Editing Talk:Crossroads, Part I/Archive 1
Discussion page of Crossroads, Part I/Archive 1
More actions
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 161: | Line 161: | ||
: RIGHT! See Jonesj gets it. Somehow, someway they dropped the ball on this episode and we are sitting here trying to make the episode fit like a square peg in a round hole. --[[User:Baltarstar|Baltarstar]] 20:47, 23 March 2007 (CDT) | : RIGHT! See Jonesj gets it. Somehow, someway they dropped the ball on this episode and we are sitting here trying to make the episode fit like a square peg in a round hole. --[[User:Baltarstar|Baltarstar]] 20:47, 23 March 2007 (CDT) | ||
: Shelly is ultimately inconsequential, since she was not involved at New Caprica. Again, Baltar is being tried for what they can prove -- which is his involvement with the Cylon occupying force on New Caprica. Bringing up Shelly would be the equivalent of showing us [[w:Chekhov's gun|Chekhov's gun]] and not firing it by act 3, since all she did was to discredit those who may have known about [[ | : Shelly is ultimately inconsequential, since she was not involved at New Caprica. Again, Baltar is being tried for what they can prove -- which is his involvement with the Cylon occupying force on New Caprica. Bringing up Shelly would be the equivalent of showing us [[w:Chekhov's gun|Chekhov's gun]] and not firing it by act 3, since all she did was to discredit those who may have known about [[Amorak]]'s evidence about a "traitor in their midst". -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 20:27, 22 March 2007 (CDT) | ||
:: Read what I said you're right that Shelly is inconsequential to the PROSECUTION but it is NOT inconsequential to the DEFENSE. Also the standard of evidence is much slacker for a defense (that's based on our legal system but then colonial law seem similar.) Showing this evidence could point to a conspiracy within the fleet against Baltar (whether thats true or not doesn't matter.) The point is it would be a viable tactic for the defense to persue, and an important tatic as well. --[[User:Jonesj3599|Jonesj3599]] 20:52, 22 March 2007 (CDT) | :: Read what I said you're right that Shelly is inconsequential to the PROSECUTION but it is NOT inconsequential to the DEFENSE. Also the standard of evidence is much slacker for a defense (that's based on our legal system but then colonial law seem similar.) Showing this evidence could point to a conspiracy within the fleet against Baltar (whether thats true or not doesn't matter.) The point is it would be a viable tactic for the defense to persue, and an important tatic as well. --[[User:Jonesj3599|Jonesj3599]] 20:52, 22 March 2007 (CDT) | ||