Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]



Viewing Single Post From: Tuesday, December 11th Daily Discussion
annie21


esp13
Dec 11 2012, 05:54 PM
annie21
Dec 11 2012, 04:48 PM
esp13
Dec 11 2012, 04:22 PM
annie21
Dec 11 2012, 04:14 PM
But they've basically been reduced to plot devices -- like a twosie or a lipstick.

Sure. Of course, Madison was always more plot device than character, but I don't disagree. But being used as a plot device is not the same as not existing. Hating how the writers interpret past history is not the same as the writers erasing that history. In this case, pending changes when the truth finally comes out, it does not appear that the writers intend to have Gabi held responsible for Madison and Jack's deaths. I'm not even sure that she could be held criminally responsible for those deaths. But that doesn't mean they've erased those deaths from history.

She could face criminal charges for Melanie's kidnapping because she knew about it and essentially helped cover it up (accessory after the fact). But by the time things moved to the catacombs, Gabi was kidnapped too and the criminal conspiracy would no longer exist. So, she can't be held criminally responsible for Andrew's actions if she was not a co-conspirator, I don't think. I guess we'll see how it plays out down the line.
You msy be right about Gabi not facing criminal charges for the deaths, although I seem to recall reading just recently that when one enters into a conspiracy with someone that person is then held accountable for whatever that co-conspirator ends up doing (the case was about a robbery where one of the robbers shot someone yet both conspirators were held accountable).

In any case, while it might be difficult to prove criminal charges, I think it would be interesting if Abby pursued a wrongful death action against her "friend" Gabi in civil court.

None of this will happen though, because these writers prefer not to refer back to Daysaster any more than they have to.

As for characters existing or not in the minds of the writers, while I don't disagree with your assessment, I would prefer that these writers completely ignore off-canvas characters in lieu of using them (or the mention of their names) to prop up petty contrived plots. That's just my opinion.
Yes, there is co-conspirator liability. That's partly why Gabi would face criminal liability for Melanie's kidnapping. She didn't conspire with Andrew for it to happen, but once she learned of it and did nothing she became a co-conspirator (or, possibly, an accessory after the fact). But the criminal liability extends only as long as the conspiracy. So, the question is, how far does the conspiracy extend. At the time the tunnels exploded, Gabi had been kidnapped by Andrew as well and, arguably, was no longer part of any criminal conpiracy. Therefore, arguably, to the extent the deaths can be said to have been caused by the commission of a crime (Melanie's kidnapping), Gabi was no longer part of the criminal conspiracy at the time the deaths occurred.

That doesn't mean that various people can't blame Gabi for starting the chain that lead to the explosions and deaths. And I'm perfectly happy if they do. I just think her criminal liability is somewhat limited and, quite frankly, I don't have a problem with that. It's been clear from day one that Gabi didn't want Andrew to kidnap Melanie and never intended for any of the other things to happen. Given the number of people in Salem who have never served time for things they definitely intended to do, I've got no real problem with Gabi getting off (criminally) for things she never intended to happen.

Gabi had ample time (weeks) to report Melanie's kidnapping and stop Andrew after he'd gone beyond their original conspiracy plans. As you point out, she didn't, so it could be argued that she was still conspiring with him throughout that time, albeit reluctantly, and all the way up to the moment she was kidnapped. Anyway, i agree that the criminal aspect is questionable, but the grounds for a civil suit would be much stronger and clearer. She was responsible for setting in motion what happened.

As you know, if you bring a pit bull into a neighborhood, you're responsible for any damages he causes, even if you took precautions to keep him chained and fenced in and even if you weren't there when he attacked someone. If you start a small fire and it ends up burning down the entire forest, killing people, and destroying homes, you're still responsible even if you didn't intend to set off a conflagration and even if you took precautions against it. Gabi didn't even take precautions; she was too busy scheming and covering up her own part in things.

I don't care one way or the other what happens to Gabi. But it's a shame that the writers have glossed over events and used Justin to help cover it up. At the very least, they should try to make a better story out of all that happened instead of just picking out the Melanie part and letting the rest go.
Offline Profile Quote Post
Tuesday, December 11th Daily Discussion · DAYS: News, Spoilers & Discussion