Guest April 24, 2016 Share April 24, 2016 Just caught up on this episode and I am confused about something. The flashbacks establishing that Claire sees there is something creepy about Hank and kids (when she rescues Jack from the rain)--when was that supposed to have happened? Because unless I've forgotten something (entirely possible), Adam seemed to be visiting with Hank and having a friendly relationship with him up until the time he disappeared. Did I miss where it was established before his disappearance that he had been forbidden to go to Hank's house anymore? Also, I remember that John expressed his frustration that there wasn't evidence against Hank and that's how Willa got the idea to frame him with the ship in the bottle. But does John know what Willa did? This show! Maybe a bit too much going on for my simple mind :) I could be wrong but here's my recollection. Claire found out about Hank and told John she wanted to warn the kids to stay away from him and why but he said, "No, they're too young to learn about that." So they didn't. Hank implied to Claire that no one knew Adam visited him, so I guess Claire didn't know. I think John was in on the frame because he called the cops and then later Willa asked, "Did you do it?" And he said, "Yes." Nina recognized John's voice on the call and called him out on it, too, I think? John made the call only to get the bottle found to get Hank arrested, I thought. If he had actually heard screaming in the house he could've just called from home but he went to a payphone and called anonymously, I think. Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/41696-s01e08-sweet-jane/page/3/#findComment-2182069
bref April 24, 2016 Share April 24, 2016 Thank you both! Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/41696-s01e08-sweet-jane/page/3/#findComment-2182582
KaveDweller April 24, 2016 Share April 24, 2016 I could be wrong but here's my recollection. Claire found out about Hank and told John she wanted to warn the kids to stay away from him and why but he said, "No, they're too young to learn about that." So they didn't. Hank implied to Claire that no one knew Adam visited him, so I guess Claire didn't know. I think John was in on the frame because he called the cops and then later Willa asked, "Did you do it?" And he said, "Yes." Nina recognized John's voice on the call and called him out on it, too, I think? John made the call only to get the bottle found to get Hank arrested, I thought. If he had actually heard screaming in the house he could've just called from home but he went to a payphone and called anonymously, I think. He called the cops, but Willa could have just told him, "hey, maybe if you call 911 the cops would be able to go look for evidence." He didn't have to know she planted something, because they all already thought there was legit evidence for the cops to find. It seems really dumb of him to go along with the planting evidence idea, since they didn't know if Adam was dead or not. It would only make sense if he was hoping for a real lead. Willa is young so she may not have thought of that, but you'd think he would. I am amazed that they never investigated who made the call, since there was clearly no immediate danger like John claimed on the call. Did Hank even have a lawyer? The cops case for mrder was crazy slim. 2 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/41696-s01e08-sweet-jane/page/3/#findComment-2182590
Guest April 24, 2016 Share April 24, 2016 (edited) Yes, it does seem dumb they planted evidence. It's like all of them cared more about convicting someone than finding Adam. It's not very realistic. Just like when Claire and John got a call late at night from the police 10 years ago and her first question was, "Did you arrest someone?" Not, "Did you find Adam?" Maybe it was part of the writers wanting us to think at the time that the Warrens knew Adam was dead and faked the disappearance. Or just sloppy writing. I rewatched some scenes in Of Puppies and Monsters and I think we're supposed to believe John knew about Willa planting the boat. Nina accuses him of framing Hank, even complimenting him on the choice of the underwear drawer, and John just justifies it with, "I thought he did it." There was also a scene before that where after Willa plants the bottle she tells her dad she knows he didn't hurt Adam and they both know who did and he says, "What did you do?" then the scene ends. Edited April 24, 2016 by Guest Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/41696-s01e08-sweet-jane/page/3/#findComment-2182649
backformore April 26, 2016 Share April 26, 2016 Kids age out of the foster system at 16, I think. All in all, it's hard to see why Adam and Ben would be kept prisoner past 17-18. With John's infidelities, I wonder if Ben really is his son. I have to chime in here. Kids age out of foster care at 18. Sometimes it can be extended to age 21, under certain circumstances in a lot of states. Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/41696-s01e08-sweet-jane/page/3/#findComment-2187036
backformore April 26, 2016 Share April 26, 2016 Just coming on to say that the sympathy shown toward Hank is the primary reason I have so much difficulty with this show. He supports a business that profits off of the rape of children; he's guilty of a (albeit lesser) crime; he allowed a family to believe he killed ther child and refused to help them, thus ending their search; and he beat the hell out of himself to frame an entirely innocent man that he psychologically tortured for years. Not to mention, he would have gone to jail for the porn, anyway. It wasn't a false charge or an insinuation - there was proof. But he sure gets a nice edit. That voluntary chemical castration makes him someone we should feel sorry for? He just can't help himself? In real life, these guys are dangerous predators and just get worse, so I don't feel any desire to humanize them. There is some research now that a predilection toward pedophilia is a tendency that some people are born with, a perverse sexual tendency. He was framed for killing Adam, and after denying it at first, was coerced into a confession. He is angry for being framed, but also seems to have a lot of self-hatred for his sexual appetites. Not all pedophiles are dangerous predators, only those who act on their urges are. We don't, and can't, lock people up for being pedophiles. We can only lock them up when they are abusers. 2 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/41696-s01e08-sweet-jane/page/3/#findComment-2187063
MyMorningCoffee April 29, 2016 Share April 29, 2016 Forgive me if this has already been addressed. From what I understand, pedophiles are attracted to young children, in this case 7 or 8 year old boys. Why would this guy keep these boys as they grow into young men, never having replaced them so to speak? 1 Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/41696-s01e08-sweet-jane/page/3/#findComment-2194511
Madding crowd April 29, 2016 Share April 29, 2016 (edited) It's possible he developed an affection for them and that he kept them looking and acting younger fior as long as he could. He also could have been getting ready to kill them and replace them with younger models. There have been cases of children being kept for years but at some point Doug would have to know they could eventually overpower him. Edited April 29, 2016 by Madding crowd Link to comment https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/41696-s01e08-sweet-jane/page/3/#findComment-2195253
Recommended Posts