Video 17 Feb 1,064 notes


Since it started with a kid getting killed, it would be incredibly inappropriate to celebrate the 25th anniversary of Sherlock’s sleuthing career in 2014, right?

Even though we’ll need something to do between series of Sherlock?


Fine. I didn’t really want to anyway. *ill-concealed sulk*

Oh, look what year it is.

Chat 17 Feb 6,576 notes Series 4 Plot Twist
  • Sherlock: Mycroft and I were one step ahead of Moriarty the whole time, and we tricked him into thinking he'd beaten us.
  • Jim: Ha! I was actually two steps ahead of you the whole time, and I tricked you into thinking you'd beaten me.
  • Carl Powers: You're both amateurs.
  • Sherlock: ...
  • Jim: ...
  • Carl: And I want my shoes back.
Photo 4 Feb 210 notes piper-of-hameln:

Sherlock in 1989.
If this blog is ever deleted, find me here on AO3.
via Come away..
Text 10 Jan 30 notes


Photo 6 Apr 388 notes
Photo 24 Mar 304 notes wohnjatsons:

“What have you done to my bloody wall?!”

I like how the eyes took me 7 hours to draw and I wish I was joking but I’m not I just lost the ability to draw eyes for a moment


“What have you done to my bloody wall?!”

I like how the eyes took me 7 hours to draw and I wish I was joking but I’m not I just lost the ability to draw eyes for a moment

Video 10 Dec 176 notes


Nice touch, this. The pool… where little Carl died.

Carl Powers (1978 - 1989)

via acquiesce.
Photo 24 Oct 376 notes inkydrop:

They consult me


They consult me

Video 2 Jun 34 notes

fromthesuncomesthelifeofastar asked:

Something I’ve been contimplating ever since I figured out that Moriarty must have kept the shoes. He seems to have kept them because he knew Sherlock knew about them. So does this mean ever since they were kids, Moriarty was waiting for him? Also, did he not do any crimes between killing Carl and the stuff he does to set up the encounters with Sherlock? I wanna believe sherlock would have caught onto those cases if he had. Sorry my question’s not super clear. Character limit, and all.

Jim initially took Carl’s shoes because they were the only solid evidence that Carl had been murdered. Sherlock read about the missing shoes in the paper, and the fact that they were missing made him think Carl’s death may not have been an accident.

Even if the detail about the shoes appeared in the newspaper reports as quickly as possible after Carl’s death and Sherlock went to the police as quickly as possible after reading the article and Jim found out Sherlock was causing trouble as quickly as possible after that, I think we’ve still got to assume that whole process took at least a day. Which means Jim, faced with the options of immediately destroying the evidence or keeping it, had already chosen to hold onto the shoes for at least a little while.

Maybe Jim did decide to keep the shoes forever and ever after he realized Sherlock was interested in them.

Or maybe (and I tend to think this is more likely) Jim kept the shoes because Carl had loved them.

Given all of the parallels with Sherlock and the fact that Carl Powers was Sherlock’s first case, I suspect Carl Powers was Jim’s first murder as well. So Jim may have kept the shoes for years as a trophy. (Rather than because he immediately came up with the idea of saving them to play a game with Sherlock in the event the boy grew up to be a detective.)

As for crimes that happened in-between Carl’s murder and A Study in Pink… Yes, I think Jim had almost certainly been involved in tons of crimes by then. The cabbie described Jim’s reputation (“more than a man,” etc) in a way that makes me think Jim was well-established as a consulting criminal.

Why wouldn’t Sherlock have caught on earlier? Because Moriarty’s good at his job, and Sherlock Holmes never does fully catch on until just before it will lead to an exciting face-off.

From The Final Problem:

"As you are aware, Watson, there is no one who knows the higher criminal world of London so well as I do. For years past I have continually been conscious of some power behind the malefactor, some deep organizing power which forever stands in the way of the law, and throws its shield over the wrong-doer. Again and again in cases of the most varying sorts—forgery cases, robberies, murders—I have felt the presence of this force, and I have deduced its action in many of those undiscovered crimes in which I have not been personally consulted. For years I have endeavored to break through the veil which shrouded it, and at last the time came when I seized my thread and followed it, until it led me, after a thousand cunning windings, to ex-Professor Moriarty of mathematical celebrity."

Photo 22 Apr 154 notes Is that laundry, or did we miss a sock-based Carl Powers case?

Is that laundry, or did we miss a sock-based Carl Powers case?

Video 24 Mar 1,064 notes

Since it started with a kid getting killed, it would be incredibly inappropriate to celebrate the 25th anniversary of Sherlock’s sleuthing career in 2014, right?

Even though we’ll need something to do between series of Sherlock?

Fine. I didn’t really want to anyway. *ill-concealed sulk*

Text 23 Mar 6 notes

Anonymous asked: How could Moriarty have known that Sherlock was interested by Carl Powers' death, if he couldn't get the police to listen?

We’ll probably never know.

My own guess would be that was the biggest crime young Jim had committed at the time, so he paid extra attention to whether anyone suspected Carl’s death was murder rather than an accident. Somehow Jim must’ve seen or heard about Sherlock’s investigation or attempts to convince the police. I can imagine a few ways that could’ve happened, but we’re basically in fanfiction territory there. So your guess is as good as mine.

Text 7 Mar 5 notes

silverpolarbears asked: Whoa. Just had a mind-boggling thought: what if Jim knew about Sherlock's suspicions about Carl Powers' death from Mycroft? Or is it just more likely that was the first time Sherlock came to Jim's attention?

I think it’s more likely the Carl Powers case was just the first time Sherlock came to Jim’s attention.

Jim already knew about Sherlock’s investigation of the Carl Powers case in The Great Game. That’s why he incorporated Carl’s shoes into one of the puzzles.

There’s nothing to suggest Jim and Mycroft had ever discussed Sherlock’s history at that point. As Mycroft later explained, he only told Jim about Sherlock’s life because it seemed like a way to get Jim to talk about the key code when Mycroft had him in custody. Mycroft didn’t have Jim in custody until after Scandal.

Irene: Jim Moriarty sends his love.

Mycroft: Yes, he’s been in touch. Seems desperate for my attention, which I’m sure can be arranged.

Text 20 Feb 13 notes

Anonymous asked: Just want to clear something up you said: Since Jim was the one who killed Carl and kept the shoes all these years... Was it confirmed that Moriarty is the killer? Sherlock said he was just a kid when that crime was committed, do you believe Moriarty is much older than Sherlock or committed the crime at as a child? Possibly a classmate of the swimmer? Keep up the good work.

The Great Game:

Man (speaking for Jim): Clever you. Guessing about Carl Powers. I never liked him. Carl laughed at me, so I stopped him laughing.

John: Anything on the Carl Powers case?

Sherlock: Nothing. All the living classmates check out spotless, no connection.

John: Maybe the killer was older than Carl?

Sherlock: The thought had occurred.

John (speaking for Jim): Nice touch, this. The pool, where little Carl died. I stopped him. I can stop John Watson, too. Stop his heart.

So Jim definitely killed Carl. Jim wasn’t a classmate of Carl’s, but was probably close to the same age based on the comment about Carl laughing at him.

Text 20 Feb 11 notes

hotgaysarehot-deactivated201206 asked: In "The Great Game", the killer who kept Carl Powers' shoes is the bomber-- has Moriarty been following Sherlock around since they were gradeschool kids? If so, I would assume they grew up in the same area, maybe went to the same school. I would assume Sherlock would have known of him earlier, been more... prepared. Something's not adding up for me, and I'm not sure why.

The Great Game:

Sherlock: Carl Powers, John.

John: What is it?

Sherlock: It’s where I began.

Sherlock: 1989, young kid, champion swimmer, came up from Brighton for a school sports tournament, drowned in the pool. Tragic accident. You wouldn’t remember it. Why should you.

John: But you remember.

Sherlock: Yes.

John: Something fishy about it?

Sherlock: Nobody thought so. Nobody except me. I was only a kid myself. I read about it in the papers.

John: You started young, didn’t you?

Sherlock: The boy, Carl Powers, had some kind of fit in the water, but by the time they got him out, it was too late. There was something wrong somewhere and I couldn’t get it out of my head.

John: What?

Sherlock: His shoes.

John: What about them?

Sherlock: They weren’t there. I made a fuss. I tried to get the police interested but nobody seemed to think it was important. He’d left all the rest of his clothes in his locker. But there was no sign of his shoes. Until now.

So Carl wasn’t from London. He was only at that swimming pool for a sports tournament.

And Sherlock had no personal connection to the case. It was only something he’d read about in the newspaper. He couldn’t even get anyone interested in the shoes, so he didn’t meet Jim or find out who was behind Carl’s murder until The Great Game.

Considering Jim knew to leave Carl’s shoes as a puzzle for Sherlock later, though, it seems likely that young Jim had noticed young Sherlock’s efforts at the time.

Hopefully that helps make things add up a little better?

Design crafted by Prashanth Kamalakanthan. Powered by Tumblr.