Here's what is confusing me

Eastman says he's been out there for 3 years, and by the time Morgan meets up with him it's been roughly two years since the outbreak - so Eastman killed Crighton a year before the outbreak, which is why he wouldn't have seen him turn

Ok so first: Why didn't anyone go looking for him...face it he's a prime suspect

And cheeseman says murderer took 47 days to die, and when he went to city to turn self in, apocalypse had happened, so why didn't the murderer turn? If he had been out there for 3 years, and when he went to the city the Apocalypse had already happened...how does this all work?

I don't get this timeline at all.

 

I find it odd that Crighton didn't turn, if by the time he went to the city shit had already hit the fan

 

Timeline just doesn't feel very well thought out is all

 

With that logic who cares about consistency at all?
Next episode we'll have singing and dancing zombies.

Who cares

 

What mistake?

He says when Creighton died he went to go turn himself in, then learned that the world had gone to hell.

Somehow 47 days near Atlanta showdown this guy doesn't turn?

Either he buries him straight away and doesn't know...which seems unlikely since he starved to death it would be hard to tell when he died to then bury him right away.


Just seems too weird to set out this timeline of starving a man to death who doesn't turn, but the apocalypse was already underway.

Only thing that was explained to me was he was out in the woods a year after his wife and kid died.

Still doesn't explain the weird timeline being THAT close to the ZA.

 

Fine on the 3 years.

His story of finding out about the ZA, and starving the guy to death and not knowing seems a bit weird.

 

Still looks like a bit of an oversight

​ I still think it is another example of convenience overriding actual story telling - sometimes the people turn in 5 minutes because the story needs a walker threat, sometimes it takes days because they forgot everyone is infected while writing this scene.