GiGi

 

116 days

Oh my goodness you are too hilarious! :)

Hi everyone, I think Gideon's point of view adds such depth to the story line. Thanks Sylvia. :)

Hi Mrsmajessick, I agree with many of your points. I really hope that Sylvia deals with Elizabeth Vidal. Somehow I am not sure how she could get around the topic of Gideon's trauma or subsequent healing without including her in the discussion...so to speak. Time will tell. :)

Hi Mrsmajessick, I agree with many of your points. I really hope that Sylvia deals with Elizabeth Vidal. Somehow I am not sure how she could get around the topic of Gideon's trauma or subsequent healing without including her in the discussion...so to speak. Time wil tell. :)

I just wanted to clarify I saw the latest snippet and I LOVED IT!! Sigh!

Hi everyone, It is official, I am in ! I have 4 months and a handful of days to wait for the next installment...sigh! Oh help me!

Hi everyone, I think it will be interesting to see just how in control Gideon has been or will be in the next book. On one hand the reader is lead to believe that Gideon is in complete control and on the other hand everytime Gideon is with Eva or their relationship is threatened, Gideon seems to loose control. I can hardly wait to see how this will be explained in the third book. I am not convinced that Gideon could have that much control to be able to separate his "supposed motives" for killing Nathan, if in fact he did kill Nathan.

Hi Crossfire, I apologize if I misunderstood your position. My position is as such. If a child claims that they have been sexually abused, they are to be believed PERIOD!!!! No if's and's or but's....PERIOD!!! I understand the analogy of a child getting into a fight, but I state clearly this is the rule to the exception. Common sense would dictate that there are many many forms of sexual abuse that wouldn't necessarily show up during an exam, such as oral sex, fondling, touching, etc. None of those things could be evidenced unless a child were forced to perform oral sex on an adult, then petechiae or little red dots, or bruising, hemorrhages could be found at the back of the child's throat. I have seen that clinically for myself on a few occasions. My position here is absolute! A child is always to be believed...PERIOD!! A child is always to be given the benefit of the doubt...PERIOD!! 9/10 times, a child will keep the sexual abuse a secret, and even with clinical physical documented evidence, a child will be reticent about reporting the abuse. Often times, the child believes the threats that the abuser has made; ie. I will hurt you, your family, they are going to take you away from your family, etc. The fact that Gideon had the courage to speak up and tell his mother was huge! I can't even imagine how much suffering he must have endured before the opened his mouth to someone who was supposed to love and protect him. So no as far as I am concerned Elizabeth Vidal not only dropped the ball but she sent her son back to the person who was abusing him. It is morally reprehensible! If I had my way, Elizabeth Vidal should loose custody of Ireland and face criminal charges. This woman wasn't lacking funds, resources or opportunities to find counselling elsewhere. She could have easily found someone else to counsel her and her son, but she didn't. Again, she could fired the entire team just to be on the safe side and she didn't. She chose her convenience over that of her child. I also think that it is also absolutely asinine and RIDICULOUS that Elizabeth Vidal would ask Christopher about Gideon's abuse. There are SO MANY things wrong with that thought process that I wouldn't even know where to begin! I have absolutely no sympathy for Elizabeth Vidal whatsoever. My sympathy has and always will lay with the child. That child will have to live with the horrific effects of being abused for the rest of their lives. Elizabeth Vidal should live with guilt. More so, she hasn't done anything to atone for her error in judgement. Why should Gideon forgive her? In the end it will be very interesting to see how Sylvia will deal with this issue. It is clear from the books that Gideon has far from dealt with these issues and the part that her mother played in this entire thing.

Hi Crossfire & Teresac, I think that Gideon is in fact dominant. When he and Eva have, he needs to control the experience and the actual acts that are going on. Often times when Sylvia writes about their sexual encounters, she describes about how Gideon holds down Eva, holds her hands above her head/behind her back, and directs the angles of penetration when she is on top of him. When Eva and Gideon first had sex in the limo, it was at Eva's initiation, which I think may have freaked Gideon out a bit. I agree with you Teresac, that due to the abuse Gideon suffered it may make him more controlling but I cannot say that one is mutually exclusive with the other. Perhaps Gideon feels safer, more powerful, in control etc. when he grants pleasure and/or pain on his terms. In that way he can always be assured of the outcome. Those are just my thoughts, what do you ladies think? I look forward to the discussion.

Hi everyone, I thought a lot about this subject and I have to agree with Crossfire. I am sure that Gideon suffered from the lack of support of his family, but what I find more insidious is the fact that this mother not only did not believe him, she pitted him against his brother when she took Christopher's word against Gideon. Then instead of taking Gideon at his word about being abused, she continued to allow the "abuser" access to Gideon. I would think that any prudent mother with half an ounce of sense, would have fired said psychiatrist/psychologist/grad student and then found someone else to help her with her problems. It seems that the world solely revolved around Elizabeth Vidal. I really hope that the next book deals with these issues. What does everyone else think? I find this entire process so fascinating!

Hi Michele, I too am from Canada and I just wanted to clarify with you, because my understanding is that once a client/suspect/person of interest, has lawyered up and has given a full and complete statement, they cannot be continually questioned at will. Detectives cannot "just show up" unannounced. That would fall under the category of potential police harassment. Besides that; anything that someone could possibly say would be deemed inadmissible in court, because they have invoked their right to not self incriminate....ie. fruits of the poisonous tree. The police would have to have the probable cause and evidence to further investigate said persons. Any further questioning would be done with lawyers and down at police headquarters. Let's also remember that all of the individuals involved are extremely wealthy and can afford the very best legal representation. So there is no way that they would waive their rights and just "chat" with a detective without their attorneys. In the end, I guess it will all depend on how accurate Sylvia will decide to be in the next novel. Thus far she has been pretty dead on as far as all of the legal logistics. I can hardly wait for the next book! June hurry and come soon!!

Hi Crossfire, I think that's what happens when a group of people who a love a series of books so much are left waiting for the next installment. :)

Hi everyone, I read all the posts and I sat back and thought to myself; did Gideon really commit this murder? It was described that Nathan suffered one fatal wound to the heart. I find it very hard to believe that Gideon could exercise that much control to only stab him in the heart. Somehow I find it very odd. Think about how Gideon reacted when Eva kissed Brett. Gideon went nuts!!! How do you think Gideon would have reacted seeing the man who brutally and repeated the woman he was beyond in love with? Somehow I think it would have been a far uglier murder scene. I also don't think that Gideon, if he did commit the murder, did it alone. What does everyone else think? I look forward to reading everyone else's thoughts. GiGi

Hi everyone, I had the opportunity to read everyone's post and I have to say my guard is up. There is no way that a police department is going to leave a murder unsolved. I almost think that it would be too easy. I had a discussion with some of the other ladies in another forum about this very topic and I have to say I almost think that the detective is lying. Even if she doesn't want to further investigate Nathan's murder, that detective can be taken off the Nathan case and assigned to another homicide. I would think that the police department would want results and do everything in its power to solve the murder. One other quick thing here; why would Gideon be playing it cool and continuing to distance himself from Eva if he didn't think that the murder was still being investigated and that both he and Eva were still persons of interest? Some of the snippets that Sylvia released seem to suggest that. Those are just my thoughts. I look forward to everyone's comments and the discussion. GiGi

Hi everyone, I had a chance to read all the posts and I think that Eva's dad may have a more significant role in the next book. I am hoping that all will be revealed, ie. did Victor find out about Eva's abuse and how? I also really hope that it will be revealed if he played a role in the death of Nathan. Those are just my thoughts mixed in with some of my hopes. GiGi

Welcome Fayeth, I too just started posting a few days ago and look forward to your and everyones' input. I so look forward to these discussions. The books are great and I can't hardly wait for the next installment in June!

Hi ValGirl and XoMissMaria, The nbsp and symbol thing just pops up when I specifically click on the quote button. I am on slow speed dial up and I think that may affect what I am actually seeing or how the posting translates. When I click on the response button, I also see numbers and symbols. Sorry about any inconvenience this may cause.

 

Wow this is another book in itself lol what dies nbsp mean im list there lol and all this talk is msking me crazzzzyyyyyyy omg does anyone think gid will get away with this and him snd eva will be ok to be together sgsin plse say yes lol

Hi ValGirl,

Sorry about the long list of theories. I suppose that I have been sitting here speculating myself about the state of Eva and Gideon's relationship...sigh! I think if June doesn't come around soon, my fingers may fall off from replying to all the group comments. Then how on earth will I be able to hold on to the NEXT BOOK? :)

 

LN Cronan:

It was only when BTY was first released and I told Sylvia I wanted Corinne to disappear, feeling Eva's jealousy. LoL.

Corinne and Magdalena are just enjoying being near Mr. Untouchable and are agitating Eva because Gideon hasn't cut them off. I have a cute husband that women flirt with and he's usually oblivious ... or knows better to not to act on it... and visa versa. It's a respect thing, and Eva feels her place isnt being acknowledged. I feel for Eva. . These women are driving we readers CRAZY! Lol

Sylvia must laugh at our theories! We'll know how it unfolds in time. Whatever happens will be awesome because Sylvia is.

Hi Michele,

I think you made a really valid point. I think these women are suffering from a case of sour grapes. Corrine had the opportunity to have Gideon and blew it in the end (Gideon wasn't in love with her). Magdalene never stood a chance because Gideon never had any interest in her.

What I find most interesting is how often this kind of thing happens in real life. These women are so stuck on the "hope" of having a relationship with Gideon that they end up degrading themselves. Any woman who has a shred of self respect, would have picked herself, maybe eaten a gallon or two of ice cream and then gone on with her life. :)

 

GiGi you're absolutely right about "spousal privilege" making it almost impossible for prosecutors to force a person to testify against his/her husband or wife. In fact one of my Entwined theories is that Gideon and Eva are going to elope for that very reason as the cops try to close in. Thus the luggage tag. I can't wait until June to see if I'm right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Detective notes are not public documents; indeed, they're closely guarded secrets. Ask any journalist who covers the crime beat (I used to be one) who tries to get detailed information about a case, especially a murder, in its early stages. There is something known as a affidavit, which often become public once a suspect is arrested and then arraigned in court . Those aren't the same thing as detective notes. An affidavit is a basic summary about why the prosecution believes it has enough evidence to charge the accused and bring him/her to trial.

Detectives never destroy their notes, especially homicide detectives and most especially in "open" cases  (that is, a case in which no arrest has been made.) When Detective Graves said to Eva "I burned my notes" it confirmed my suspicion Graves was lying through her teeth. Cops can and do lie to trick suspects and sometimes witnesses. Fair? No. But they'll do what it takes, short of committing crimes themselves (entrapment), to try to bring someone to justice.

As for all the old sealed court records in the seven-million dollar civil lawsuit Nathan's father settled with Monica because his son raped her daughter, the police would have subpoenaed them and gotten copies quite easily, copies they've got tucked away with the rest of the stuff in their investigation files. That does not mean the court records are now unsealed and anyone can go to the courthouse to view them as public records. Someone (usually a news organization) would have to fight to convince a judge to unseal.

If -- IF -- Gideon were charged with murder, his defense team gets copies of everything in the detectives'/prosecution's files, per his constitutional rights (Sixth Amendment) to face his accusers. Facing an accuser means getting to see every piece of evidence the prosecution has against a defendant. But that doesn't automatically those files public either. In fact, the last thing the defense wants is copies of every last incriminating thing being thrown at their client being public (and thus all over the news.) Only if there is a trial and something in the files gets introduced into evidence does that thing become public.

 

One last thing - even if the detectives might feel that maybe what Gideon did was justifiable homicide, they don't get to drop the case. It's up to the prosecution (district attorney's office) whether or not to drop it. And a case like this would be irresistible to an ambitious prosecutor wanting the limelight. A famous billionaire whose father escaped justice for a Ponzi scheme by killing himself? The billionaire son now accused of an even worse crime, first degree murder? And the motive for the murder being because the victim was a rapist terrorizing the woman the defendant loves? Good lord, outside the courthouse would look like NASA, there would be so many satellite trucks lined up from networks covering the case.

HI LN,

Thank you for your comments. What I was specifically referring to was the rape shield law. No one knew about what happened between Eva and Nathan except her mother, Monica, Stanton and Nathan's dad. What transpired between the parties was strictly a civil settlement. I don't believe that criminal prosecutors were involved in this at all and if I am not mistaken, Monica did not go to the police. There is no way that any prosecutor in his/her right mind would ever agree to allow a case with so much documented physical evidence (ie. the hospital records and the obvious physical trauma and subsequent miscarriage, etc.) or a person who is so clearly violent (ie. Nathan) to be dismissed and go to civil court. That prosecutor would probably loose their job or be ousted out of office. In the United States of America, are prosecutors not appointed or elected to their position?

1. So what I think Victor would have been fishing for would have been how exactly his daughter Eva was connected to Nathan and that digging would have uncovered the sexual abuse and the settlement. I don't think that Victor would have dug into Nathan's murder without some kind of evidence or link between Nathan and Eva. Had Nathan never brutally and repeatedly raped Eva, and then his father never covered up these crimes (ie. absolving Nathan of being accountable for his actions), he wouldn't have been murdered. Then again, we wouldn't have something to talk about either.

2. The second issue is Nathan's murder. I agree with you that some detectives lie, and mislead suspects. Absolutely, but there is a missing link here. How did the detectives latch onto Eva exactly. The detectives said that the hotel room was filled with photos of Eva and remnants of her trash etc., but what I want to know is if he had videos of the rapes. That would give a definitive causal link between Nathan and Eva. It was mentioned in the book that Nathan came looking for a "payday" of sorts when he tried to extort money out of Stanton and supposedly Gideon. Remember, the repeated rapes were never reported and the police cannot investigate a crime that hasn't been brought to their attention. As such Eva is not entitled to protection under the "Rape Shield Law". She never made a complaint to the police or to the courts. The lawyers sealing the settlement details would only have resulted in a person paying a monetary sum of money if they broke, what is in essence a contract of non-disclosure.

3. As for the court records, the police would have to establish a causal link between Eva and Nathan, and Nathan's attempted extortion of said rapes from Stanton and Gideon. The police would have to prove that Nathan came looking for his payday. I would like to think that Stanton did not mention to the police that Nathan tried to extort him. It again, would put him under suspicion for the death of Nathan. As far as Gideon is concerned, the only documented evidence that the police has is Nathan walking outside of the Crossfire Building. Gideon would not give the police ammunition to look at him as a suspect. Thus far the only thing the police has is speculation. Unless Nathan wrote something down (or had some kind of notation in the form of a diary, email, journal, etc.) about having met with Gideon about trying to extort them, the police would still have no evidence.

4. You are right about the prosecution have the discretion about whom to bring to trial. Just think about it for a moment. You have some eager beaver prosecutor who stupidly brings to trial one of the wealthiest, most good looking, philanthropic men in all of New York without a shred of evidence. How long do you think that person would remain in office. The next position that prosecutor would have would be to ask the customer if "they want french fries with their order?" the only light that prosecutor would be exposed to would be the warming lights of the french station of the local burger joint.

Those are just my thoughts. I appreciate everyone's thoughts too. :)

 

I agree with ya, but when the police left Eva went to her bedroom & locked door, now he's my thinking..when Gid. came back in Eva was in her room.. so Victor was or so I think maybe he was feeling feel to ask Gid. all about this and who knows what was talked about then. My thoughts!  

Hi xomissmaria,

Thank you for your warm welcome. I agree with you about Victor. Who knows what happened after Eva went to bed. I guess we will have to wait and see what happens in the third installment of the series. Now all I have to do is cross off the days on my calendar until June....sigh!

Hi LN,

There is one thing I think everyone forgets about these cases. The detectives notes are not sealed and all a person would need to do is look to see who the detective was on that case. A detective always gets to keep his/her notes. Even after a law enforcement officer retires, they keep their notes. A police officer/detective, lawyer, etc. could simply ask the detective who investigated the initial complaint who the victim was in that case and could get around the "rape shield law", which quite frankly isn't worth the paper it has been written on (meaning that there have been so many challenges made to that law that is has more holes in it than swiss cheese).

I also just thought of something else. If Gideon and Eva get married, can a spouse be forced to testify against his/her partner? My thought is no. Does spousal priviledge not apply? Those are just my thoughts. I look forward to the discussion. Thanks.

GiGi

 

Gideon did NOT sleep with Corrine. Of that, I'm convinced.

As for the cops, they've been unable to break his alibi about being at the hotel, even though they've tried repeatedly. Detective Graves told Eva as much. But she (Graves) also knows Gideon's act of leaving Eva to run back to Corrine was just that -- all an act. Graves saw Gideon's face when he was on the phone with Eva as Eva dumped him, how utterly devastated he was. (It was really stupid of him to answer his cell phone at the police station - he ended up giving himself away.)

The detective's supposed motive for talking to Eva was "so you could go back to him." Caught off guard, Eva foolishly thanked

Detective Graves. Graves wasn't being nice. She was setting a trap, I think - a trap to trick Eva into going Gideon and him confessing to Eva it's all true, he did kill Nathan. Then the police would try to force Eva to testify Gideon confessed, maybe try to haul her before a grand jury, force an immunity deal onto her and leave her one of two choices: testify about what Gideon told her, or go to jail herself for obstruction of justice. The cops have zero evidence physical evidence linking Gideon to the murder, and they can't break his alibi. Their only hope left is a confession. He'd never confess to them. So they want to lure him into confessing to someone else - to Eva.

Hi everyone, my name is GiGi and this is my first posting on this website. I have to say I absolutely love Sylvia Day's books. With that said, I wanted to respond to a few things you mentioned.

1. Eva is already represented by a lawyer. Her dad made sure of that when the detectives first came to question Eva about the murder. Therefore she cannot be subsequently questioned without legal counsel present. That legal privilege remains in place and will stand during the duration of the investigation or until the case is resolved.

2. There is no statute of limitations when it comes to a murder case. Therefore that case will remain open and unsolved, until law enforcement finds the person who committed the crime. I agree that the detective wouldn't sweep a murder under the rug.

3. Due to the fact that the police has no evidence against Gideon and that he has given a complete statement, the police cannot continue to question Gideon. It would then violate his constitutional rights. Unless the police has the probable cause that avenue of questioning is now a dead end. The only hope that the police have is to see if Gideon and Eva are together or apart, which it appears that they are now apart.

4. I think as far as the murder of Nathan is concerned, if Gideon did commit the murder, he did not do it alone. My money is on Victor. Who else but a long standing ex-law enforcement officer would know the inns and outs of how to commit a crime without leaving evidence behind or would know how to stage a crime scene.

If Eva's dad was any good at his job, red flags would have been raised when detectives showed up at her doorstep to question her about a murder. I do not believe for one second that Victor would not have noticed when Eva lost all her colour, stumbled and nearly passed out. My bet would be that as soon as all the hoopla settled down for the night, Victor would have been on his cell phone calling one of his colleagues who are still in the "business" to find out about this Nathan character. Or he could possibly contacted Monica about the incident. I simply do not think that this issue is cut and dry. I do not believe that Gideon would drag other people into this mess and I most certainly do not believe that he would tell Eva exactly what his plans were and how he went about planning and staging the murder of Nathan. I do not believe that he would firstly want to burden Eva with that kind of information and secondly I do not believe that he would provide evidence that could possibly put Eva in a situation where she might be forced to testify against him.

5. As for Gideon answering the phone at the police station, it lends to his credibility of having stated that he and Eva were broken up. I do not believe that he looked devastated in the least. It would behove him to remain calm and passive, as he had stated earlier to the detectives that he and Eva had broken up and as was witnessed on the surveillance footage from The Cross Towers. It was Eva who wore her emotions all of her face when she and Gideon were on the "outs-or so she thought" which is why her statement was so believable.

Those are just my thoughts. I look forward to everyone's comments and the discussion.

GiGi