12-22-2017, 12:48 PM
I believe that a death thread must be taken seriously.
12-22-2017, 12:48 PM
I believe that a death thread must be taken seriously.
Quote:Will they be spending days in jail before a court appearance, probably not, most likely a summon will be issued and a court appearance will be required. It is all relative.Ok you have never dealt with the system. The facts are she could be arrested for destruction of property and assault. By the way it happened it would be doubtful they would arrest her. mainly because the accusations would not make sense. One there is no explanation for how she could have blown out the lights. Second she is too small to believe she throw the guy across the room. She would be arrested if she became difficult or refused to deny that she did not do the things they said she did. It is not for the officers to figure out how. Once arrested the DA would have to look at the charges and determine if they have a case. Because blowning out the lights is physically impossible that charge would be dropped. They would then look at Juliette and then at the victim. Unless they thought they could prove she had some kind of martial art training. That charge also would be dropped. the bottom line is the DA will not file charges if they do not have a reasonable expectation of proving the case. When the accusation fall outside the laws of physics. They do not consider them possible. This means there are two reason why she was still in the cell. The case was so strange the DA was looking for a plausible explanation. Especially if Juliette was not willing to cooperate. With Juliette saying see was there to see what Nick would do, explains how she was arrested. It could also explain why she was still in jail. It is the same problem with the police station. Had Juliette ripped out Adalind throat from across the room, even after threatening to do so. She could never be charged because it could never be explained how she did it. Sure Nick and Sean knew how but they try and tell anyone they would be considered crazy. aThat is why I said in a previous post. Saying you where going to ripe someones throat out would be hyperbole because it is not physically possible. Quote:I'm really trying to be educated on this whole thing. According to what I'm reading, Juliette saying she would rip Adalind's throat out isn't a threat but her saying something like she would stick a paper clip in her neck is? Both of those statements would be her saying she wants to kill her but only the latter would be considered a threat?one is physically possible the other is not. Saying I am going to beat you into the middle of next week is not a threat because you can not beat someone into the middle of next week. Now if you say I will be you within an inch of your life. That is a threat because it is possible. Here is the definition of hyperbole "exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally." saying ripe your throat can not be taken literally because no one can do it. True a hexenbiest or wesen can do it but as far as the Portland community they do not exist. So you can't use what they can do to alter the statement
Embrace your inner Biest..... We all have one
Hello Forum,
The entire Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) can be researched on the internet. If you search for "accessory" you will find: Quote: 2015 ORS 161.155¹If you search for "accomplice" you will find: Quote: 2015 ORS 136.440¹The Google definitions are similar: Quote:Accessory:A preponderance of factual evidence has been presented that demonstrates Juliette was both an accomplice and an accessory. I refer to posts #139, #169 and #177 as examples. Another example is post #376 in the "What Juliette Knew" thread. The Juliette apologists cannot deal with such facts. For example from 4.20, "You Don't Know Jack" the synopsis includes: Quote:Juliette returned from Nick's house, and Kenneth asked her how it went. Juliette replied that Kelly Burkhardt believed Nick was in danger and was on her way. Kenneth asked Juliette if she had asked Kelly about the child, but Juliette said she did not because Kelly would have gotten suspicious. Juliette warned Kenneth not to underestimate Kelly, and he said that he didn't underestimate her nor Juliette either. Juliette then went to leave, but Kenneth stopped her, telling her that because things were moving quickly now, they couldn't afford to be out of touch. He told Juliette that he expected her to stay and pointed to where her room was, adding that he didn't see why Adalind would return. He wryly stated that now that Nick knew he was going to be a father, he was probably taking very good care of Adalind. Kenneth then noticed some ash on Juliette's hand, asking her, "Been burning some bridges?" Juliette said it was "a little payback," and Kenneth responded that there was going to be a lot of that upcoming.The transcripts of the scene(s) in the hotel provide significant evidence: Quote:Scene: Juliette informs Kenneth that she contacted Kelly.Are any of the Juliette apologists prepared for some "The Five Ws:" "When? Where? Who? What? Why?" When did the scenes occur. I say prior to the murder(s). Prove me wrong. Where did they occur? I say in the Royal's hotel suite. Prove me wrong. Who was in the scenes? I say Juliette, Kenneth and the Verrat thugs. Prove me wrong. What happened? I say Juliette confirmed the betrayal email was sent and Kelly would come to Nick's house. Why? I say Kenneth needed to be certain Juliette had conned Kelly to return to Portland. What else? I say Juliette warned Kenneth not to underestimate Kelly. Why? I say Juliette knows Kelly is lethal and wonders if Kenneth is too complacent. What else? Kenneth adds that he doesn't underestimate Juliette. Why? I say he knows about her attempt to kill Adalind. What else? They discuss the ashes and "payback." Why? She burned Nick's trailer. He says "We're going to have a lot of that." What does he mean? What else? Juliette gives details about her neighbors and Nick's house. Why? We know that murders will occur in the locations where Juliette is providing details. We do not see him ask for the details, so why is she providing them? What is her motivation to provided them? We know she hears Rispoli radio Kenneth as the neighbors are killed but she says nothing. Why. Innocent people are being killed using the details she provided but says nothing. Why What else? In the third scene the Verrat are loading guns. Why? No one asks why guns are being loaded. If the reason for loading guns is so obvious, then what does Juliette think they will do with them? Why does she think loaded guns may be needed at Nick's house and at the neighbors? You apologists will forever ignore the facts and attempt to prove Juliette was innocent simply because that is your opinion. Bunkum and balderdash! N G
12-22-2017, 03:46 PM
(12-22-2017, 07:59 AM)syscrash Wrote:Quote:She did not need to do anything. Just on what she said in the police station was cause to arrest her. Threatening to rip her throat out is enough to charge her. Also, her treat was enough to break her parole after she was bailed out. She was just released on bail, no charges were dropped yet. Her bar assault charges did not go away yet.Actually the statement would be considered hyperbole because it is not physically possible, at least from the perspective of none wesen. Here is a clip of a throat ripping hyperbole: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yg5BLPn0TVA just a dream?
12-22-2017, 07:28 PM
(12-22-2017, 03:46 PM)New Guy Wrote:(12-22-2017, 07:59 AM)syscrash Wrote:Quote:She did not need to do anything. Just on what she said in the police station was cause to arrest her. Threatening to rip her throat out is enough to charge her. Also, her treat was enough to break her parole after she was bailed out. She was just released on bail, no charges were dropped yet. Her bar assault charges did not go away yet.Actually the statement would be considered hyperbole because it is not physically possible, at least from the perspective of none wesen. So why are you only responding to this one line? Ok, so you just proved, Juliette, as a Hex could carry out the kill method. Nick being a Grimm is aware and it is well established, ripping throats out is a Hexenbeist MO, or at least they always claim they want to. What about you bragging about her ability to hurt her victims by telekinesis. Can she or can’t she? Make up your mind. A verbal assault is still a verbal assault. It doesn’t matter if you are going to do it or not. Out of that whole long post, this is the best you can do?
You know you are OLD, when you see the Slide Ruler you used in college selling in an ANTIQUE SHOP!!
Quote:What else? Kenneth adds that he doesn't underestimate Juliette. Why? I say he knows about her attempt to kill Adalind.A more logical answer based on what was shown. We be he knews Juliette has more power then the average hexenbiest. He also realizes she can not be intimidated like he did Adalind. We have already heard the Kenneth did not care the Juliette was trying to kill Adalind. Quote:What else? They discuss the ashes and "payback." Why? She burned Nick's trailer. He says "We're going to have a lot of that." What does he mean?Again the dialog explains the payback was to take Diana away from Adalind. Remember Adalind was in Portland for the purpose of being reunited with Diana. What better payback for ruining Juliette life then to take her child and give it to the Royals. In fact we got to see the devastating effect it had on Adalind when she thought Juliette had got on the helicopter with Diana. That is actual cause and effect that we can see and not have to speculate the result of the payback. Quote:What else? Juliette gives details about her neighbors and Nick's house. Why? We know that murders will occur in the locations where Juliette is providing details. We do not see him ask for the details, so why is she providing them? What is her motivation to provided them? We know she hears Rispoli radio Kenneth as the neighbors are killed but she says nothing. Why. Innocent people are being killed using the details she provided but says nothing. WhyThe problem with your theory that Juliette knew the plan was murder. If that was the plan you would not have needed her to come in the house. They could have planned to shot her when she got out the car. They should use Juliette had a problem killing Adalind. That establishes her state of mind about being Ok with an assassination. That is why as Eve the assassination at the restaurant was such a shock. That is also why Nick said he does not know who Eve is. Rispolli called Kenneth after they killed the neighbors. When he did call there was nothing in his statement that could have been interpreted as having killed the neighbors. You asked why she did not say anything. There is know way she could have known the neighbors where dead. Again that was deliberate on the part of the writers. But you want us to believe that Juliette hears the neighbors being killed. Even though that happened before the call. You can not quote a single line to support that accusation. You posted line after line of Juliette involvement. that was never in dispute. what is in dispute is what was she involved in. According to the dialog. She was helping to kidnap Diana for the Royals. You posted all of the lines about the legal statutes and Kenneth and Juliette conversations. Both establish her liability for the plan to kidnap. But you are trying to show it support your theory that she was planning murder. of all that you posted not a single line indicates murder. Quote:What else? In the third scene the Verrat are loading guns. Why? No one asks why guns are being loaded. If the reason for loading guns is so obvious, then what does Juliette think they will do with them? Why does she think loaded guns may be needed at Nick's house and at the neighbors?Have you ever heard of guns being used as a deterrent. What I find very interesting is you make an assumption that there actions could only be viewed as a plan to commit murder. Even though HW using the same number of men. Dressed exactly like Kenneth men. Armed exactly like Kenneth's men. Entered the house exactly like Kenneth's men. Performed a kidnapping like Kenneth men. yet no one died. Do you think that was a coincidence on the writers part. or could it be they wanted to show murder was not a fore gone result. Is it more then likely the writers wanted to show the contrast between Kenneth and his ruthless approach and HW using a more civilized approach. Then to have Juliette choose to not go why Kenneth but work with HW. Could it be the writers wanted to establish that Juliette turn Eve was not like Kenneth. What your fail to do in all your explanations is examine the why a scene was written the way it was. why if they meant for it to be interpreted the way you see it they did not have at least one line to support your position. Instead there are a number of lines of dialog that contradict what you are trying to say is fact. example Juliette says she did not know Kenneth was going to do that. Yet there is not one line involving Juliette, that talks of killing, murder, or even anyone dying. Quote:Here is a clip of a throat ripping hyperbole:You are mixing what the people of Portland know and understand and what wesen can actually do. Yes it is a fact that wesen can rip a throat. But if they do it you could never prove that they did because doing it defy s the laws of physics. This is the point being made from the first episode. Nick and the wesen community may know for a fact what happened . But they also know you could never convict someone of a wesen crime. We even hear Sean tell them to make the reports sound a plausible as they can.
Embrace your inner Biest..... We all have one
12-23-2017, 02:40 AM
(This post was last modified: 12-23-2017, 02:41 AM by dicappatore.)
(12-22-2017, 10:29 PM)syscrash Wrote:Quote:What else? Kenneth adds that he doesn't underestimate Juliette. Why? I say he knows about her attempt to kill Adalind.A more logical answer based on what was shown. We be he knews Juliette has more power then the average hexenbiest. He also realizes she can not be intimidated like he did Adalind. We have already heard the Kenneth did not care the Juliette was trying to kill Adalind. I will make one more attempt to try to get you to see the light on your ridiculous series of arguments. Being a Life member of the NRA, I know for a fact, that guns prevent more crimes then are used I committing them An easy example, every cop that goes out on the street wearing a gun prevents count-less crimes. Verat does not use guns to prevent crimes, they use them to commit them. Just because a committed crime can’t be proven, doesn’t mean it did not occur. Ask the countless unreported rape victims if a crime wasn’t committed when they were victimized. You must be one of those believers that if a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it, it doesn’t make a sound? Well guess what? It does!
You know you are OLD, when you see the Slide Ruler you used in college selling in an ANTIQUE SHOP!!
12-23-2017, 05:40 AM
(12-22-2017, 07:28 PM)dicappatore Wrote:Hi Dicap,(12-22-2017, 03:46 PM)New Guy Wrote:(12-22-2017, 07:59 AM)syscrash Wrote:Quote:She did not need to do anything. Just on what she said in the police station was cause to arrest her. Threatening to rip her throat out is enough to charge her. Also, her treat was enough to break her parole after she was bailed out. She was just released on bail, no charges were dropped yet. Her bar assault charges did not go away yet.Actually the statement would be considered hyperbole because it is not physically possible, at least from the perspective of none wesen. Juliette's threat was real, not hyperbole. We both know that. N G
12-23-2017, 07:04 AM
(12-23-2017, 05:40 AM)New Guy Wrote:(12-22-2017, 07:28 PM)dicappatore Wrote:Hi Dicap,(12-22-2017, 03:46 PM)New Guy Wrote:(12-22-2017, 07:59 AM)syscrash Wrote:Quote:She did not need to do anything. Just on what she said in the police station was cause to arrest her. Threatening to rip her throat out is enough to charge her. Also, her treat was enough to break her parole after she was bailed out. She was just released on bail, no charges were dropped yet. Her bar assault charges did not go away yet.Actually the statement would be considered hyperbole because it is not physically possible, at least from the perspective of none wesen. I know bro, sorry for that one post that looked like I was responding to you. I guess you figured out I was responding to ..... well I will keep my thoughts to myself. Thanks for the video of the Hexes MO. Just because some might know some big words, they should learn how to apply them.
You know you are OLD, when you see the Slide Ruler you used in college selling in an ANTIQUE SHOP!!
|
|