Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
!!Sonny's Trial
Added DiffLines:
!!Surprise, Sonny!
Added DiffLines:
!!The Custody Case
Added DiffLines:
!!We could have avoided all of this, Sonny.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
No spoiler tags in Fridge or Headscratchers
Changed line(s) 1 (click to see context) from:
* You don't have to think too hard to figure out that [[spoiler: Kevin's confession that he fathered Julian with a Canadian girl]] is something the characters should already know, given that the precise reason why Sonny is on trial is because he impersonated him. Since the Canadian girl's surname was "[=McGrath=]," it would have been more logical in the context of the plot for Sonny to have impersonated a [=McGrath=] relative instead.
to:
* You don't have to think too hard to figure out that [[spoiler: Kevin's confession that he fathered Julian with a Canadian girl]] girl is something the characters should already know, given that the precise reason why Sonny is on trial is because he impersonated him. Since the Canadian girl's surname was "[=McGrath=]," it would have been more logical in the context of the plot for Sonny to have impersonated a [=McGrath=] relative instead.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
** If you look closely, after Sonny states his birthplace, Kevin can see seen thinking.
Changed line(s) 11 (click to see context) from:
** The next day, he immediately decided to raise Julian in the hopes that Vanessa will take him back for being a "mature parent".
to:
** The next day, he Sunny immediately decided to raise Julian in the hopes that Vanessa will take him back for being a "mature parent".
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added line(s) 8 (click to see context) :
** Only Corinne blames Sonny for it because she hates him.
Added line(s) 8 (click to see context) :
** Though Sonny's "punishment" is being refused custody over Julian.
Changed line(s) 8 (click to see context) from:
** Kevin was on a trip, and Julian originally stated he was from Buffalo, where Kevin has never been to.
to:
** Kevin was on a trip, and Julian originally stated he was from Buffalo, where Kevin has never been to.to.
** The next day, he immediately decided to raise Julian in the hopes that Vanessa will take him back for being a "mature parent".
** The next day, he immediately decided to raise Julian in the hopes that Vanessa will take him back for being a "mature parent".
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* Okay, so Sonny returns home--to HIS home--and stumbles in on a surprise party he was deliberately not told about...and it's somehow his fault they "ruined the good surprise" on him?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 6 (click to see context) from:
* Why didn't Sonny just flat-out ask Kevin for permission to legally adopt the kid? Kevin obviously wanted nothing to do with the kid, at least at first.
to:
* Why didn't Sonny just flat-out ask Kevin for permission to legally adopt the kid? Kevin obviously wanted nothing to do with the kid, at least at first.first.
** Kevin was on a trip, and Julian originally stated he was from Buffalo, where Kevin has never been to.
** Kevin was on a trip, and Julian originally stated he was from Buffalo, where Kevin has never been to.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 5 (click to see context) from:
** As stated at the beginning, it was to determine the proper custody of Julian. Sonny's contention is that his taking custody of Julian was in the child's best interest, and so he wishes to prove that through character witnesses.
to:
** As stated at the beginning, it was to determine the proper custody of Julian. Sonny's contention is that his taking custody of Julian was in the child's best interest, and so he wishes to prove that through character witnesses.witnesses.
* Why didn't Sonny just flat-out ask Kevin for permission to legally adopt the kid? Kevin obviously wanted nothing to do with the kid, at least at first.
* Why didn't Sonny just flat-out ask Kevin for permission to legally adopt the kid? Kevin obviously wanted nothing to do with the kid, at least at first.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 4 (click to see context) from:
** It was a trail for Sonny, on account of 'defrauding the state of new york'. Kevin wants to save Sonny from jail, and that's why he claims to Julian's father, because if he's Julian's father and the court is based on Julian's 'abduction' by Sonny then if he refuses to press charges (and all testimony states that Sonny was a good, if illegal, father) than the state has less reason to punish Sonny. That was Kevin's line of logic. Social Services pretty much just shrugs.
to:
** It was a trail for Sonny, on account of 'defrauding the state of new york'. Kevin wants to save Sonny from jail, and that's why he claims to Julian's father, because if he's Julian's father and the court is based on Julian's 'abduction' by Sonny then if he refuses to press charges (and all testimony states that Sonny was a good, if illegal, father) than the state has less reason to punish Sonny. That was Kevin's line of logic. Social Services pretty much just shrugs.shrugs.
** As stated at the beginning, it was to determine the proper custody of Julian. Sonny's contention is that his taking custody of Julian was in the child's best interest, and so he wishes to prove that through character witnesses.
** As stated at the beginning, it was to determine the proper custody of Julian. Sonny's contention is that his taking custody of Julian was in the child's best interest, and so he wishes to prove that through character witnesses.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 3 (click to see context) from:
* Was the court proceding a trial for Sonny or a custody proceding for Julian? It seemed like it was serving as both, which is problematic on multiple levels. The rules of evidence are different in each, the goals of each are different, and it's probably unlikely that the same court would have jurisdiction to do both, much less do both AT ONCE.
to:
* Was the court proceding a trial for Sonny or a custody proceding for Julian? It seemed like it was serving as both, which is problematic on multiple levels. The rules of evidence are different in each, the goals of each are different, and it's probably unlikely that the same court would have jurisdiction to do both, much less do both AT ONCE.ONCE.
**It was a trail for Sonny, on account of 'defrauding the state of new york'. Kevin wants to save Sonny from jail, and that's why he claims to Julian's father, because if he's Julian's father and the court is based on Julian's 'abduction' by Sonny then if he refuses to press charges (and all testimony states that Sonny was a good, if illegal, father) than the state has less reason to punish Sonny. That was Kevin's line of logic. Social Services pretty much just shrugs.
**It was a trail for Sonny, on account of 'defrauding the state of new york'. Kevin wants to save Sonny from jail, and that's why he claims to Julian's father, because if he's Julian's father and the court is based on Julian's 'abduction' by Sonny then if he refuses to press charges (and all testimony states that Sonny was a good, if illegal, father) than the state has less reason to punish Sonny. That was Kevin's line of logic. Social Services pretty much just shrugs.