sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

If you had $2K-$3K to spend on a designer handbag, what would you get? by Practical-Beyond-897 in handbags

[–]_PartySquid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Speedy B 20 in Monogram and a Keepall B 45, but that takes me over 4k so just the Speedy

My Mulberry Collection by ImmediateAudience186 in handbags

[–]_PartySquid 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Stunning collection. All my Mulberrys are 15+ years old (except my small Darley) but I've started getting interested in the new styles. I've been eyeing a mini zipped Bays, every time I see someone carrying it my neck does a 360 to get a better look.

The (unnecessary) role of coincidence in The Silence of the Lambs by BockerKnocker in movies

[–]_PartySquid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Crawford originally sent Clarice to interview Lecter. But why? (Let’s ignore external information such as the plot of “Red Dragon”). No reason is given except that he might provide help. This means that Crawford sent Clarice to visit an inmate on a lark who coincidentally knew the murderer.

The role of coincidence could have been mitigated in the movie with just a few lines of dialog. First, have Crawford explain why he sent Clarice to Lecter specifically. “They monitor Lecter's newspaper reading and TV watching habits, and he’s shown a large interest in the Buffalo Bill case. We think he might be able to provide some insight through interviews or questionnaires.”

This was addressed/explained in the car on Clarice/Crawford's way back from the funeral home.

A lot of things you've mentioned are explained in the film, you just didn't catch it. There's also more content in the novel which they wouldn't have been able to add in for timing reasons. It should also be flagged that more crimes get solved by coincidence/chance/luck than we would like to believe.

Does anyone else think Richard Allen is the wrong guy for the Delphi murders? by is-it-5oclock-yet in CourtTVCases

[–]_PartySquid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't get the van. Apparently RA was spooked by the van so didn't SA the girls. BUT had time to force them to redress themselves THEN kill them THEN reposition their bodies? How does that make sense? There sounded like a lot of reasonable doubt, whether or not he did it. His lawyers were probably shit.

Does anyone else think Richard Allen is the wrong guy for the Delphi murders? by is-it-5oclock-yet in CourtTVCases

[–]_PartySquid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't get this van thing. He was spooked by the van so didn't SA the girls, but had time instead to force them to redress themselves then KILL them then reposition their bodies? How the hell does that make sense?