12-25-2017, 07:42 PM
Quote:Nope, I haven't forgotten. But what basis would there be for Adalind's question? Sean never abused Adalind, Juliette, or Rachel. If she thought her father abused Adalind, she never would have used the voodoo dolls to get them together.The statment was in the context of Sean being safe from Diana because they had this connection. I was pointing out the two examples of Diana not being daddy's little girl. Like I said we don't know the voodoo dolls put Sean and Adalind together could have been more to make Adalind happy then it was for Sean's benefit.
Quote:He did not, but he was also at the bottom of the stairs when Bonaparte went after Adalind so it would have been difficult for him to intervene. However, I was reading the narrative when Bonaparte was torturing Meisner. Renard intervened and then shot Meisner out of sympathy. Even Bonaparte accused him of being compassionate and as such, he would be dangerous to all of them.Your argument about saving Adalind was he was at the bottom of the stairs. Why not go up the stairs and stop Conrad. Remember Sean does have a gun. Even with Meisner. He did not save Meisner. He could have just as easily shot Conrad as he shot Meisner. Wasn't it you the one that said it was Nicks police training that caused Nick to pull his gun on Juliette. Then why would Sean use his police training to pull his gun on Conrad.
I think he would have intervened had Bonaparte tried to kill Kelly.
Your logic lacks rational thinking. It is based on an emotional response. That is why you would want to think Sean would intervene to save a child. Yet based on prior actions in the show. There is nothing to show that would be true.
Embrace your inner Biest..... We all have one