06-07-2018, 04:53 AM
(06-07-2018, 04:39 AM)irukandji Wrote:Iruk,(06-07-2018, 04:05 AM)New Guy Wrote: Iruk,
The Grimm scenes and transcripts provide the facts and demonstrate beyond any doubt that Juliette is an accomplice and an accessory. Your opinion about this issue has no basis in fact.
Another fact is that there are no PMs.
Your inability to accept these facts reveals who truly is the "simpleton."
N G
No, the Grimm scenes and transcripts do not provide the facts. You only state such because they're, ***as you see them***. That's the difference here, New Guy. You're trying to applaud what you believe as facts and cannot do so.
Here's an example. You repeatedly call Juliette an accessory and an accomplice. You cite the transcripts as demonstrating beyond a doubt that she's both. Yet, where does any transcript state when a character calls her an accomplice? Furthermore, who calls her an accessory? If she is, wouldn't at least Nick have mentioned it? If not Nick, the most certainly Kenneth would have done so. Come on, the guy never denied the murder. He's low enough to bring Juliette into it as his accomplice and accessory. Yet, he mentions nothing of the kind to Nick.
You can't even get a character to confirm she's either or both of those two terms and that would be the most logical step for anyone who says she's an accomplice and an accessory.
The truth of the matter is you can't prove a thing. You go through all kinds of lengths, inflating a scene, adding your own impressions, and calling it fact as though no one knows the difference. But you go ahead, inflate away. There still isn't a character in Grimm who's called Juliette either of those things.
No emails, huh? Yeah, right.
Facts and truth are beyond your comprehension. Ignorance is bliss, so be happy!
![Big Grin Big Grin](https://grimmforum.com/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
N G