GiGi

Hi Julie54, Have a great day at work.

Hello Ms Julie54, There's no steam here sister.  I just find it very interesting when some people are ok with the concept of murder when it is someone else's child but may have very different views when it comes to their own child (good or bad). I know, we all know Nathan was scum, but who would want to hold the bag as his or her parent and say yes it is ok that someone murdered my child (even as despicable as he was). Do you know what I mean?Â

 Thanks

 I just want to clarify that if you were Nathan's mother you would be ok if your son was murdered?Â

Hi everyone, I just have one more controversial question to ask (quickly) before I put down the “what Gideon did was wrong†stick. What if you were the mother or father of a child who was mentally ill, committed rapes, tortures, etc but hadn’t yet killed anyone, had been incarcerated (locked up in a mental institution) for his crimes and by all accounts had paid his debts to society-according to the law. Would you be ok with someone premeditatedly coming along and murdering your child (for something he not done) or would you want your child locked up in a mental institution where he could get help and where the public would be safe and protected.  You carried that baby in your womb, had hopes and dreams only to realize that they would never come to fruition. Every hope and dream that you ever dreamed for your child was dashed; every prayer ever made to a higher power has gone unanswered. You have a very mentally ill child.  One day you receive a knock at the door and find out that your child has been murdered. As the investigation goes along you (the parent) find out the details of your child’s demise. You find out that someone had methodically and premeditatedly plotted and planned the murder of your child. How would you feel? Would you be ok with your child’s murder and that stranger taking the law into his/her own hands or would you have wanted the law to punish your child?  As I have stated before, what Nathan did was despicable. I am not in any way shape or form condoning it. Nathan got killed for something he hadn’t done yet. Did Nathan deserve to die based solely on what he had done?Â

 That statement is contradictory. One minute one thing is posted and then in the next it is flipped. Which is it?

Hi AMC, I think that if Nathan was going to back for a second round he would have done it well before he was murdered and well before he attacked Cary. That scenario doesn't fit for me. How can it be both ways; Nathan was sick and disoriented who was obsessed, but was smart and a clear thinker enough to plot an entire extortion ruse? It doesn't fit.  Why wait to go for another round with Gideon, if he was that nut's what was holding him back? He wouldn't have been rational and therefore wouldn't have had activated self-preservation skills.Â

Hi everyone, When are we supposed to start reading a chapter a day, leading up to the release of Sylvia's next book?Â

Hi AMC, Nathan's attack on Cary was a death threat on Cary.  The law would only look at it like that. I don't think that Nathan would have made any threats against Gideon. I don't know that he would have been that stupid. He'd already gotten a taste of Gideon's fury and I don't think that he would have gone back for another round.Â

 Hi Sscrph, I could have completely bought the whole Gideon killed Nathan, or Monica or Stanton on the day he went to each of them with the video tapes and photos. One could have made an extremely compelling arguement that any one of these individuals snapped when they saw the level of violence that was inflicted upon Eva. If Nathan happened to throw in a death threat or two, the cops would have been taking statements and this entire scenario most likely would have been ruled a justifiable homicide. The cops would have had evidence of Nathan's past brutal crimes, the outcry of "upstanding members of the community" vouching for either Gideon, Monica and/or Stanton and it most likely would have been a scenario of case-closed.  Instead one of them or all of them plotted Nathan's murder (we won't know until June 4th for answers as to who knew what). Was there concern and their only concern that of Eva, or did they worry "just a bit" about how their "good names" would be affected by such a scandal. That's not the way it happened, so now we wait until June 4th to see if we will finally get some answers.Â

 Hi Julie54, In the scenario that you have laid out, you are the mother and there is some moral obligation for a mother to protect and defend her child (or in your case children). Part of that protect would include you informing them of the need for safety precautions and the level of danger they may be facing (age appropriate levels of information of course), but what was written in the book was that everyone kept Eva in the dark. Absolutely everyone! No one saw fit to let a grown woman in on what was going on.  To make matters worse, one man decided to play, judge, jury and executioner all in one fell swoop without even havig tried to help from outside sources! That just boggles my mind. I could have completely bought the arguement if Gideon had contacted law enforcement or then such, tried to obtain help and couldn't and then decided to act because he had no other choice, but to automatically assume that there was no other choice just doesn't fly with me.  I could also have bought the arguement that Victor killed Nathan because of his background as being a cop and maybe having tried to get Nathan to back off, but that's not what was written. Thus far, we the readers have been lead to believe (by written word or lack thereof) that Gideon planned and executed this murder all by himself all in his heroic attempts to save a woman that he "needs more than his next breath". That isn't romantic (I am not saying that you said that this was romantic or implied it). Had Gideon tried to get outside help or at least made an attempt then that would have been a completely different story, but that's not the way it has been written and the rest we have to wait until June 4th to find out.Â

Hi Ript, Gideon decided to play judge, jury and executioner all in one fell swoop. There have been posts that have automatically dismissed Gideon's actions as being just justified. Who appointed Gideon God? Why did Gideon get the ultimate say in who should be murdered?  If we the readers have been given accurate correctly and have theorized correctly then what Gideon did was premeditated. There isn't any way to excuse that. Mortal danger means immediate; someone is coming at you with a knife or a gun or whatever and you have to defend yourself (kill or be killed). Justified does not mean sitting back for over a week and planning the demise of another human being (even as despicable as he was) even if he was crazy or stalking Eva.  Gideon's perceptions don't mean jack when his actions clearly implied that he planned the murder of another human being. Gideon never tried to reach out for help via the police or the FBI or other sources (we will have to wait and see on June 4th if he tried to get help from outside agencies).  Gideon was also not the person in immediate danger, Eva was (for which our beloved Gideon stupidly never let Eva in the loop). Eva would have had to be the one wielding the knife, not Gideon.   Do we have any lawyers or DA's or law enforcement in this forum who could jump in to this discussion. Surely Canada and the US cannot be that different as far as the interpretation of the law. So if we want to call a spade a spade and say that Gideon is a murderer (and no not a justified ender of someone's life), then cool. Let's rock and roll. If not then let's not kid ourselves and try to justify actions that were clearly premeditated murder (if in fact he did kill Nathan and we surmised the situation accurately).

Hi Peachies, Let's not mince words here. We are not talking about someone who suffered a heart attack, or a stroke or died of some terminal illness (or performed an assisted suicide of sorts). We are talking about a man who sat in his office and deliberately, coldly and methodically decided all on his own to end the life of another human being (yes, yes Nathan was despicable no doubt about it). So let's be clear here and not trivialize this, if what Sylvia said is true then Gideon is a murderer! Period! Point stop!  Interchanging murder with death is adding "chocolates, hearts and roses" to a very serious subject.Â

 Hi Jls1216, I think that your theory is plausible and it might have been a nice change to the storyline. I guess we will all find out on June 4th.Â

Hi Ript, I am sure that we are aware that this is just a fictional story with fictional characters (at least I hope we do), but what I think some people are having difficutly with is the romanticizing of murder. There is nothing romantic about that subject. It doesn't matter how you slice the bread, murder is murder.  I also think that come June 4th, people will have the opportunity to read for themselves what exactly happened. It may help them make up their minds as to what was going on in Gideon's mind at the time that he killed Nathan. It will also help to understand what the circumstances were surrounding Nathan's murder and how exactly everything went down.Â

Hi Julie54, I could have bought that arguement if Gideon had snapped, went to Nathan and killed him immediately. What I am finding hard to swallow is the fact that he just sat there and formulated a plan. He systematically and methodically planned this entire thing out (or so the reader is left to believe that given what has been written thus far). Anyway you slice that loaf of bread, it is still premeditated murder and that just isn't romantic from my point of view.  I am going to wait until June 4th to read for myself and see what exactly happened. I hope it will shed some light on a very hot topic.Â

Hi everyone, I just wanted to throw out a quick question; if Gideon had been so meticulous about not involving anyone in the planning and commission of Nathan's murder then why on earth would Angus be involved? Again, the notion of murder may be romantic for some people, but if faced with conspiracy or accessory charges, does anyone really think that Angus would throw himself on his sword? That would go completely against human nature. What does everyone think?Â

 Hi Julie54, I think that Eva was more upset by the fact that Gideon never disclosed the fact that she was going to have a security team following her around 24/7. I think that she was also upset she felt that Gideon couldn't even trust that she could have a harmless conversation with another man without Gideon freaking out and sending his security team in to break up that discussion. I think that in that instance, Eva had every right to be upset. That whole dynamic spoke volumes about Gideon's and Eva's relationship. I don't think that it really had anything to do with "security". What do you think?

 Hi Mrs.CrossXxXxX, I agree. I don't find anything romantic about this entire situation at all! I also don't care if Gideon is good in bed or what have you, what I need to know now is why Gideon felt that there were simply no other options and that Nathan had to die. I also don't care if Gideon would have hired someone else to commit the murder. Murder is murder and what is so romantic about that?  Yes, yes, I get that this is a fictional story and that these are fictional characters but what I am finding more interesting is the parallel between the story and the social commentary. Under what circumstances do people find it acceptable to murder another human being? Who gets the "get out of jail free pass" after having committed such a crime and who doesn't? As consumers what do you expect of your characters? What makes a book worth buying and what line would have to be crossed in order for you the consumer to say "no thank you" I don't wish to participate in buying another book?Â

  Hi AMC, I think that the storyline of whether Gideon killed Nathan or not may be a huge hook for some people. All the s** scenes aside, Sylvia has written a really good storyline and I am sure that there are many people who will be completely turned off by the fact that someone they had been rooted for killed Nathan. That may affect her sales as a result.  I have said it before and I will say it again, killing another human being is not romantic. If someone were to objectively look at the facts as they have been presented thus far, Gideon wouldn't have been justified in killing Nathan, this would have been premeditated murder. Trying to get a justifiable homicide ruling would be like trying to climb Mt. Everest on a "pogo" stick. If anyone has legal expertise, feel free to jump in here.  I also don't understand why Sylvia would disclose such an important part of the storyline (in such an obscure way) so close to the release date of her next book. It makes absolutely no sense what so ever. How is that a thank you to her faithful fans?  As you said that people won't buy the next book to see if Gideon killed Nathan, I too, don't believe that people will soley buy the next book because s**. Â

Hi everyone, I have been thinking about what everyone has been saying and I have to wonder whether Nathan would have been able to use the "he was mentally ill excuse" and therefore he wasn't responsible for his actions. I have been thinking about some many cases in the US where the defendants were clearly mentally ill and yet the juries all found those individuals mentally competent and guilty of their crimes.  The biggest example of that for me was the Andrea Yates case (a lady who had been suffering from post part um psychosis for years and finally snapped and drowned her five children and attempted to kill herself). In this case: 1. Andrea first told her husband that she didn't want to have any more children (child 3) and that she was feeling depressed. She went to her doctor and he prescribed medication but her husband prevented her from taking it. It could affect future pregnancies (could cause birth defects and such and she was physically going against God's order).  Her husband replied that she was going to go to if she physically prevented a pregnancy. It was God's will, how many children she was supposed to have.  2. After the fourth pregnancy she started hearing voices and began complaining to her neighbours who took her to the hospital on a few occasions. Each and every single time her husband came and had her discharged before she could receive proper treatment. In the last case, the ER Physician deemed her not an immediate threat to herself or anyone else so he released her.  3. Baby five comes along and Andrea is complaining to her doctor (of whom she was complaining to all along), is seen wandering through the streets, disoriented and unable to form rational thoughts. She was hospitalized immediately to which end her husband came and had her discharged against medical advice. They warned him that Andrea could be a danger not only to herself but to her children as well. Her husband stated something along the lines of the God will look after Andrea.  4. Within a few days after that incident Andrea drowned all five of her children in the bathtub and tried to kill herself.  This was a woman who was clearly very mentally ill and yet, the jury couldn't stomach the fact that a woman would ever kill her children so they deemed her mentally competent and convicted her of first degree murder. I think she got a sentence like that because of political reasons and not for actual factual reasons. In the end her murder sentence was overturned because she was clearly mentally ill and did try repeatedly to get help but got shut down at every single turn.  Somehow I wonder if Nathan could use the excuse of his mental illness or whether the US people have simply had enough and they too would throw the book at Nathan. I don't know what kind of mental illness Nathan could have had that would make him so sexually sadistic. Most psychopaths and sociopath's aren't violent. They realize that they don't fit into society because of their lack of ability to be able to follow social cues (compassion, empathy, etc.), so they do everything within their power to try and fit in. So what made Nathan snap and what was it in his make up to make him that way?  I don't think that Nathan would have gotten a second bite at the "mental illness" apple. It is just a gut instinct, but who knows maybe he would have. We will never know. I also think that given his past crimes, his effective breaking of the seal on his juvenile records through the attempted commission of other crimes would have given the judge leeway on giving Nathan the maximum sentence.  If you add federal charges, I think Nathan wouldn't have seen the light of day again.  I can also see everyone's concerns that maybe things wouldn't go according to plan and that Nathan could have walked away a free man.  One final thing, I think that although Nathan may have been able to fool the doctors the first time around, I don't think it would really have mattered. Nathan was charged and sentenced as a juvenile and as such when he turned 21 his release would have been mandatory. Now that he is an adult and has attempted to commit more very violent crimes and has been hanging on to trophies of his past crimes (i.e. the videotapes and photos), it could be argued that Nathan is a dangerous offender and that releasing him back into society would only be a recipe for disaster. He could potentially receive a "dangerous offender" label and never be released (I would hope that the US has that designation for these types of cases) if he was found mentally incompetent.  I don't think that Nathan would get a second chance at being able to fool his doctors. He would have had Gideon, Monica, Stanton and Eva all rally for him remaining in prison. What does everyone think?   Â

Hi Peachies, I think you can go to www.sylviaday.com and type in the search engine entwined with you and the first chaper should pop up. If not try www.goodreads.com go to the search engine and type up sylvia day and the book title and it should lead you to a link that should have the first chapter for you to read. I went to "Goodreads" last time and got Sylvia's first chapter from Reflected In You. I hope that helps. As it gets closer to the day or on the day I will go to the website and see if I can post a link for everyone.Â

Hi Reader76, Welcome to the forum! I think some people are suspicious about the timing of Sylvia dropping the bomb so close to the release of the next book. Why choose now of all times to spill the beans about Gideon having killed Nathan when the release is just over a month away? So many people have been asking questions for so long and Sylvia has been absolutely tight-lipped about this entire subject. Sylvia decided to release the "big scoop" on some obscure radio station which I am sure that many people have never even heard of. It isn't like Sylvia was giving an exclusive interview to Oprah or Barbara Walters, so I think that many people (myself included) found it a little more than odd. Why release the information now? Wouldn't that affect the sales of her next book? I am sure that there are some people who would buy the book to find out if Gideon did kill Nathan. Now that they know, will they still remain motivated to purchase the next booK? Another quick little thing is that if the reader was go back and look over all the questions that they have askd Sylvia, if you notice some of her responses were very vague or quotes from the books. That isn't necessarily an answer (brilliant by the way ), so I think that some of us (myself included) want to wait until we actually have a book in our hands and actual tangible proof that Gideon killed Nathan. I think in one way or another we are all devoted fans of our Gideon and Eva. What do you think? What does everyone think? :)

Hi KiMa, You are absolutely correct! It is so important to wait until June 4th, before we make up our minds. We need to have the actual tangible proof in our hands and see that proof with our own eyes. You are not the only lone wolf, I'll stand beside you. I am just a little bummed out. I really hope that this was just part of some publicity stunt. I guess we will know on June 4th for sure. Until then...chin up.Â

Hi Donnad, What's going on? I am trying to follow your postings and I think that I may have missed something there. If you would be kind enough to catch me up that would be great. Thanks in advance.Â