I don't normally stalk into other people's LJs but since you linked mepensive1September 23 2011, 18:37:07 UTC
1. what's the point in that and 2. he's not a murderer, he just wants vengeance for the murder of his family.
THIS! THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS
That's my whole problem with it! Jane was turned into a murderer, and we're supposed to giggle and go along with it. No thanks. I liked Jane morally questionable, but trying to sell this as a justifiable homicide was buggered all up. I'm okay with him killing RJ in hideous and mangled ways, and I'm okay with him defending himself if being attacked (or if someone on the team is being attacked). But I'm not okay with this-- I don't care if BW was a disgusting torturer and kidnapper of women; he didn't do what the show purported to show us he did, it was just another ruse, and that's one ruse too many.
Have Dr Strange drinking a cup of tea and making this episode's ending go away.
Re: I don't normally stalk into other people's LJs but since you linked meferaliousSeptember 23 2011, 19:11:26 UTC
Yeah, RJ really got him good by tricking him into pulling the trigger on an 'innocent' man. I completely agree with you on everything that you said regarding Jane's plans for Red John, but I couldn't believe it when the jury proclaimed him not guilty. It actually made me happy I watched this episode without subtitles, because those usually show the next line, thus rendering the suspenseful silence in between lines useless
( ... )
That's what I'm saying: no consequences, sham trial, didn't even get the right guy... in no way is that satisfying, or even GOOD. It's frustrating as all-hell, and totally shoddy writing. Too easy, too convenient, too back to status quo.
Jane has a silver tongue. He's flawless and utterly sympathetic. Of course the jury bought it, look how charming he is!
Haha yeah, he can talk smooth alright. Any good prosecutor should've told the jury this:
'Did Patrick Jane do the public a favor by getting rid of a serial killer? Yes. Did he murder him? Yes. Does the law say that murderers should go to jail, in spite of the identity of the man he killed? Yes. There's no good or right, there's just following the law and the law is equal to everybody. Taking a gun with you with the intention of shooting someone is the definition of murder in the first degree.'
With the circumstances I can imagine it being turned into manslaughter, but that would still mean jail time for Jane. He's not innocent, he's said so himself. Now that's what the jury should've bought.
Comments 7
THIS! THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS
That's my whole problem with it! Jane was turned into a murderer, and we're supposed to giggle and go along with it. No thanks. I liked Jane morally questionable, but trying to sell this as a justifiable homicide was buggered all up. I'm okay with him killing RJ in hideous and mangled ways, and I'm okay with him defending himself if being attacked (or if someone on the team is being attacked). But I'm not okay with this-- I don't care if BW was a disgusting torturer and kidnapper of women; he didn't do what the show purported to show us he did, it was just another ruse, and that's one ruse too many.
Have Dr Strange drinking a cup of tea and making this episode's ending go away.
Reply
Reply
Jane has a silver tongue. He's flawless and utterly sympathetic. Of course the jury bought it, look how charming he is!
Reply
'Did Patrick Jane do the public a favor by getting rid of a serial killer? Yes. Did he murder him? Yes. Does the law say that murderers should go to jail, in spite of the identity of the man he killed? Yes. There's no good or right, there's just following the law and the law is equal to everybody. Taking a gun with you with the intention of shooting someone is the definition of murder in the first degree.'
With the circumstances I can imagine it being turned into manslaughter, but that would still mean jail time for Jane. He's not innocent, he's said so himself. Now that's what the jury should've bought.
Reply
Leave a comment