'Serenity'
[NAFDA] Spoiler Policy: Seasons 1-3 and the movie are fair game. Spoiler font two weeks for new content presented all at once (e.g. Season 4 on Hulu is fair game as of Aug. 9, 2019). New content presented as weekly episodes may be discussed with no restrictions as it is released.
I thought he was looking for the gun to use it to protect Kendall and possibly himself.
I thought he was looking for the gun to protect all three of them, but when the gun was missing, he guessed Cormac might have bad intentions as well. If he hadn't found the pen, he might have just gone back and gotten shot. Or Cormac might have waited until he had the papers and had gone, but since Keith found the gun missing, he had to change his plan.
I thought he was looking for the gun because he'd found the bug and assumed that Liam was on their trail and he was going to use it to protect himself, Kendall and Cormac. he had no idea Cormac wanted Kendall dead until he found the gun missing and knew he'd had the opportunity to swipe it when Keith fell asleep while they were waiting on the tow truck guy.
Okay, here's the best sense I can make of it.
Keith falls asleep waiting for tow truck, Cormac swipes the gun from Keith's glove box, presumably to kill Kendall once Keith leaves.
Keith and Cormac arrive at Kendall's hide out.
Keith goes out to get Cormac's papers. Finds Vinnie's pen and realizes they're been tracked, most-likely by Liam.
Goes to grab his gun from glove box to defend against Liam, finds it missing.
Keith has one of two assumptions: either he believes Liam has already followed them and swiped the gun so Keith will be defenseless or he realizes Cormac has stolen the gun and intends to kill Kendall.
Keith runs to the house, shouting to warn Kendall.
Cormac hears Keith yelling, assumes Keith knows what he's up to, and shoots Kendall and then tries to kill Keith. If Keith hadn't discovered the gun missing and started yelling, Cormac would likely have waited until Keith left before killing her.
points two posts back
Okay, thanks y'all. That makes enough sense for me.
points two posts back
I know. I wasn't trying to steal anyone's thunder. It just seemed like we had a piece of the puzzle here and a piece of the puzzle there, and I was trying to get a completely spelled out theoretical chronology going. Apologies if it sounded like I was stepping on people's toes.
I know. I wasn't trying to steal anyone's thunder. It just seemed like we had a piece of the puzzle here and a piece of the puzzle there, and I was trying to get a completely spelled out theoretical chronology going. Apologies if it sounded like I was stepping on people's toes.
No, no, no - I was (mostly) kidding. I almost asked if there was an echo in here (or "Is this thing on?"). No toes were injured in this discussion. Also, this is most definitely a case of too much WTF/not enough HSQ.
Or perhaps Cormac meant to wipe off the prints and somehow frame Keith for shooting Kendall with his (Keith's) gun.
No, no, no - I was (mostly) kidding.
Okay, cool.
Or perhaps Cormac meant to wipe off the prints and somehow frame Keith for shooting Kendall with his (Keith's) gun.
I was thinking this was a possibility as well. He certainly would have other oppurtunities/ways to kill her without it.
Cormac's comment about how Kendall wasn't such a good judge of character, and the fact that she was "shot" offscreen, still makes me think we haven't seen the last of her alive and breathing.