Soap writer has experience with murder mysteries and criticizes Coronation Street's recent reveal of Sarah's secret.

In the midst of a complex murder investigation, Sarah Platt stood out as the only suspect who wasn't actually a suspect. As a writer with a decade of experience on the popular British soap, Coronation Street, I couldn't help but notice that the show had broken one of the golden rules of plotting a whodunnit - playing fair with the audience. Having written numerous murders for fictional characters, I know that it is a meticulous and exhausting process.

But it is also an opportunity to improve and learn with each successful "getaway". However, Coronation Street seemed to have successfully kept the killer of Weatherfield's most sinister scaffolder, Theo Silverton, a secret for months. They even went so far as to hide the victim's identity, teasing the viewers with a flash-forward of a character discovering the body.

This master stroke had the audience on the edge of their seats, eagerly anticipating the reveal. But the real genius move was putting a target on the backs of Weatherfield's biggest villains and keeping the viewers guessing as to who would be the next victim. It wasn't just a whodunnit, it was a "whogonnagetdun".

Admittedly, the constant focus on every villain's story did cause some fatigue, but it was all worth it for what came next. The momentum never dropped as Todd Grimshaw, one of Corrie's top characters, was accused of murdering his abusive husband. With Todd's closest friends and allies also under suspicion, the drama only intensified.

Summer Spellman, who had her own motives for wanting Theo dead, added another layer of intrigue to the investigation. And let's not forget about the other suspects, such as Theo's ex-best friend, his ex-wife, and Todd's boss and mentor. As a dedicated reader of Metro Soaps, I know the importance of never missing an article.

That's why we have the option to add the Soaps team as a preferred source, ensuring that you never miss any of our articles, spoilers, videos, and interviews. But even with all the excitement and suspense surrounding the murder, there was one major flaw in the storytelling - Sarah Platt being revealed as the killer. On the surface, making Sarah the murderer seemed like a bold and unexpected move.

She was soap royalty, with a massive fanbase and a relatable "girl next door" persona. However, this decision goes against the golden rule of playing fair with the audience. The fun of a murder mystery is in the guessing, and being misled only leads to disappointment and frustration.

With all the marketing and promotion surrounding the six suspects, it only made sense for one of them to be the killer. Adding a seventh suspect at the last minute robbed the viewers of the satisfaction of correctly guessing the culprit. Looking back at other famous whodunnits, such as EastEnders' "Who Killed Lucy Beale?", we can see the impact of not playing fair with the audience.

Thirteen potential suspects were presented, but ultimately the killer turned out to be Bobby Beale - a character who nobody suspected because they weren't given a reason to. This twist not only undermined a ten-month long marketing campaign, but it also made beloved characters unlikeable accomplices. As we process the shocking revelation that Sarah Platt is a murderer, it raises questions about her past and why she didn't take matters into her own hands in previous situations involving criminal boyfriends and sex trafficking.

Ultimately, Coronation Street may have broken the golden rule of whodunnits, but their clever storytelling and gripping plot twists still make for an exhilarating and unforgettable murder mystery. When it came to the suspects, Sarah stood out as the odd one out. She wasn't actually a suspect at all.

In the world of crime fiction, there's a golden rule that writers must follow - play fair with your audience. However, as a writer on the popular British soap Coronation Street for over a decade, I witnessed firsthand how this rule was broken. Being a soap opera writer means that I have had to "kill" a fair share of characters in my time.

Of course, none of these deaths were real, they were all fictional. But in a show like Hollyoaks, where a killer strikes almost as often as Warren Fox glowers at someone, it's safe to say I've had my fair share of practice. One particular storyline that kept me up at night was "Who Killed Amy Barnes?" The other writers and I spent countless hours discussing and debating who the killer should be - Harry Thompson or Duncan from Blue.

And as we deliberated, the pizza we ordered for sustenance slowly turned cold. Writing a murder mystery is a lot like the real thing - it's exhausting, meticulous, and you constantly strive to improve with each successful "murder." And Coronation Street did get away with it - at least, in the beginning. They managed to keep the killer of Weatherfield's most sinister scaffolder, Theo Silverton, a secret for months.

But what was even more impressive was that they also kept the identity of the victim under wraps. The audience was teased with a flash-forward of Betsy Swain discovering the body at Swarla's wedding, leaving them hungry for more and glued to their screens. But the real genius move was making all the biggest baddies in Weatherfield potential targets and keeping the viewers guessing as to who would die.

This wasn't just a simple whodunnit - it was a whogonnagetdun. Of course, this did mean that every villain's story had to be ramped up in anticipation of "Murder Night," which led to some fatigue for the viewers. But it was all worth it for what came next.

Even after Theo's death, the momentum of the storyline didn't drop. Todd Grimshaw, one of Corrie's biggest A-listers, was accused of murdering his abusive and narcissistic husband. And as the suspects turned against each other, the aftermath of the killing was just as engaging - with all the backbiting, paranoia, accusations, secrets, and lies.

As a writer, this gave me more material to work with than I could have ever asked for. Honestly, if the killer had been one of the "Killer Six," I would be writing a very different article right now. But the truth is, it wasn't any of them.

It was Sarah Platt - the one person that nobody suspected, simply because we were never told to. Let me play devil's advocate for a moment and acknowledge the positives of this decision. Sarah Platt is soap royalty, a beloved character with a massive fanbase earned from years of standout storylines.

She could do almost anything and still have the audience cheering for her. And this is partly due to the exceptional talent of actress Tina O'Brien, who brings even the most challenging and emotionally demanding stories to life. But it's also because Sarah is an everywoman - the girl next door.

We have watched her grow up on the Cobbles, and we have grown up with her. We would forgive her anything, even murder. So why was making Sarah the killer a mistake?

It all comes back to that golden rule - play fair with your audience. The fun of a murder mystery is in the guessing. It's okay for viewers to be wrong, but what they don't like is being misled.

And that is exactly what happened in this case. All the promotional material leading up to the reveal suggested that one of the "Killer Six" was the murderer. So when a surprise culprit was thrown in at the last minute, it robbed the audience of the satisfaction of saying "I knew it all along!" And let's not forget the thirteen could-be killers in EastEnders' infamous "Who Killed Lucy Beale?" storyline, where the actual killer turned out to be the one person that nobody suspected because we were never told to suspect them.

It was a big shock twist, but one that left many beloved characters looking unlikeable and the ten-month-long marketing campaign in shambles. And now, with Sarah's revelation as the killer, it raises questions about her past. Why didn't she kill her criminal boyfriend Callum Logan?

Or the man who sex-trafficked her daughter, Nathan Curtis? Or her other criminal boyfriend Damon? These questions remain unanswered, and it leaves us wondering if this decision was truly the best one for the show.