Here is my reasoning for why I don't believe Carol murdered Karen & David in cold blood:

1. Carol is on a council. She was placed there for a reason. While I agree that she may have gone rogue and started her "Knifing with Carol 101" classes, I also believe that was a set up to make the audience believe she could easily go a step further.

2. Karen and David were at the fence killing walkers. Lizzie saw them because the kids were shouting at Nick. Karen saw the photo of Nick (foreshadow). Way too much emphasis on Nick and the fantasy/reality blur. Nick was likely killed shortly after that by Karen and/or David, which Lizzie knows. This leads me to believe that Karen & David's death had nothing to do with the sickness at all. It was revenge.

3. At the end of Infected, Lizzie took a knife from Carol. It was also a very specific camera shot, focusing on that exchange. Just prior, Carol had been telling Lizzie why she was upset, not asking her why or trying to determine what was wrong. Mika said herself that Lizzie was messed up. We assume Carol had gotten through to her and that Lizzie was willing to step up, take the knife, and be strong. Well, yep, she was strong all right. And Lizzie obviously doesn't truly know the difference between alive and dead.

4. Lizzie learned from Carol how to knife someone in the head. Carol specifically told her "you know this is what we have to do" when her dad died.

5. There was no hesitation when Rick asked her if she killed Karen & David. If it really was her, why not keep up the pretense? What happened to her reason for keeping it a secret at that point? What changed to make her want to confess? Nothing changed. As a matter of fact, knowing how Tyreese took it, it was in Carol's best interest to keep her mouth shut. I believe she knew Rick would eventually find the truth and she was grateful that his eyes didn't turn toward Lizzie, so she could have protected her in that instant. She didn't hesitate. When Rick asked if there was anything she wouldn't do to protect the group, I believe she was thinking about her "daughter" and that's why she freely admitted to killing them.

6. The blood on the door. It was a partial handprint of sorts and it was under the door jamb. A lot lower than where Carol's hand would have been placed in order to open the door.

7. Carol had medical training. She knew about infections and the spread of them. She knew the girls had already been exposed to Patrick so they had already been exposed to infection. Once you're exposed, you're exposed. So why would she only kill those two? Why not kill everyone in the cell block that had been exposed? It just doesn't make any sense.

8. Carol was willing to cut off an arm in order to keep someone alive. I have a hard time believing she would kill someone who was isolated, locked in a cell, who (a) had a chance to get better or (b) was simply going to die of infection and then they would be killed and burned. There was no motive for Carol to kill Karen and David before they died.

9. On Talking Dead last night, when spoken to about Carol killing Karen & David, Gale Ann Hurd responded by saying, "If she did, in fact, take lives." That's an exact quote. She didn't admit Carol killed them.

10. The whole Lizzie faking being sick thing was also telling. I don't think she could have been that bad of an actress.

11. In the preview for next week, Carol and Lizzie are talking. Lizzie says "eventually everyone dies." and Carol says "you have to keep trying." That doesn't sound like a person who gave up on two sick people and shanked them in the coconut. It sounds like Carol giving Lizzie a lecture.

12. In the preview for next week, we see the feet of a body being dragged, which I believe to be a flashback. Why would we need a flashback if Carol just killed them? Why would we need to see HOW she did it? We wouldn't.

It's possible she found out that Lizzie killed them and burned the bodies, but that's debatable. Karen wasn't that big. Neither was David. Lizzie and Mika could have made that mess by dragging them, or Carol helped them. If Carol helped them, I can't help but think she would have cleaned up afterwards.

As an alternative to number 5 above, Rick asked if there was anything she wouldn't do to protect the group, not "the children." Maybe she is protecting the group. She DID throw Lizzie in with the sick people. Maybe that's why she committed watercide. [hey, I coined a new word!]

Regardless of whether or not Carol delivered the death blow or was an accomplice, or suspects Lizzie or is covering for Lizzie, her guilt would be real on all counts. She IS responsible, so I can see why she would confess to killing them. In her mind, she did - one way or the other.

As for Kirkman's interview? He and Danai Gurira also mentioned something about a hint of a zombie baby in episode 1. I didn't see that. We don't really even know if the interviewer's questions were the actual questions asked. Media changes stuff up all the time. As far as anyone knows by the end of this episode, Carol did it. Every reviewer is taking it at face value, which is fine.

Someone said that there was no evidence Lizzie killed them. That's correct. But there's no evidence Carol did either. Carol confessed, but there's still no evidence that it was her.
​

 

All good points & ones I agree with (and have stated more or less the same thing).
But you forgot #13, which WILL happen this next week: Lizzie faking illness to get into the sick ward & carves Glenn into sushi proving "sometimes you eat the bear and sometimes the bear eats you"...

 

Why not go down a darker path ... Carol "trained" Lizzie on karen and david because she doesn't want lizzie to be a weak scared kid like sophia ... ! She did feel guilt and horror after the scene ( probably karen woke up and begged etc etc ) and has now a termi-lizzinator !

Also patrick died very quickly after the coughing symptoms ... why can't we assume that David and Karen turned already ... ! We all assume she killed them while they where still alive ...

 

Because if she killed them after they turned, there would be no reason to hide that fact, everyone would understand

 

[MENTION=8495]Willow[/MENTION], I'm with you about the whole focus on Lizzie, her making a big deal about walker Nick, and then the focus on her receiving the knife from Carol while standing at the fence staring at walkers possibly thinking about getting revenge. This scene happens before Tyreese discovers the bodies. So I still hold out hope for Carol .

However, Kirkmans statements have me worried. Even worse are Melissa McBrides statements. I'm not as confident as you that they are just misleading us, but I hope that next episode we find out it is crazy Lizzie who did the killing. Even if that happens, I still think Carol had to have helped somehow. Otherwise, why lie for Lizzie?

 

If Lizzie killed them with Carol's help that would just get her sick faster!

 

If it is Lizzie that killed them, then she might kill some more sick people next episode. And the worst part? Carol won't even be there, she's going on the run. Mika, keep your sis on a leesh...

 

Carol also told Lizzie that Glenn was good at tucking people in or telling a bedside story or something. So if Lizzie kills Glenn then I'm going to blame Carol. It did seem very emotional when Carol told Lizzie to go into the sick people area. My guess is that they both were involved, Lizzie killed them and Carol burned the bodies to hide the evidence.

 

That's a good question. If Lizzie did it, why would she cover for her? Does she expect Lizzie to just be executed or something?? Seems unlikely.

 

Rick: Lizzie. Shit happens.
*wack*

 

First, because Lizzie's dad put her in Carol's care and therefore it would reflect poorly on her. Second because she coerced her into killing her father and called her weak when she couldn't do it which reflects poorly on Carol. Third, because Carol's been teaching the kids to use weapons and attack things, which reflects poorly on Carol. Basically if comes out that Lizzie was the one that killed those two then Carol's position is weakened. If it was Carol then everybody just thinks she did it for the good of the group.

 

I'm not so sure about this. Rick might buy this "best for the group" excuse, but Tyreese will certainly disagree. Others might not be as understanding either, especially Hershel who pretty much did the opposite and sacrificed himself for others. IMHO, her position is weakened either way. More so now, actually. That is, of course, assuming Rick tells others about it.

 

You have some very good points, but McBride's statements worry me. Also, why would Mika help her? I honestly don't think Mika would be really in for killing people... It was Lizzie who was attached to that walker, not Mika, and Mika may have "accepted" her sister's craze in a way, but she's not a killer imo.

 

Tell me one thing.

If it was not Carol, and Carol was just protecting Lizzie, Why Carol was so troubled in that episode? For examble go out alone and start to mess around with those water barrels?

 

First off, GREAT job putting all that together and writing it out, that was a lot of thinking and reasoning, thanks for posting it. It's so much of what I think and I agree with all of it. Everything points to what you say as being the truth.

But like others, it's those damn interviews I can't get past. They seem to confirm Carol doing it. I don't see why AMC would have McBride going out and giving interviews about being the killer if she wasn't- it just doesn't make much sense for them to do that- and it seems like she has put a lot of thought into it- and obviously they have filmed way past that episode so she would know by now if she didn't do it. And Kirkman put a lot of thought into his answers as well- and it's hard to think he means it any other way. I just can't see them next week going, "Ha ha fooled you! She didn't do it!"- I would think interviewers would think twice about interviewing the Walking Dead cast members if they were just going to spend a whole page talking about something they didn't do- it just seems too weird.

I REALLY hope that is the case because it doesn't seem logical Carol would do it. The one small thing I noticed though that sort of makes me doubt McBride's version of things is they asked her if her killing the two people would endanger any future relationship with Daryl and she seemed to think it shouldn't pose a problem at all. That was odd.

 

I dont think carol killed them. I think shes protecting Lizzie or something like that.

 

I went back to watch episode 2 and this just seems totally on the money. Lizzie is "angry" about Nick, she doesn't act like she is even thinking about her father. "He's dead- he was special and he's dead! Why did they kill him, why did they kill Nick?" she says- Carol thinks at first she is talking about her father, but she is crying about Nick being dead. And it was Karen and David who killed Nick at the fence. This has got to be it. Lizzie killed them because they killed Nick. When we first see Lizzie in 4.1, she is there at the fence talking to Nick. The way this is set-up, I don't see how it can be anything else. It's actually much more interesting a turn of events than Carol killing the two- just because it's so out of character for Carol to do that but this is a better discussion because the concept of dead and alive to the child and the children is undergoing a big change- it's easy for adults to make the difference, but probably not so much for a child, who doesn't even understand death much.

 

Totally agree with you here HS. Carol has already proved she believes in being proactive. She's a little problem solver that one is. Those girls...well... Yikes.

 

I think Rick (this season) will keep her secret. Rick Season one... she's be screwed. But this Rick might just keep his mouth shut.