DAYS:Trent's killer is.....

Follow @DaytimeRoyalty

Hello, soap fans -- and welcome to Daytime Royalty!

For those unfamiliar, we are an uncensored community for fans and lovers of the daytime genre. We have a no-holds-barred atmosphere in regards to the shows, writers, actors etc. but we do not allow member bashing in any form.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member, please log in to your account to access all of our features.

Pages:
1
…
7
8

DAYS:Trent's killer is.....; UPDATED
Topic Started: Oct 23 2008, 01:36 AM (6,553 Views)
ElvisDiMera	Oct 25 2008, 05:57 PM Post #141
Posts: 582 Group: Members Member #2,256 Joined: May 12, 2008	Tripp Oct 25 2008, 03:44 PM ElvisDiMera Oct 25 2008, 03:00 PM Drug dependency is not an excuse for murder even if the victim was a low life thug who tried to pimp out his own daughter. Maybe in real life but this is soap. Remember that both Marlena and Kate shot at EJ but nothing happened to them. Lucas got off after a few months in prison. Stephanie and Chelsea got off with Ford after having him buried twice and Max only got community service. It's gonna make me furious that the show decides for ONCE to punish the one guy who has tended to be more good then bad on his worst day into prison for killing a horrible guy WHILE he was under the influence of drugs. Plus they could also try to do a mental illness. Someone else pointed out that they've already setup for this, Nick saying in the jailcell about his DUI he felt like it wasn't him. EJ lived, Trent wasn't so lucky. Also, with Ford, they didn't set out to kill him. Ford died because he tripped and fell. I'm just saying that if Nick is the killer, they need more than drug dependency to be the reason for his crime. Like self-defense or in defense of another or accidental.



ElvisDiMera	Oct 25 2008, 05:58 PM Post #142
Posts: 582 Group: Members Member #2,256 Joined: May 12, 2008	Charmqn Oct 25 2008, 04:54 PM Dena has done mental illness stories before-Jess/tess..it started off great...I actually really like Tess and her romance with Nash, but somehow the dtoryline got ruin at some point. Nick has the family history, it could also be a first for DOOL in a while. To actually bring back family history and using that for a storyline That's Dena for you. She knows how to turn gold into manure faster than you can say "what's that smell?"



esp13	Oct 25 2008, 06:08 PM Post #143
Posts: 3,707 Group: Elite Member Member #676 Joined: December 20, 2007	ElvisDiMera Oct 25 2008, 05:57 PM EJ lived, Trent wasn't so lucky. Also, with Ford, they didn't set out to kill him. Ford died because he tripped and fell. I'm just saying that if Nick is the killer, they need more than drug dependency to be the reason for his crime. Like self-defense or in defense of another or accidental. Well, I might agree with you in real life, but not so much on soaps. After all, I can't recall Stefano or EJ paying for any of their crimes. EJ never paid for shooting John, torturing Steve, or any of the Black Glove crimes. Stefano has never paid for anything he's done. Why should Nick pay if he committed a crime due to drug dependency or mental illness?



ElvisDiMera	Oct 25 2008, 06:18 PM Post #144
Posts: 582 Group: Members Member #2,256 Joined: May 12, 2008	esp13 Oct 25 2008, 06:08 PM ElvisDiMera Oct 25 2008, 05:57 PM EJ lived, Trent wasn't so lucky. Also, with Ford, they didn't set out to kill him. Ford died because he tripped and fell. I'm just saying that if Nick is the killer, they need more than drug dependency to be the reason for his crime. Like self-defense or in defense of another or accidental. Well, I might agree with you in real life, but not so much on soaps. After all, I can't recall Stefano or EJ paying for any of their crimes. EJ never paid for shooting John, torturing Steve, or any of the Black Glove crimes. Stefano has never paid for anything he's done. Why should Nick pay if he committed a crime due to drug dependency or mental illness? EJ shot John in cold blood but John lived. Lucas shot EJ in cold blood but EJ lived. Trent is dead. Lucas and EJ paid for their crime in that Lucas went to prison for a few months and EJ was shot himself, lingered in the hospital and paralyzed for awhile. I think had Lucas and EJ been successful in their murder attempts, the would have written more severe soapland punishments for them. Stefano is a full-fledged villain thus does not need to pay for his crimes.



Tripp	Oct 25 2008, 06:31 PM Post #145
Geekette Posts: 1,643 Group: Elite Member Member #561 Joined: November 24, 2007 Favorite Soap Opera of All Time Santa Barbara Favorite Primetime Soap Opera of All Time Melrose Place (original)	ElvisDiMera Oct 25 2008, 05:57 PM EJ lived, Trent wasn't so lucky. Also, with Ford, they didn't set out to kill him. Ford died because he tripped and fell. I'm just saying that if Nick is the killer, they need more than drug dependency to be the reason for his crime. Like self-defense or in defense of another or accidental. Yea but I don't think Nick set out to kill Trent either. It was Melanie who brought the knife to the murder scene so unless he brought something else but decided to use a weapon of convenience, I think this will be an accidental death. Of course, the doesn't excuse his behavior of trying to gaslight Melanie which I still feel is totally OOC for him.



esp13	Oct 25 2008, 06:32 PM Post #146
Posts: 3,707 Group: Elite Member Member #676 Joined: December 20, 2007	So as long as you don't actually kill somebody, it's okay? Sorry, I just can't agree with that standard. I personally don't necessarily like the fact that nobody pays for crimes in Salem, but I think it should at least be consistent. If EJ never pays for his crime (being shot and paralyzed for a couple of weeks just doesn't qualify as punishment to me), and gets to be considered a wholesome citizen of Salem, then I can't see Nick paying for killing Trent either.



ElvisDiMera	Oct 25 2008, 07:03 PM Post #147
Posts: 582 Group: Members Member #2,256 Joined: May 12, 2008	esp13 Oct 25 2008, 06:32 PM So as long as you don't actually kill somebody, it's okay? Sorry, I just can't agree with that standard. I personally don't necessarily like the fact that nobody pays for crimes in Salem, but I think it should at least be consistent. If EJ never pays for his crime (being shot and paralyzed for a couple of weeks just doesn't qualify as punishment to me), and gets to be considered a wholesome citizen of Salem, then I can't see Nick paying for killing Trent either. Did I say it was "okay"? Please point out where I said it was okay.



esp13	Oct 25 2008, 07:26 PM Post #148
Posts: 3,707 Group: Elite Member Member #676 Joined: December 20, 2007	Sorry, that was how it seemed to me from your comments that EJ and John didn't die, but Trent did. It seemed that you were okay with EJ not being punished for shooting John because John didn't die. If that wasn't what you meant, I apologize for misunderstanding. That just seemed to be a distinction you were making.



ElvisDiMera	Oct 26 2008, 03:16 PM Post #149
Posts: 582 Group: Members Member #2,256 Joined: May 12, 2008	esp13 Oct 25 2008, 07:26 PM Sorry, that was how it seemed to me from your comments that EJ and John didn't die, but Trent did. It seemed that you were okay with EJ not being punished for shooting John because John didn't die. If that wasn't what you meant, I apologize for misunderstanding. That just seemed to be a distinction you were making. Well, I do believe murder is a much more serious crime than attempted murder and so does the law thus the difference in penalty between the two. In a strict soap context, If they felt Lucas needed to pay for his crime of attempted murder by going away to prison for a few months, don't you think they would give Nick a more serious punishment for actual murder (unless they expect to play him as a straight villain from here forward)? The story has not played out but simple drug dependency is not enough of an explanation for Nick to have murdered Trent but still continue on the canvas as a rootable character. They will need to make it in self defense, defense of another, or accidental. I do not think attempted murder is "okay" simply because I see the difference in severity between murder and attempted murder as far as crimes go.



Charmqn	Oct 26 2008, 03:18 PM Post #150
Posts: 489 Group: Elite Member Member #148 Joined: July 24, 2007	any more scoop from this topic, angie or OBK?



esp13	Oct 26 2008, 03:35 PM Post #151
Posts: 3,707 Group: Elite Member Member #676 Joined: December 20, 2007	ElvisDiMera Oct 26 2008, 03:16 PM Well, I do believe murder is a much more serious crime than attempted murder and so does the law thus the difference in penalty between the two. In a strict soap context, If they felt Lucas needed to pay for his crime of attempted murder by going away to prison for a few months, don't you think they would give Nick a more serious punishment for actual murder (unless they expect to play him as a straight villain from here forward)? The story has not played out but simple drug dependency is not enough of an explanation for Nick to have murdered Trent but still continue on the canvas as a rootable character. They will need to make it in self defense, defense of another, or accidental. I do not think attempted murder is "okay" simply because I see the difference in severity between murder and attempted murder as far as crimes go. Well, as I said before I think we'll have to agree to disagree. EJ is now a "good guy" and has never paid for shooting John or for locking Lucas in a freezer truck in an attempt to kill him. So, if the writers didn't feel it was necessary to punish EJ for his crimes even though he is not a straight villain, then I don't see why they would need to punish Nick or why the drug dependency wouldn't be enough of an explanation for the audience. Sure, John and Lucas didn't die, but that wasn't because EJ didn't intend to kill them. And, while Trent may be dead, he was undisputedly an "evil" person, whereas both John and Lucas were good guys. So, in the soap world, Nick's crime is probably less than EJ's (particularly when you throw in the attempted murders of Max, Stephanie, Steve and Kayla during EJ's "Black Glove" days). Now, I certainly hope that there is more of an explanation and that it was self-defense, or defense of Melanie, or maybe just a straight mental illness storyline. But, if they only go with the drug dependency, it will be more of an explanation than they've given for a lot of people who committed crimes and got off scott free in Salem.



ladyofthelake	Oct 26 2008, 03:52 PM Post #152
Posts: 7,912 Group: Veteran Member #1,765 Joined: January 31, 2008 Twitter ID ladyofthelake60	It certainly is more palatable than demonic possession or brainwashing.



1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


« Previous Topic · DAYS: News, Spoilers & Discussion · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
…
7
8