucy for sure and knew a lot but they'll never find out what.
And Tom did not kill himself - we know that for sure.
Dan - what happened to him??? did he just vanish or did they kill him too???? He was more involved than I thought and rightfully paranoid it seems.

Hays is still lying a lot to Elisa - notice he sad he never thought about the case being similarly buried in 1980 and 1990 after the death of someone. Yet he did exactly that. And he got the name Watts from her. And another name Mr. June from the maid. The approach to the car in 2015 was interesting.

So I think we see now why Hays left the force and quit back then - whatever happens with Hoyt convinces him to drop it and don't look back (until 2015 anyway).

Damn. A lot of stuff here.

Good episode but still a lot to reveal.

---

They found dans body in a quarry, forgot what episode they mentioned it in but there is a shot in the latest episode with Hayes and behind him is a quarry I think in 1990. I'd have to rewatch but I think it's right after they went to the hotel looking for dan.

benchmark said:

---

Since this is the last episode, why don't we post our best guess answers:

7) Who is in the car watching the house?

---

This is the question that most interests me. Why would someone stake out a 70 year old retired cops house late at night? He can't drive, so he's not going anywhere. Perhaps they're tapping his phone or hacking his wifi.... but I haven't seen him use a computer or a phone yet. Hoyt seems to be out of the picture by 2015. The AG and DA from '90 are both likely dead by now. Dead-eye is probably long gone. Others have said Julie, but why would a 45 year old Julie who's probably long past all of this be sitting outside Hays' house night after night? Could be Eliza... who might have some mics/cameras in there trying to glean information. Maybe.

My first inclination is that it's someone who's there to protect him. But who would they protect him from? Who's still relevant in 2015 besides Hays and West?

MonkeyKnifeFighter said:

---

What if Eliza's documentary is a useful red herring? And it's actually about systemic intersectional racism within America's law enforcement leading to the downfall of capitalism?

There have been more than a few times where Hays has said "get to the point" to her before an interview closeout, and she's said things like [loosely quoted] "did you feel like you weren't taken seriously on the police force?", "so you disagreed with the official story of the 1980 case?", and "do you think there is more to the 1990 case close-out that is being overlooked?"

In today's political climate, what if this is just a SJW/virtue signaling documentary saying one detective knew all the way, and was silenced by Big White?

I started writing this as sarcasm, and ended it downgrading that to mild sarcasm + hoping I'm hilariously wrong.

---

I see Eliza as a screen writer's device. The interviews are a catalyst to make Hays think about the case and review his memories and notes - to tell the story. She also adds drama by her questions and things she reveals, how Hays answers her, etc. - not to mention a little side story with the son...I think it's a great way to tell the 2015 story. She might have an agenda, as you suggest, like solving a cold case file or expose of the politician. But I don't think it will be a big part of the finale.

Can someone remind me why Hays got blackballed after the 1980 case? Because he didn't agree that Woodard was the guy?

I'm not sure they ever revealed that. But that's what I would assume

Well we know in 90 and old man timeline he keeps investigating the case after if was closed so my guess is it'll be a mix of that + some hard headed comments directed towards his superiors.

Can't wait for tomorrow's season finale. Got the DVR set to record it

TCTTS said:

---

Yeah, this is what I was getting at last night. Hoyt's dead. Harris is dead. Tom's dead. Especially with Hoyt out of the picture, there's really nothing left to "solve" in terms of justice being served, is there? I just don't understand the point of the latest timeline if it's only to put a few minor pieces of the puzzle together once and for all. Hays and West already know there was a broader conspiracy. They already know Harris killed Lucy (and assume he killed Tom as well). What significant realizations are left? What does it matter if they confirm their suspicion that a one-eyed black guy likely kidnapped Julie 35 years ago? It just seems like a lot of work to figure out some relatively minor details. And in terms of character arcs - if we're saying it's about the detectives themselves more than the case - there's really nothing apparent that needs to be mended or completed, other than Hays wanting to confirm his suspicious of something he's likely been right about all along, but will forget about again soon anyway.

I guess I'm still curious to know...

- Where Julie is now.

- Why Hoyt kidnapped Julie. Because he's A) a pedophile, B) wanted a "replacement" daughter or C) because Julie IS his daughter (as he and Lucy may have hooked up at some point).

- If not B or C, where does the pedo ring stuff come in? They wouldn't have mentioned that stuff as much as they have if it doesn't come back into play somehow.

- If Eliza has some kind of involvement or stake other than simply wanting to try and crack the case for her show.

... but none of that remotely compares to any kind of big "Who's the killer???" or "Are they going to catch the killer???" type question usually left dangling at this point in the story (as in season one). And again, it'd be different if some big suspect were still alive, or the detective's character arcs still weren't complete, but even those feel like they really don't need that much more attention.

Again, this is still high-quality storytelling, and easily one of the best shows on TV, I just wish I wasn't essentially feeling like a the equivalent of shoulder shrug emoji going into the finale.

---

I'm caught up to episode 7 as of last night, delayed watching this season to hear if any buzz said it was a worthwhile watch. Buzz was good and I'm glad we decided to watch it, it's a solid season. Now catching up on this thread, I had been avoiding it until caught up.

I agree with you as far as culpable parties and the overall case - it seems they know who was involved back in 1990, had kind of unwound it all. We visibly see Hays get threatened at the end of episode 7, is that what causes him to walk away from it all - protecting his family? Knowing that for sure, and what happened to wife (I'm fairly certain just natural death) and daughter (seems like an almost throwaway mystery since that dinner scene at son's house, but then the college dropoff scene suggests something more coming), I wonder if West also threatened so that's why he never got married or had kids, wondering if two lonely men that were once strong partners somehow reconnect to help each other through twilight of their lives - all those are interesting enough to watch final episode. Did they solve it between the two of them in 1990 but Hays doesnt remember and West is just humoring him for companionship now? I guess West doesn't want Harris murder coming out during interviews, maybe it does and the news crew is the ones that not only figure out what Hays and West did in 1990 but also are able to expose truth to world finally? Enough interesting storylines to make the finale compelling, to me.

Season finale has a iMDB rating of 9.8 (only 55 votes). That's higher than any other episode in any season. So, the odds of it sucking seem to be pretty low.

Way out there theory: Roland West is involved/corrupt. He wasn't initially, but at some point they 'got to him'. This explains his move up the company ladder. Wasn't confident in this theory until last episode. He could have easily tackled/restrained Harris but shot him instead.

John Galt 04 said:

---

Way out there theory: Roland West is involved/corrupt. He wasn't initially, but at some point they 'got to him'. This explains his move up the company ladder. Wasn't confident in this theory until last episode. He could have easily tackled/restrained Harris but shot him instead.

---

Also could explain why he wasn't confronted by Hoyt only Hays was. Might also explain how Hoyt knew about it.

Although I am sure Roland did NOT kill Harris - but even if he did not it still could work because he might have been trying to not kill him because he was involved but Hays did it which really screwed them.

He drug his feet on a few things for sure - it is possible he acted along with whatever Hays found but otherwise did not pursue stuff.

This is a series of screenshots in the fight with Harris you can clearly see Hays has his gun pointed at Harris chest at the time of the kill shot. Roland seemed to have fired first but dropped his gun to his side before the fatal shot.


Roland shot first right here




But he lowers his gun here



And now you can see Hays puts his gun to his chest right before the final shot



and Roland's arm is to his side and gun is facing down