+- Grimm Forum (https://grimmforum.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Grimm Universe (https://grimmforum.com/forum/Forum-Grimm-Universe)
+--- Forum: Grimm Discussions (https://grimmforum.com/forum/Forum-Grimm-Discussions)
+--- Thread: A very interesting article that features Juliette's character (/Thread-A-very-interesting-article-that-features-Juliette-s-character)
RE: A very interesting article that features Juliette's character - brandon - 12-22-2017
Nick was right to leave her alone, expected her to ask for help,do not harass or harass her
RE: A very interesting article that features Juliette's character - syscrash - 12-22-2017
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 am not sure how many bar fights you have been in but most times it is reduced down to disturbance of the peace a misdemeanor. But besides that we only know she was arrested. We have no idea if she was charged. Considering what happen exactly how would they prove a case against. The facts all the lights blow out. How would they explain how she did that. The second thing The guy came toward her she put her hand up he flew across the room. Explain how that could be her fault. The botttom line they would never charge her because they could never make the case. That was the theme of all the cases Nick dealt with. The inability to explain any of it, allowing them to be able to charge someone.
Quote:You make it sound that this was a radio show instead of a TV Show. The scenes are not only dependent on dialogue. Part of the script includes set, costumes and what they were doing. Ever hear of the term, “A picture is worth a thousand words". Or “actions speak louder than words. Not everything on the screen has to be words. If so, how the hell did Silent Movies ever would have flourished?You have made my point. You are basing your reasoning on what you as a viewer saw. This formulates what you know. My point is the show made it a point for Juliette to not witness any of the dialog or events that you are basing your knowledge on. You then try and file in your reasoning by assuming Kenneth informed Juliette off screen. Why would Kenneth tell Juliette about his plan. It is not like Juliette was a hardened killer. He got her to participate by manipulating her emotions with Adalinds pregnancy.
Telling Juliette they where planing to commit mass murder would not be inline with the Juliette personality. Remember she could not even drop the statue on Adalind who she hated. She then felt bad because she tried.
RE: A very interesting article that features Juliette's character - irukandji - 12-22-2017
(12-22-2017, 06:37 AM)brandon Wrote: Nick was right to leave her alone, expected her to ask for help,do not harass or harass her
This is an odd contradiction in Nick though, don't you think? I mean, this was supposed to be the new kind of grimm, the understanding grimm, the grimm who goes out of his way to help good wesen.
Juliette was a good wesen before she was driven to be a monster. Why would Nick leave her alone?
RE: A very interesting article that features Juliette's character - Henry of green - 12-22-2017
(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 am not sure how many bar fights you have been in but most times it is reduced down to disturbance of the peace a misdemeanor. But besides that we only know she was arrested. We have no idea if she was charged. Considering what happen exactly how would they prove a case against. The facts all the lights blow out. How would they explain how she did that. The second thing The guy came toward her she put her hand up he flew across the room. Explain how that could be her fault. The botttom line they would never charge her because they could never make the case. That was the theme of all the cases Nick dealt with. The inability to explain any of it, allowing them to be able to charge someone.
Quote:You make it sound that this was a radio show instead of a TV Show. The scenes are not only dependent on dialogue. Part of the script includes set, costumes and what they were doing. Ever hear of the term, “A picture is worth a thousand words". Or “actions speak louder than words. Not everything on the screen has to be words. If so, how the hell did Silent Movies ever would have flourished?You have made my point. You are basing your reasoning on what you as a viewer saw. This formulates what you know. My point is the show made it a point for Juliette to not witness any of the dialog or events that you are basing your knowledge on. You then try and file in your reasoning by assuming Kenneth informed Juliette off screen. Why would Kenneth tell Juliette about his plan. It is not like Juliette was a hardened killer. He got her to participate by manipulating her emotions with Adalinds pregnancy.
Telling Juliette they where planing to commit mass murder would not be inline with the Juliette personality. Remember she could not even drop the statue on Adalind who she hated. She then felt bad because she tried.
Syscrash, what you just said is false she did drop the statue on Adalind, she only servived because the Verat guard pushed her out of the way, please go back and watch the scene.
RE: A very interesting article that features Juliette's character - syscrash - 12-22-2017
Quote:She was guilty of associating in murder and mayhem. Your store clerk analogy is completely off base. Ever hear of Patty Hearst? A kidnapped victim that ended up to be brainwashed by her abductors and participate in bank robberies. She was rescued and then prosecuted and jailed for her associations in committing crimes.Patty Hurst participated. She actually picked up a gun and helped rob the bank. Juliette only participated in planing to take Diana from Kelly. That Juliette planned to commit murder and mayhem is a supposition. Something people try and draw using a logical connection based on how they feel someone would act. Yet the show makes no direct accusation. The show purposely isolates her from all scenes and dialog that prepares us for what is to come. You can not quote a single line to support your assumption that Juliette knew. All everyone seems to quote are things that point to how she should have known. In a scripted show, if she was meant to know it would have been written that way. If she was meant to know they would not write her saying she did not know. What would be the purpose of the writers to script her lying at the beginning of her death scene. The entire scene was to wrap up the characters positions. People keep trying to relate to what happened as if they are real people using real rational thinking. In a scripted show a lie is told for a reason, things don't happen by chance or coincidence. A statement is made as a narrative to explain and clarify a character position.
Quote:She was, once, part of the Scobies. I admit, Juliette was a late comer to the group but this is what they did, they fixed things. They all knew the potion would not cure her but it would suppress her reactions. It was tested on Adalind and it did suppress her Hex, and maybe, just maybe, calm her down to be more reasonable. She never went there to get help. She was directed by Kenneth to go and stir things up. She never gave, the gang a chance to do what you say they wanted. Did you forget how Nick and the Scobies saved her life and Sean life with the potions they made to cure her and Sean from the obsession they had for each other? How about the Zombie Cure potion that Juliette resolved, on how to administer it to a crowd? This was their "Modus Operandi"The potion would have suppressed her powers. But she still would have had the anger. Just because she could not woge, that still did not stop her from being a hexenbiest. Adalind proved that point. Nothing changed about who Adalind was.
The two examples you mention where actual cures. I both cases the problem no longer existed. That is not the case with the suppressant. The problem people have is they fail to understand why Eve no longer had the hate and anger towards any of them. Even though twice the show had her explain how see had had purpose. How she now understand and accepts that it was meant for her to be a hexenbiest. With acceptance of her fate she no longer has a reason to hate. Like she told Trubel it is to dangerous to dwell on who she used to be. But this is another point that is very simple yet people want to make it some complicated indoctrination or brainwashing process performed by HW. Like everything else people take the on scene where Mesiner slap her and project that in to evidence of they performed some kind of torturous brainwashing on her. Even after the show has Eve deliver dialog explaining her new outlook. It seems because it does not fit the narrative they want to believe they discount it as Eve making excuses.
Quote:Again, you need to read up on the Patty Hearst case from a few decades ago. It will give you a great base of how associating in a crime, let alone help to plan it, but just being present is enough to be indirectly guilty.Patty was convicted because she took an active part. Not because she participated or help plan the actions. What her defense was arguing was Stockholm syndrome. They argued that being a captive she was not responsible for her actions. As we see that argument did not fly. There where two many examples of her exerting free will. What really sunk her was her manifesto that she was a believer in the cause. Conspiracy said she was a member long before she was kidnapped. It was also said the kidnapping was part of the plan to raise money for the group. That was debunked by the fact Patty had a trust fun she had access to which was bigger then they where asking for. The point I am very aware of all the fact and conspiracies about the patty hurst case. Juliette situation has nothing in common with that case.
Quote:The other fact you seem to confuse is what Adalind tried to accomplish, compared to what Juliette accomplished to do. After Adalind tried to Kill Juliette by “Cat Scratch Fever” and the follow-up coma. Don’t you think, if Nick could have gotten his hands on her, she would have ended up next to her mother, alla Grimm style? But the, THEN”, bitch, took off for Austria.lets compare accomplish to attempts.
Juliette accomplished burning the trailer. She accomplished obtaining Diana for the Royals. What other accomplishments are there on Juliette side. The deaths are a false accusation that you can not quote a single line to support this claim.
As for Adalind. She accomplished poisoning Juliette. She accomplished poisoning Hank. I would also say she accomplished changing Diana for the sole purpose of getting her powers back. AS for taking of to Austria. She came back twice. Both times all was forgiven. The second time Nick choose to live with her. So your statement about if Nick could have got his hands on her. She live with him.
Quote:Talk about “The mother of all contradictions”. According to your analogy of how Juliette, never uttered any words on killing Kelly. Let us apply your comparison to the factory killings as you applied them to the Kelly planning.
What did Juliette say when all those all those Wesen were being killed? We didn’t even see her do anything, she wasn’t even in the scene? Did we hear any dialogue to the fact? All we heard was moaning sounds and one guy going up and then crashing down to his death. Then we see the gang come out, all the dead Wesen and Juliette creeping out of the shadows. How do you know she was the ONE?
We saw Eve drop the guy to the ground. We then heard the one surviving wesen explain how it was a hexenbiest that killed them all. Two scenes that provided direct evidence. I am still waiting for even a single line that provides direct evidence that Juliette knew they intended to commit murder.
RE: A very interesting article that features Juliette's character - syscrash - 12-22-2017
Quote:Syscrash, agian you seem to be the most in uninformed poster on this site , actually Adalind wouldn’t have had to go after Nick and the gang in the first place if they hadn’t of stole Diania. In season 4 Juliette was the villain of the show she planned the death of Kelly and told Kenneth which of her nieghbours to attack, assaulted people in bars and l Mtried to kilonroe. You are wrong saying Juliette didn’t know the final out come she made sure Kelly was unprepared by tricking her into the house via phone call. Then your all powerful Hexenbiest set upstairs while Kelly’s being murderd that’s actually in the show you seriously need to do a rewatch because you are clueless to what went on. Actually without Adalind going to Dinaia in the season 5 finale Nick and the gang would be dead so she did save his life as she did in the series finale when she took the axe from Zerstorer to save Nick and got killed in the process. Adalind didn’t tell Viktor Kelly had Diania she just told Viktor information and Viktor guessed, beacuse Adalind herself didn’t know Kelly had Diania. You have basically proved nothing. with your utter nonsense above, except you clearly don’t know the show very well you must have just watched Juliette scenes and ignored the rest.You consider my statements as uniformed because the contradict your distorted accusations.
Lets take you point one at a time.
Quote:Adalind wouldn’t have had to go after Nick and the gang in the first place if they hadn’t of stole Diania.First Nick and the Gang did not take Diana Kelly took Diana. Nick and the Gang took Diana from the Royals but Kelly took Diana from Portland. But even that did not happen till after Adalind poisoned Juliette , and then Hank. How can you say in the first place if the attacks happened before the kidnapping.
Quote:she planned the death of Kelly and told Kenneth which of her nieghbours to attackYou can not quote a single line that says Juliette planned to Kelly. The only dialog about that action was Juliette saying they only wanted Diana. She also said she did not know they where going to do that. As for the neighbors she told Kenneth about the neighbors. But again you can not quote a single line that says there was a plan to kill the neighbors. Even as viewers we did not see that coming till after they did it. Even after it was done and they where on the phone with Kenneth. The show made a point to not mention about killing. They only referred to the neighbors as being taken care of. So to assume Juliette would have perceived that as they where murder is your projection of the situation because you saw them die.
Quote:assaulted people in barswhat people? the only person she pushed away was the guy who put his hands on her shoulder because she woged in his face. It was a single person not people. Plus he had no right to touch her. We know she blow out the lights , but there is no way the guy knew she was the cause of it.
Quote:Tried to kill MonroeLets not forget Hank and Nick pull guns on her and threatened to shoot. Had Nick not pull his guns she would not have had him point it at Monroe. As for her trying to kill Monroe. I will a agree we do not know her intent. But I go back to how it bothered her when she tried to kill Adalind. Makes it hard to believe she actually intended to kill Monroe. Did she intend to scare them sure. But to say she tried to kill Monroe that is a leap with nothing to back it up.
Quote:You are wrong saying Juliette didn’t know the final out come she made sure Kelly was unprepared by tricking her into the house via phone call. Then your all powerful Hexenbiest set upstairs while Kelly’s being murderd that’s actually in the show you seriously need to do a rewatch because you are clueless to what went on.That proves what was stated. Juliette thought they only wanted Diana. It is your projection that is seeing that as evidence of planning a murder. While Juliette was upstairs she heard the fight not the murder. They took Kelly outside. This shows you are projecting perception as facts. Being all powerful has nothing to do with her waiting to intervene. What makes your analogy even more flawed. We say Diana has more power then Eve, yet she did nothing. We have seen several times Diana intervening when she felt Adalind was in trouble. She already has a body count. Yet she did nothing. This points to the show not wanting Kelly's death to be a fore gone conclusion. But unless you can convince your self that it is , then you can;t see Juliette as the villain you want her to be. Even if that is not what the writers intended.
Quote:Actually without Adalind going to Dinaia in the season 5 finale Nick and the gang would be dead so she did save his life as she did in the series finale when she took the axe from Zerstorer to save Nick and got killed in the process.I guess you missed the point that zesotrer could not take the stick. Nick had to give it. If he could have just killed Nick and taken the stick he would have. So no Adalind did not save Nick life. Zestorere could not kill Nick or he would not have gotten the stick. Again you see what you want instead of what the writers wrote. More then once they made the point Nick had to give up the stick. They even brought back his mom and aunt to make the point about how he could not give it up no matter what.
I have watched the show very closely and know exactly what happens. I have also scoured each line of the show to she if I had missed a line of dialog that supports you theory. I will admit I see how you can see it the way you do. But that does not make it a true or a fact as to what happened.
Quote:Adalind didn’t tell Viktor Kelly had Diania she just told Viktor information and Viktor guessed, beacuse Adalind herself didn’t know Kelly had Diania. You have basically proved nothing. with your utter nonsense above, except you clearly don’t know the show very well you must have just watched Juliette scenes and ignored the rest.You are right Adalind did not say Kelly has Diana. But she did confirm that Kelly who is Nick's mom is the women they where trying to figure out was the women they where looking for. That still does not change the fact that Adalind came to the house to make Juliette do what Kenneth manipulated Juliette into doing. both had the intent of having Juliette contact Kelly and have her bring Diana.
That also does not negate the fact, Adalind knew Nick mother was in danger yet she said nothing to Nick. Had Adalind said something about her mission was to get Juliette to contact his mom. Now that Juliette was with Kenneth she would surly try and contact her. Nick could have sent a simple message warning his mom. Juliette may have lured Kelly to Portland. It was Adalind silence about what she knew that sealed her fate. It was Adalind letting them know it was Kelly they where looking for, that put a target on her back. It was Adalind figuring out that using Juliette they could get to Kelly.
The point you make assumptions without anything to back it up. your distort events to fit your theory. You file in what you see as the blanks and consider those as facts. I can argue line for line about what was said. Your entire paragraph is based on what you think and not what was shown or said.
Quote:Eve didn't save the gang in 5x06 out of the goodness of her heart, Eve saved them because Hw had programmed her to follow orders and saving Nick and the gang was part of those orders.That is misguided projection. The show more then once explained Eve motives for what she does. Both before the sitck and after the stick. both times it was the same answer. As she explains it she was given purpose. Instead of seeing being a hexnbiest as a curse. She now sees it as what she was meant to be. As she said in the other place. She would not go back even if she could. She said her life now has meaning. Yes she said they needed you when asked why she saved him. But meisner also said that it was Eve who wanted to test him. It was Eve who also was not sure if Nick would work out. So to say Eve was programmed means people are not listening to the explanations given by Eve.
Quote:Syscrash, what you just said is false she did drop the statue on Adalind, she only servived because the Verat guard pushed her out of the way, please go back and watch the scene.The guard pushed Adalind out of the way only because Juliette let him. Had Juliette wanted to she could have thrown the guard just like she did Rosalee. That is the same argument i made about Hank saving Monroe. Had Juliette not wanted Hank to intervene, she could have just thrown him out of the way. Why is it people ignore, Juliette is using magic and has complete control of the situation. This is that she missed is illogical. With Adalind and the statue it was a change on conscience that let Adalind be saved. With Monre killing him was not her intent.
RE: A very interesting article that features Juliette's character - Henry of green - 12-22-2017
Adalind didn't know about the fact that Zerstorer couldn't kill Nick when she risked her life to save him because her and Renard were clueless as to why Zerstorer didn't kill Nick the first two times, I actually didn't miss any of the show unlike you who watched it with Juliette glasses on. Eve said in her own words she saved Nick because they needed him meaning Hw clearly you need a rewatch. Juliette didn't let the guard save her that was never shown on the show she tried to murder her out of rage then after the guard rescued Adalind Juliette came to her senses and reliized she let the rage get the better of her and scurried away. Juliette didn't miss she hit her target that statue was landing directly on Adalind if not for the guard. What's illogical is your bs if Hexenbiest are as powerful as you claim and never miss why are they so easily killed compared to Grimms. Only one Grimm on the show has been killed two if you count Trubels reversed death.
RE: A very interesting article that features Juliette's character - dicappatore - 12-22-2017
(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 am not sure how many bar fights you have been in but most times it is reduced down to disturbance of the peace a misdemeanor. But besides that we only know she was arrested. We have no idea if she was charged. Considering what happen exactly how would they prove a case against. The facts all the lights blow out. How would they explain how she did that. The second thing The guy came toward her she put her hand up he flew across the room. Explain how that could be her fault. The botttom line they would never charge her because they could never make the case. That was the theme of all the cases Nick dealt with. The inability to explain any of it, allowing them to be able to charge someone.
Quote:You make it sound that this was a radio show instead of a TV Show. The scenes are not only dependent on dialogue. Part of the script includes set, costumes and what they were doing. Ever hear of the term, “A picture is worth a thousand words". Or “actions speak louder than words. Not everything on the screen has to be words. If so, how the hell did Silent Movies ever would have flourished?You have made my point. You are basing your reasoning on what you as a viewer saw. This formulates what you know. My point is the show made it a point for Juliette to not witness any of the dialog or events that you are basing your knowledge on. You then try and file in your reasoning by assuming Kenneth informed Juliette off screen. Why would Kenneth tell Juliette about his plan. It is not like Juliette was a hardened killer. He got her to participate by manipulating her emotions with Adalinds pregnancy.
Telling Juliette they where planing to commit mass murder would not be inline with the Juliette personality. Remember she could not even drop the statue on Adalind who she hated. She then felt bad because she tried.
What part of “DO YOU UNDERSTAND” that it makes no difference if she didn’t know. She participated. She knew after the fact. I guess you are still delusional that she still did not know of her actions and the aftermath that resulted. Not knowing the outcome of what she was involved with doesn’t make her innocent. Even if she did not know the plan or the slaughter, she was part of the plan. She participated. Did you look up Patty Hearst story? Of course not. The truth shall set you free.
Yea, I am formulating what I saw as a viewer. Isn’t what this whole discussion is all about? You are the one with the contradictions. One scene you claim it was voiced in the script, the other it doesn’t matter. Your whole explanation in your example in the police station is all based on BS.
She was arrested. It doesn’t matter what for. That’s to be determined in a courtroom that never came up. She was bailed out. Bailing someone out does not dismiss the case. She still has a charge pending. She threatens another, that’s a form of assault. Assault doesn’t have to be physical. In NYC, you can press charges on someone if they say FU to you. It’s called Verbal assault’
Assault
At Common Law, an intentional act by one person that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact.
An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm. It is both a crime and a TORT and, therefore, may result in either criminal or civil liability. Generally, the common law definition is the same in criminal and Tort Law. There is, however, an additional Criminal Law category of assault consisting of an attempted but unsuccessful Battery.
Statutory definitions of assault in the various jurisdictions throughout the United States are not substantially different from the common-law definition. Do you CAPISCE? An assault does not have to be physical?
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.
As for her pending charges, Somehow, you already know the courtroom appearance outcome of what occurred in the bar. Did I miss an episode where that was determined? Is there a deleted scene of the courtroom appearance? I don’t think so, but I do know, when out on bail, you better keep your nose clean. What she was saying to Adalind in the police station does not constitute, keeping your nose clean, when you are out on bail.
As for the word “hyperbole”? Do you think kids being accused of bullying are being excused because of a “hyperbole”? Are you aware that does not apply to making threats? A threat is a threat, not an exaggeration. Trying to use big words without the ability to properly apply them isn’t too impressive.
RE: A very interesting article that features Juliette's character - syscrash - 12-22-2017
Quote: Eve said in her own words she saved Nick because they needed him meaning Hw clearly you need a rewatch.Don't just quote part of the incident. Yes she said they need you. But it was Eve decisions to test Nick. It was also Eve choice to work with him. There is nothing about Eve relationship with HW that shows they demand her to do anything. Everything she did was by choice. Only Trubel was given orders.
This idea of seeing Eve as a HW robot was disproved by the show showing she worked on her own. The plan to get Marwan's phone, Meisner knew nothing about it till Eve got back. Nothing showed that HW knew about Eve becoming Sean.
The point it she considered herself HW so when you says they that includes herself. I will agree there was nothing emotional about saving Nick. Nick could have been anybody with his skill set. That the other where saved was a by product. She even told Monroe he need not think her.
Quote:An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm.present ability to cause the harm is the flaw. True we know she has the ability. But that ability does not exist as for as other know. that is like saying I am going to send you to the moon. ripping someone throat out is not something someone can do. Now if she said I am going to shot you. or even if she said I am going to kill you that is a threat that she has the ability to perform. But stating a unrealistic activity is hyperbole.
You do know that accessory after the fact is not the same as committing murder. People may have an emotional reaction to wanting to blame all involved. But legally it is not the same. What you are trying to relate is being charged for manslaughter if death occurs in commission of a crime. It is like the getaway driver being convicted of murder from a robbery gone wrong. That is not the usual outcome. Unless it can be proved they planned the crime as opposed to contributing to planing the crime. It would also require that the plan included murder as opposed to murder being the result. What you fail to acknowledge is Juliette being up stairs is what makes the difference. That is why they wrote it that way. It makes her like the getaway driver. Every part of how they wrote her part was to isolate her from being complicit in what Kenneth was doing. It is why they wrote it so she was never heard or knew about murder. It may not fit some emotional reaction you have to the situation. But that does not change what they wrote. Your are trying to convict her on circumstantial evidence. The problem with that is this is a scripted show which negates circumstantial situations.
RE: A very interesting article that features Juliette's character - Hell Rell - 12-22-2017
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?