The Blacklist Refugees » The Suitcase

Tuxie400 · 10/28/2017 5:25 pm

lara1 wrote:
Brittany - my thought is that the person with a vested interest in the suitcase is someone whom Red thought was dead ( not necessarily in the suitcase) and is not. Ie its KR who has the vested interest. Red isn’t aware and perplexed perhaps that others are interested in it because he thinks the only other person who would have such an interest is KR - she does not want the contents revealed perhaps - she’s alive but Red does not know that.

Katarina would definitely be someone who had a vested interest in the suitcase. I understand what you are saying, and would like that to be the case.

I don't think I could take it if Kaplan were still alive or there were two Kaplans. One was really enough!

Last edited by Tuxie400 (11/05/2017 9:49 am)

10/28/2017 5:35 pm

Lara- that’s a really good idea! I could see that being possible. Especially when you put it together with the times where Red seems unsure of what happened to her. I think he has definitely underestimated why anyone else would be interested in this suitcase and it’s contents. I just wonder how that could tie into “what you did to Katarina”...

oh the agony of waiting out a story arc....

lara1 · 10/28/2017 8:25 pm

Tuxie400 - yeah thinking about two Kaplans makes me dizzy.....yet how to explain the roaming head wounds - sometimes the side of her head, sometimes the back, then for a while her cheek wound re-appeared. ha ha

Brittany - I feel that there are a lot of breadcrumbs in the series that could point to KR still being around, the most obvious being the Vanessa Cruz storyline. I feel like someone (maybe Red) witnessed her going into the water but then nothing of her was ever found.....

Last edited by lara1 (10/28/2017 8:27 pm)

lara1 · 10/28/2017 8:26 pm

Tuxie400 - oh yes, it could be the MPS theory too! And each of Kaplan's wounds on the same side as the other wounds and scars we talked of for Liz and Red, Dembe as well. Did Kirk have any scars? I can't remember.....

Honey West · 10/28/2017 10:11 pm

Ooh, maybe they faked Katarina's death and made Red think he was the one who killed her! And, yes, maybe he was led to believe that those were her bones up at Tansi Farm. Being part of the hiding of her remains might have been what sold it to him that she was dead and it was his fault. So he would be pretty upset to think that "their secret" might be revealed to Liz. What a great thing to be holding over his head. "I used to think I knew what happened to Katarina Rostova..." maybe he was beginning to get suspicious of whether she was really dead like he thought for so many years. I still think something in that ROSTOVA file maybe pointed that way. "It’s worse than I thought", he said after reading it. Maybe it confirmed Velov's story about following her to Prague after she was "dead". So, I would want to know, was Red part of the fakery or was he also a victim of it? I don’t think we have quite enough puzzle pieces to know which one yet.

So, of course the secret works both ways at this point as to what great truth would be revealed to Liz by the suitcase as placed into play by Kate. If the bones belong to Katarina, then she finds out her mother met a gruesome end and her body was hidden and that Red was likely responsible. If the dna shows it’s not Katarina, when it was thought to be by Red, then that probably means Katarina is still alive and that is the truth that gets revealed to Liz. Also, if Red helped fake her death, then the news that Katarina has been discovered to be alive could cause a lot of other dominoes to fall with even bigger ramifications for things as large as governments or global stability. Velov said that he always considered Red to be the KGB's biggest enemy. That’s a pretty bold statement of Red's importance to the situation, and Katarina's. This could be very, very interesting if it plays out that way.

lara1 · 10/29/2017 1:23 pm

Wasn't sure where to add this, but today someone on the Facebook Blacklist Exposed site posted a really interesting theory about Liz's scar/symbol in the series and how it may be connected to Liz's real father and possibly the suitcase. The author put a lot of time and effort into it so I won't try to paraphrase here but suggest you read it in full on FB.

Of course for full disclosure I will say that I found it really interesting because a) I still don't really believe that "hubby" Tom is what he appears to be, i.e. he's still on some "mission"; and b) I still don't believe that Red is really Liz's father. Though I do accept that these are just theories and may not turn out to be the case....

Last edited by lara1 (10/29/2017 1:25 pm)

lara1 · 10/29/2017 6:23 pm

I am not sure whether this is correct or not about CODIS though it seems it might be from what I have read about it: although the database was formally established around the mid 1990s, various organizations can/do contribute to it, so it seems possible that DNA samples from prior to that time period have been added.
I am no expert to be sure. But if that's correct then its possible that the DNA of someone who was no longer alive in the mid-90s ,already on a database somewhere else, could have been added to CODIS. But like I said I am no expert so not sure if that is correct. I'm not at all sure we will find out whose DNA it is prior to the Fall finale, if then.

10/29/2017 6:31 pm

I've thought about that too, Lara. It's possible. I did look up CODIS and I found that it can collect maternal DNA, meaning it can connect in the missing persons index through maternal DNA. But it doesn't sound like that's possible for any paternal DNA. So in the imposter theory case, if that were Raymond Reddington, it wouldn't be able to show a link to Liz, nor would Jennifer show up as any sort of half-sister or genetic link to Red.

lara1 · 10/29/2017 6:58 pm

Brittany#29 - oh that's interesting I didn't realize that. I only found info that various Federal, state and local crime labs can and do contribute DNA profiles to the index. I don't think "reddington" would be in there if what the FBI says is true - that they never had his sample because it was not collected before he disappeared.

The interesting thing for me is that the DNA in the database is that of criminal offenders and DNA taken from crime scenes. So it would appear that it doesn't contain just anybody's DNA, its that collected as part of the criminal justice process, which would seem to make sense. Was that your understanding as well, or did I mis-interpret that? So my point is, if that is correct, that there wouldn't be a match in any event unless the DNA was from a criminal offender or part of a crime scene. Which if true makes it even more interesting.....

Tuxie400 · 10/29/2017 7:02 pm

Part of CODIS is trying to identify human remains from among known missing persons and their relatives. Here's what I found:"Sufficient DNA data from both the human remains and the relatives of the missing person are needed to produce a statistically significant database association involving DNA profiles in a missing persons case. In order to maximize the potential for such associations, as much genetic information as possible should be requested and obtained in a missing person investigation. This may be accomplished by:
[list=square]
[*]Collecting DNA samples from multiple relatives. Any relative of the missing person offering to provide a DNA sample should have a sample collected. The laboratory will assist in determining which samples should be analyzed and databased;
[*]Requesting mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) analysis on at least one maternal relative for all missing person cases, regardless of gender;
[*]Requesting YSTR analysis on at least one paternal relative if the missing person is a male; and
[*]Requesting mtDNA analysis on all unidentified human remains and YSTR analysis on male remains.
[/list]
So what I got is that the paternal DNA would only be used to identify males. And that would be if the father of the missing person gave a DNA sample.

10/29/2017 7:06 pm

Lara- Yes, that was also my understanding, that it is only for crimes. I believe I read somewhere that CODIS was initially created as a way of keeping track of sex offenders and expanded into felony crimes and missing persons on both state and national levels. Each state operates their own CODIS, so some may collect DNA upon a felony arrest or may only collect upon conviction. Some states do familial connections based on first order relatives (either parent or siblings), but not at the national level. They only do the maternal DNA for missing persons. Liz would probably be in there because of her own felony arrest. Red isn't in any databases. So if the person in the suitcase were a relative of Liz's, they would have be female and have DNA in the system to show up as anything.

Last edited by Brittany (10/29/2017 7:07 pm)

10/29/2017 7:11 pm

Good catch, Tuxie. So maternal DNA can be used on anyone, but paternal DNA can only be used for males.

lara1 · 10/29/2017 10:15 pm

Thanks Brittany and Tuxie400, so missing persons....hmmmm

Colleen and Tuxie400 - interesting on the origin of CODIS isn't it - to keep track of sex offenders.......

Eastcoast · 10/30/2017 4:11 am

Actually there is a way. It's called Autosamol DNA testing.
I don't think they have all the information on that updated. There is a lot they can do with DNA when they want to. I could go on and on about that subject because I find it so interesting. But for now, I'm too tired!

Eastcoast · 10/30/2017 4:11 am

I think I spelled that right?

lara1 · 10/30/2017 10:42 pm

I just re-watched 5.04 and I reverted back to my original thought on the scene with Tom, Nik and Pete. I think Pete did get a match but had no way of IDing the match. Not so much in the words he says but how he says them. Then in their next scene Tom asks, after he gets Liz's ID, how long til you ID the bones? Bottom line, I think there is a match in CODIS. And we may all be surprised by what it turns out to be.

Last edited by lara1 (10/30/2017 10:44 pm)

Eastcoast · 10/31/2017 2:41 am

lara1, that's the way I took it. He wouldn't have needed it if he didn't have a match. I will be surprised if it isn't Kr.
K on the tree, Kate saying she is sorry....

I tried to look again at who that was behind Nik.
I just couldn't get it to freeze in the right spot.
I will say that this time I think I got a better look at the forehead and I don't think the hair was like Pete's.

lara1 · 10/31/2017 12:02 pm

Eastcoast - yeah I tried to get a better look too but the action is too fast/partial and dimly lit. Though I do think when he walked out with the suitcase with his back to the camera, it looked like Tom to me with a kind of cut off denim jacket. But it could be anyone, someone we haven't met yet. I doubt it is Tom - unless - and this may be worth thinking about - Tom never wanted Nik to actually know the answer to the bones. And the way they interspersed what is happening in that scene to Tom and Liz talking - is that scene misleading us and is he acting duplicitous in that scene? Like he knows because he did it.

I think its a stretch though, just throwing it out there for anyone's thoughts. I think the actual person who did it may be someone we haven't seen yet although working on behalf of someone we know.

Last edited by lara1 (10/31/2017 12:03 pm)

Honey West · 10/31/2017 3:02 pm

Eastcoast wrote:
lara1, that's the way I took it. He wouldn't have needed it if he didn't have a match. I will be surprised if it isn't Kr.
K on the tree, Kate saying she is sorry....

I tried to look again at who that was behind Nik.
I just couldn't get it to freeze in the right spot.
I will say that this time I think I got a better look at the forehead and I don't think the hair was like Pete's.

You know, eastcoast, you got me thinking. Suppose the suitcase contents aren’t Katarina, but provide definite proof that she is still alive. And Kate knows that and has been helping to keep her secret all this time. Maybe she was apologizing to Katarina for being forced to expose her? In any case maybe one of the reasons she agreed to work for Red in the first place was to keep an eye on him for Katarina, and help keep,him from getting too close to outing her?

10/31/2017 3:07 pm

Lara- I can see what you are saying, but I doubt that Tom killed him. It would be an interesting turn though, if it was him.

Honey West and Eastcoast- that theory has been in my number one spot for the suitcase theory for a while. That it's more about whose remains AREN'T in the suitcase rather than whose remains are in there. I've been torn on whether or not Red knows for sure, but his behavior in the last episode (not seeming to understand why Nik would be killed for the suitcase) made me think that perhaps he doesn't know. If that ends up being the case. I'm all for Katarina being alive.