MovieChat Forums > Broadchurch (2013) Discussion > Theory - what if he was indeed not guilt...

Theory - what if he was indeed not guilty (spoilers)

posted 9 years ago by rahul_capri
6 replies | jump to latest

Joe thought(or knew) Tom did it and hence he confessed. Later he thought not worth it to go to jail for something he did not do, so he tried to save himself. Tom tried to save him because he knows Joe is not guilty,since he did it himself.But then Tom does not have a heart to frame Mark for it.After Joe is released he can`t clarify to Ellie why he confessed as he does not trust her to not go to the cops with that info.
In S3 Tom and Joe will make contact with each other and it will be revealed at some point that Tom did it.

[–] jalola298 9 years ago

There was already someone on here who tried to push that theory. The thing is Chris Chibnall, the show writer, tweeted in no uncertain terms that Joe did it. It was always Joe and only Joe.
SPOILER ALERT for another show: They went with Tom being the killer when the show was remade in the US as Gracepoint.

[–] rahul_capri 9 years ago

Thanks. That IMO is a douchey thing to do by the writer. Why say anything about a plot point that is open to interpretation?

[–] jalola298 9 years ago

I take it he was tired of being asked and decided to close the interpretation for Broadchurch.

I can see Chibnall's created this problem himself by leaving gaps that he intended to revisit and fill in during series 2 and 3. Those gaps are what allowed Gracepoint to be made with an altered end. Those gaps fooled many viewers into filling them in with details that they were sure had happened and then when the series 2 court case exposed those gaps, the viewers screamed "Retcon!" (That Chibnall had retroactively rewritten confirmed facts from series 1).

To be honest, as long as Tom was defending Joe in series 2, I thought we'd find out it was because Tom HAD been involved. But then when Tom apologized to Ellie and stood with her, Mark and Beth in banning Joe from town, I closed the door on that theory.

The thing is if Chibnall was now to have anyone other than Joe be guilty after tweeting what he did, there'd be a ton of viewers angry. So I think that Chibnall's tweet is the truth and won't be changed.

What is bothering me is the people who say Tom had to have done it because they express denial that Joe could be a pedophile -- or at least have had inappropriate desires from Danny.

[–] crazygreen1126 8 years ago

They showed the murder played out by Joe though. They showed him choking Danny to death. The only way your theory would make sense if they did it like Gracepoint had done it & not actually shown how Danny actually died. Which is how the death is switched around a little bit at the end.

"What happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object?"

[–] greekBruin 9 years ago

No, there was no indication that Tom might be the murderer. On the contrary, we were told that the hand marks around Danny's neck are from a man. An 11-year old boy cannot leave the same marks.

[–] TheMagicRainforest 8 years ago

Tom wasn't a suspect at the time of joes confession, so no need to protect him by confessing. If he was indeed covering for Tom he would surely have pleaded guilty. That's the only to make sure there are no further investigations.