Keybored bunny

"SPOILERS ----- SPOILERS ----- SPOILERS ----- SPOILERS ----- SPOILERS" .
.
.
.
.
.
.
It seems to me that there is something a little dubious or incomplete in what we have been shown about the fire and memories associated with the fire. I do realize that Cerone talked about how this was an evolving story and more was to come. But what I am trying to figure out is what we know to date, and whether some of this flies in the face of conventional wisdom, or some aspects have been evolved right out of existence.
The biggest problem about the events of the fire is that the largest amount of material related to the actual events comes from Liz's memories as awakened by Dr Orchard. And of course those memories come with the caveat "The people and the events may have been there, but in different roles." What that rather broad statement says is that not only are the roles all messed up but the people and events "may" be there. Obviously, if we are to take Dr Orchard's comment at complete face value, trying to associate any real event or person with the fire is meaningless since even the event "may" be there, which of course means they may not be there. But in order to make at least some sense out of what may have happened we need to believe that at least the events that Liz remembered happened, but the roles are all mixed up. If we don't assume that, then there really is nothing we can say about what happened in that fire event, which basically would relegate it to a non-event, in as far as the story right now is concerned.
There are some early flashes of the fire, and Liz talks about how as a child she would have nightmares about a fire and all the smoke. The one particular point from early on was her memory of her father getting her out of the fire (which however was contradicted later by her remembering her father lying on the floor of the burning house). But most of the big reveals come from the Luther Braxton 2 episode onwards. So the salient features of the events during the fire are (and I may have missed some):

• Liz was in the house with at least one person (who she remembers as a Navy Officer, based on the ring), who seemed to have some foreknowledge that something was about to happen, that might require Liz to be hidden. (Hence the hand that put her in the closet and asked her to stay there).
  
• Shortly after that person put Liz in the closet there was an argument between a man and a woman. The argument seemed to be centered around three subjects, Liz and her presence there, one party having betrayed another, though the party being accused of the betrayal seemed to say whatever was done was done because that person loved the other person, and there was some question about an object that one party believed the other party had. One person felt this object was the thing keeping that person safe, while the other thought the possession of the object put people at risk. One person seemed to have other people with her or him, and asked them to tear the house apart, potentially looking for this object.
  
• At some stage Liz wandered out of the closet and saw something that terrified her and made her go back into the closet.
  
• There was a fire and Liz started screaming for help.
  
• Someone pulled her out of the fire, and took her out of the house.
  
• She had her bunny with her, and also saw a man, who she recognized as being her father (She cried out, "Daddy, No") lying on the floor of the burning house. She believed there was no way this man could have made it out alive.
  
• She remembers getting the burn on her wrist while being taken out of the fire.
  
• In her first recollection of those events (with Dr Orchard) the only person she remembers, by name, as being at the fire was Red.
  

There is some interaction between Red and Liz during the scenes with Dr Orchard and this is where we start getting some more information. And since, as far as we know, Red's memory hasn't been messed with, I would assume that what Red remembers at least is true. So here are the salient parts of Red's interactions:

• Red believes that Liz may have knowledge of where the Fulcrum was, which is why he wanted to question her once again. Which means that either he didn't know where it was in the first place, or he knew it had been removed from the fire by someone, and thought Liz might remember where it went to.
  
• At some stage Red recognizes the events Liz is remembering and knows that whatever is about to ensue is something he doesn't want her to see. So he starts telling her to go back, to turn away, etc. I suppose at that moment, the fact that she not remember whatever was about to happen became more important to Red than the Fulcrum.
  
• After Liz tells Red that she recognized him at the fire and that he was there with the woman looking for the Fulcrum. Red says it isn't that simple and for the next few exchanges, Red tries to tell Liz that what she remembered may not have been true. But of course in true Liz fashion she's off marching to the beat of her own drum.
  
• On coming home after her encounter with Dr Orchard she seems to recollect something about the bunny, rips its open and finds the bubble module.
  

The next time Liz remembers something big about the fire is in Tom Connolly where she remembers shooting her father. I am not really sure whether Red actually acknowledges whether she actually shot her father (remember earlier in Quon Zhang he explicitly refused to tell her what happened. She did accuse him of having killed her father, but he refused to rise to the bait). The exact exchange at the end of Tom Connolly is another one of those areas where the writers have given themselves substantial wiggle room. True to form (and an apology to KellyKeybored for stealing an appropriate description) Liz was just yammering away:

Liz: The night of the fire. I know what happened, and I understand why you didn’t want me to find out. When I pulled the trigger – When I shot Connolly, I It came back to me. It was like I was there. I could hear them arguing. He was hurting her. And I know why my father died that night. I shot him. That’s why you blocked my memory – not to protect yourself. To protect me.
Red: Yeah.

What the heck did Red answer yes to? If we assume its the last thing in line it would be "That’s why you blocked my memory – not to protect yourself. To protect me." But what was he protecting her from?
So at this stage (keeping in mind Dr Orchard's warning about roles and stuff) all we know is that there was a fire, Liz was there, there was an argument between some man and some woman about Liz, some betrayal and some thing people were looking for, her father may have gotten her out of the fire, or he may have been lying on the floor of the house, or possibly both, and Red was there. Later she remembers shooting her father and some man was hurting some woman (may have been her father).
All the sound and fury until then adds up to that little bit of actual information!
Now we come to Requiem and we have Kate's account of events of the night of the fire. There is a TV report of a fire downtown. It says:

Man: Firefighters are gathering and continue to battle a 3-alarm blaze that occurred at a residence downtown. The cause is unknown at this time, and we’ll keep you updated as the story unfolds.

But there is no categoric statement that this is "The Fire." All we have is the juxtaposition of the TV report and Katarina showing up with Masha, from some fire. If people are willing to believe that juxtaposition as valid, then you have to pay particular attention to a juxtaposition, that I will discuss in just a bit, that is even more compelling. All we know from Kate is what Katarina says to Kate:

Katarina: There was a fire. Too many people. There was shouting and fighting.

and to Masha she says:

Katarina: Be good, little one. It wasn’t your fault. He was a bad man. I love you.

That is all. I guess her comment to Masha could be about some guy Masha shot. Or it could be about Masha witnessing Katarina shooting some guy. Or it could be about witnessing her father shooting someone. Who knows? We do know that Katarina wasn't hurt nearly anywhere as bad as the scars on Red's back. So for Rederina to be true those scars came at some other time, somewhere else. We also know that regardless of Cerone's claim of having overlooked Liz's scar on the day of filming, there may be something else afoot, or really bad production, because the severity of that burn, especially on 4 year old would have warranted a lot more attention than something they could just overlook that day.
So basically Kate's memories don't add much substance to what actually happened there. In fact they add none.
But two episodes later we get the absolute kicker of all reveals about the fire. This is either a very major reveal or extremely poorly written dialog, and I'll leave it to you good folks to decide. The set up for this is that Bogdan Krilov is the guy who Red went to in order to get Liz's memory of the fire (and possibly all her life before then) erased. But now Kate's visiting Bogdna Krilov, a man who has a singular talent. Not only can he erase memories, but he can manipulate them and plant false memories (as he eventually does with Ressler). And where the real twist happens is the conversation between Red and Liz about Krilov's capabilities:

Red: Dr Bogdan Ivanovich Krilov. One of the few people who have mastered the science of memory manipulation.
Liz: Science or science fiction?
Red: You of all people should know the answer to that.
Liz: I understand suppressing memories, helping someone to mute out a traumatic experience, but manipulating them?
Red: The memory of an accident, a tragedy, a fire in which a 4-year-old girl killed her father.

Since I know I am going to have to argue this with people later I might as well parse this dialog right now. Red says Krilov can manipulate memory (he calls it a science). Liz shows doubts by saying Science or science fiction?" The fiction part raises the doubt about Red's assertion. Red says Liz should know the answer to that - so he's implying that her own experiences should let her answer whether memory manipulation is true or fiction. She says she understands suppressing to cover some traumatic experience (after all she has purportedly experienced that in her own past). So she's willing to believe the suppression but again question the manipulating part. And that's when Red lays out the bombshell, in the context of memory manipulation as opposed to erasure, within the flow of the conversation, in immediate juxtaposition to her question about memory manipulation, without any change of subject, or any form of diversion, in no uncertain terms, with no ambiguity, coming in a train that started with her own experience, as a counter argument to her disbelief of memory manipulation, Red says:
"The memory of an accident, a tragedy, a fire in which a 4-year-old girl killed her father."
WHISKEY, TANGO, FOXTROT?"
That is either Red saying that Liz's memory of shooting her father is a manipulation, or this is just absolutely atrocious dialog writing. And so we are back to the basic question. What do we know about the fire? There was one and Liz and Katarina were there (that's from Kate's memory which no one has claimed was manipulated). The rest is all conjecture. Everything that Liz remebered with Dr Orchard may have happened and the people may have been present and their roles may not be what she remembers, and if Red is to be believed "The memory of an accident, a tragedy, a fire in which a 4-year-old girl killed her father." was a manipulation perpetrated by Krilov. The only other person who was possibly there and is still known to be alive is Red. And he is giving us his best impression of a clam.
Well dang!