Saturday 20 November 2010

Harry Pearce and his Watch over the Embassy in Dakar

Why was Harry watching over the embassy in Dakar?
After his a bit murky time in Ireland, I would have thought Harry Pearce would have deserved a promotion.
Watching over and being responsible for the security at a foreign embassy, where no real action or security risk is expected, seems not to qualify for that. For me it seemed a step down on the ladder for Harry Pearce.
So why was Harry Pearce really watching over the embassy in Dakar, when John Bateman was there to bomb it? Why did Harry Pearce not foresee that bombing or at least have any idea who was behind it? Not even after 15 years does he have the slightest hint concerning the background of the bombing. The whole bombing seems to be a completely blank spot, an action out of the nowhere.
Why did Harry Pearce mention the event in casual conversation with Lucas North, when they were driving to a meeting with Vaughan? Did Harry know the real background and that Vaughan was involved in it? Or had Vaughan mentioned before what information he wanted to offer Harry? But why did they meet then, when Vaughan did not really reveal anything else at the meeting?
What did the initiators of the bombing in Dakar want to reach with such an unnecessary killing? Normally a goal, at least insecurity in a certain area would be the reason to do something as outrageous as that. But nothing, no stealing of documents, no special target, just whoever went by at that moment John Bateman pressed the button.
From what John Bateman tells us not even Vaughan knew who was behind it. However, Vaughan at least must have known where to get the reward from for the bombing. Therefore, he would have been able to further research the background.


  1. The scriptwriters certainly have a lot to answer for. That is what also disturbed me so much about series 9. I was resigned to the fact that Lucas would probably be killed off as I had been a follower of previous series. I may have even been able to accept the fact that he turned bad -- if anything had been explained properly. I felt so cheated, betrayed, manipulated, disappointed, but ultimately....empty. As you said in your first post, and as I have almost come to accept, perhaps that is actually what the writers were aiming for. (?) Too bad someone doesn't interview one of them.

  2. @phylly3
    I would also like to have been a little mouse in the room of the writers overhearing every word and discussion they had.
    I also would have loved to hear, what Richard Armitage had to add to their concept and if he had any say in his role development.

  3. They don't really explain much, do they? I think the Dakar bombing is just a way for us to learn how bad Lucas was and his relationship with Vaughn, I don't think ti had anything to do with the current plot of S9.
    The fact the chinese had a pic of Lucas, was explained?


  4. @onemorelurker1
    I absolutely agree with you. The scriptwriters do explain nothing and not really much makes sense in Spooks 9.
    The Chinese kill squad having a photo of Lucas / John still is a mystery to me. It seems that it was so prominently placed to lure us on to come to completely wrong conclusions.
    Really cruel of the scriptwriter.
    They are really lucky, that I do not know who they are and are in a safe distance from me. Otherwise I could be tempted to shake and squeese them till they give me some answers ;o)