Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 2 (click to see context) from:
to:
**Well, for one, she's unarmed and confronting two guys who are perfectly capable of murder, her incompetent district chief is the only other cop anywhere nearby. Trying to bring them in could prove fatal. Secondly, I think it's clear that she's fed up with the system and simply doesn' care any more. Johnny has sorted out the problem and she just wants to wash her hands of the whole mess.
Changed line(s) 14,17 (click to see context) from:
** Essentially. Could be a cop on mob payroll, a debtor or just being blackmailed with something.
to:
** Essentially. Could be a cop on mob payroll, a debtor or just being blackmailed with something.
something.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 1,2 (click to see context) from:
* In episode 8, why would the chief of police be content not to want to lock them up and at least ask questions. Geir's death has been avenged, but the argument that "using up thousands of dollars of tax payer money to pursue justice" is a very poor one. For one thing, she should arrest Frank/Giovanni and Bobby to prove to her superiors that she isn't insane because they've been treating her as off her rocker. She also now knows that the fishy new guy in town has a dark past that includes murder and in a place where the murder rate is very low, she should be very concerned and want to know at least a few more answers about his past. Also, why the heck would she trust them when they say that the loud-mouthed one (conveniently the two guys who weren't already dead) were the murderers. Lastly, I don't see any evidence that trying Frank and Bobby would be more porportionally expensive than any other trial? By that logic, should she just not try any murders
to:
* In episode 8, why would the chief of police be content not to want to lock them up and at least ask questions. Geir's death has been avenged, but the argument that "using up thousands of dollars of tax payer money to pursue justice" is a very poor one. For one thing, she should arrest Frank/Giovanni and Bobby to prove to her superiors that she isn't insane because they've been treating her as off her rocker. She also now knows that the fishy new guy in town has a dark past that includes murder and in a place where the murder rate is very low, she should be very concerned and want to know at least a few more answers about his past. Also, why the heck would she trust them when they say that the loud-mouthed one (conveniently the two guys who weren't already dead) were the murderers. Lastly, I don't see any evidence that trying Frank and Bobby would be more porportionally proportionally expensive than any other trial? By that logic, should she just not try any murders
Changed line(s) 4 (click to see context) from:
to:
** Frank gave all the pictures to Jan as a gesture of trust. Frank had nothing to gain from releasing the photos after that, nor would claiming that Frank released them (without any evidence mind you, since he actually didn't) get him his job back. Plus, he probably figured that he lost a couple of the photos when he dropped them during National Day.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 10 (click to see context) from:
to:
** I wouldn't be surprised if someone like Geir refused to give the Mafia what they want purely out of principle. Perhaps if Robert was given enough time to play good cop to Jerry's bad cop he could have convinced Geir to spill the beans by pointing out that he is protecting a Mafioso.
Changed line(s) 12,14 (click to see context) from:
to:
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* In episode 8, why would the chief of police be content not to want to lock them up and at least ask questions. Geir's death has been avenged, but the argument that "using up thousands of dollars of tax payer money to pursue justice" is a very poor one. For one thing, she should arrest Frank/Giovanni and Bobby to prove to her superiors that she isn't insane because they've been treating her as off her rocker. She also now knows that the fishy new guy in town has a dark past that includes murder and in a place where the murder rate is very low, she should be very concerned and want to know at least a few more answers about his past. Also, why the heck would she trust them when they say that the loud-mouthed one (conveniently the two guys who weren't already dead) were the murderers. Lastly, I don't see any evidence that trying Frank and Bobby would be more porportionally expensive than any other trial? By that logic, should she just not try any murders
* Don't understand in episode 8 why Jan wouldn't suspect Frank as the guy who posted the pictures to the internet and why he wouldn't want to blackmail him instead of showing up and begging for a job like a sad puppy. Jan showed little fear of him physically in episode 1 and started becoming subservient to him once the evidence was there. Jan could have still threatened to revoke his license. Even if he's been disgraced, people would still believe him.
* Circumstances were just way too kind to Frank the whole time. Every single person that Frank physically threatened (the kid on the train; Yousef, the Arab; the guy who ended up with the ankle bracelet who they dragged through the cold and gave hypothermia to; the guys at the baby carriage store who literally activated a security alarm on him, the kids in town who got beaten by the ravens) could have reported him for physical altercation. I actually though the leader of the Ravens would have formally reported it. All it takes is a couple people to call the police.
* Would Julius really have continued wanting to work with Frank after he blackmailed him? And was the blackmail that big of a deal? He initially did think he had cancer and only waited a few hours before reporting to his family that the disease was in remission? Besides if he cares so much for his kid, wouldn't the "Osama" remark Frank made to the kid in Julius' presence been extremely insensitive?
* Why didn't Geir give up the location easier to the mafia? I don't understand who he was protecting.
* In episode 5, the cop that Geir reported Frank to tipped him off to the mafia. I take it he was a mole or double agent?
* Don't understand in episode 8 why Jan wouldn't suspect Frank as the guy who posted the pictures to the internet and why he wouldn't want to blackmail him instead of showing up and begging for a job like a sad puppy. Jan showed little fear of him physically in episode 1 and started becoming subservient to him once the evidence was there. Jan could have still threatened to revoke his license. Even if he's been disgraced, people would still believe him.
* Circumstances were just way too kind to Frank the whole time. Every single person that Frank physically threatened (the kid on the train; Yousef, the Arab; the guy who ended up with the ankle bracelet who they dragged through the cold and gave hypothermia to; the guys at the baby carriage store who literally activated a security alarm on him, the kids in town who got beaten by the ravens) could have reported him for physical altercation. I actually though the leader of the Ravens would have formally reported it. All it takes is a couple people to call the police.
* Would Julius really have continued wanting to work with Frank after he blackmailed him? And was the blackmail that big of a deal? He initially did think he had cancer and only waited a few hours before reporting to his family that the disease was in remission? Besides if he cares so much for his kid, wouldn't the "Osama" remark Frank made to the kid in Julius' presence been extremely insensitive?
* Why didn't Geir give up the location easier to the mafia? I don't understand who he was protecting.
* In episode 5, the cop that Geir reported Frank to tipped him off to the mafia. I take it he was a mole or double agent?
