Entwined With You- Chapter One

[julie54]

I hope there are not any babies yet. They need time to get to know each other, they are too emotionally screwed up at the moment with each other. Then we have the matter of Nathan's death. Could you imagine the pain of Gideon if the unspeakable did happen, never to see or hold his child or be involved in its upbringing. It would kill him.

[Peachies]

All the snippets started this way

I thought so too until last night when I went to look at the exact wording. Starting at the Easter snippet there isn't a disclaimer.

[julie54]

I think I've got this figured out, how "hours" could have passed between Eva listening to Graves and Eva being back home, thinking about the drama of the evening's events. 

 

Eva was in a complete daze when she left the Krav Maga studio and had Clancy drive her to Gideon's. She remained in a daze as she sat on his doorstep. In fact, at the time she didn't know how long she had been there. She didn't snap out of her daze until Gideon came off the elevator. They talked, and she went home. Out of her daze now, she figures out what time it is. She knows when her Krav Maga class ended. Simple math makes her realize how much time elapsed.

 

So possible timeline:

• Eva has Clancy drive her to Gideon's.
• Still in a daze when she arrives, she goes on autopilot thinking she's going to stay for the evening/night. In other words, she's going to Gideon's instead of her apartment for the rest of the night. So she dismisses Clancy for the night instead of asking him to wait.
• She sits there for a considerable amount of time while Gideon, still in a great deal of emotional anguish, worked late to help distract himself and then spent a couple of hours at the gym trying to physically outrun his pain through a punishing workout.
• She does snap out of the daze when he finally does get home.
• She tells him exactly what Graves said, and tells him he needs to call his defense team ASAP.
• She also tells him, as a cop's daughter, it's quite possible Graves is trying to set them up. So she tells him she's leaving right now.
• Talking with her at that moment is the last thing Gideon wants. Because it would involve talking about what he'd done. Sit there on the doorstep and hold her some more -- yes. Have a conversation beyond what she told him? No.
• So he doesn't stop her when she leaves. In agony, he watches the elevator doors shut.
• She gets a taxi and heads right home. Agh, she paid with a debit card, too, so she left an electronic trail of her trip.
• He calls his defense team.
• Then he screws up his courage to go to Eva's. He needs to know whether his worse fears are true: she now would conclude he is a physically violent person, one it would not be safe for her to continue to be around. Is it now over forever?

Firstly, didn't twig about the credit card, red flag?

Secondly, if Gideons legal eagles go to the police, so soon after Eva's visit, wouldn't it be a sign to Graves, that the pair had met?

Oh! What a mess. We need Victor!

[julie54]

Poor Gideons dug himself into a right hole.

Everyone feels sorry for Eva, the way she has been shamelessly treated, only she knows the truth. How hard must it be to have to listen to innuendo about the man you love.

As the saying goes, Oh what a tangled web we weave!

I've still got a nagging doubt about Monica though. There's no smoke without fire. I am still hanging out for a twist that she did it, and Gideons admitted doing it to save Eva the hurt of her mother being a killer. What he wouldn't do for Eva .

[Sharonm745]

I'll post the Sylvia meet and greet info here when she releases it. Maryse is the one organizing book bash. http://www.maryse.net/       http://bookbash.net/

 

I contacted Maryse.  The event is sold out so she put me on a wait list.  Regardless I'm going to Orlando with the hope that someone doesn't show and I can get in. 

[Donnad]

Gideon did the deed but I still have a feeling Monica and Stanton knew about it

[Donnad]

Right now I can't look at the exact wording but when eva walked into the apartment there was music on in Carey's bedroom. She assumed someone was in there with him. I'm wondering when Gideon showed up was someone still in Carey's room

[Sharonm745]

Gideon did the deed but I still have a feeling Monica and Stanton knew about it

 

I agree with you...I think.  All indications are that Gideon did it.  I don't hate him if he did, in fact, I completely understand it.  Monica has to be involved somehow even if it is just that fact that she knows what he did. 

[LN Cronan]

Gideon may have thought/hoped, right on up to when Eva told him otherwise, Graves had not yet seen through the lie he was living with Corrine.

 

Sure, he must have known he was chief suspect, and the cops were digging hard. He might have even now realized that via aggressive interviewing of people who worked at the party hotel, Graves found the hour-long disruption to the party (and thus the hour-long hole in his alibi.)

 

Yet he was probably counting on her still be thwarted by the Corrine-cover-story part of his plot. Because, officially, she hasn't busted that yet. And certainly, the cops never would be revealing secrets of their investigation to Gideon's defense. They're not required to turn over jack s*** to the defense before a suspect is arrested. Only after someone is charged is the prosecution required to start sharing evidence (known by the legal term "discovery") with the defense.

 

So now Gideon knows -- Graves isn't buying the Corrine cover.

 

Oh could this mean that Gideon now will back off, perhaps even "dump" Corrine. She's not much use to him anymore. And now that  Eva has come back, he's got some very serious amends to make for how he treated Eva via using Corrine against Eva emotionally.

 

The more I think about this, the more I think (hope) our least favorite brunette is buh-bye sooner than later. Like maybe Day Two of Entwined.

 

And not just because Gideon 1. doesn't want to cause another minute of pain to Eva and 2. the cops aren't buying the Corrine lie anyway, so he doesn't have to keep it going.

 

"Plausible deniability." That legal term Gideon's mentioned, something that's a fancy way of saying "lack of evidence."

 

Bear with one of my mini lessons in how the U.S. justice system works, per the way the U.S. Constitution set up the protections citizens have against the government, when the government seeks to criminally prosecute citizens.

 

• The government (the prosecution side of the trial) has the "burden of proof." That side always has the uphill battle of proving to a jury the defendant is guilty.
• The defense does NOT have to prove the defenant is innocent. In fact, technically the defense doesn't have to lift a finger. This is why, among other things, people have the "right to silence." The suspect doesn't have to convince the cops -- and ultimately the jury -- that he/she is innocent. The prosecution has to do all the work.
• In practice, the defense is very active in trials -- busy punching holes in the prosecution's case. Under the "right to face an accuser" the prosecution has to put its witnesses on the stand, and then the defense gets to question them too.
• Usually, the defense will put its own witnesses up as well, witnesses to sow doubts about the prosecution's side of the story. Witnesses who can convince the jury that something else happened, not what the prosecution claims happened.
• The defendant himself/herself does NOT ever have to testify. If the defense does not put the accused on the stand, for tactical reasons, then the judge has to pretty much bend over backwards to explain to the jury the jury cannot hold that against the accused in any way.
• Because there's a very good reason why defendants sometimes do not take the stand -- they don't have to face questions from the prosecutor. If a defendant does take the stand, he/she gives up the right to silence, and the prosecutor gets to ask him/her questions.

 

OK, with all of that in mind, how could this all apply to the fake Corrine-Gideon-Eva triangle?

• Gideon does NOT have to prove he loves Corrine.
• Gideon does NOT have to disprove he loves Eva.
• The cops/prosecutors are the ones who HAVE to prove Gideon loves Eva.
• If they cannot prove Gideon loves Eva, then Gideon has "plausible deniability" he loves her.

 

I think that when Gideon started taking out Corrine again, and he set up the party as an alibi, he was hoping that between the two, the cops would quickly eliminate him as a suspect. Other people who loved Eva enough to conceivably kill for her -- like Eva's mother -- also had motive. Why would he have motive if he had already dumped her? Going out with Corrine just made it more believable he dumped Eva. He didn't dump Eva for the ###### of it, he dumped her for Corrine.

 

Gideon's got a couple of alternative believable reasons why he dumped Eva while Nathan was still very much alive:

• He never was in love to begin with -- Eva was just some hot summer fling that burned itself out in a few weeks, and the fling was already over before Nathan got killed.
• He had been in love, but Eva broke his heart by "cheating" on him with Brett. He walked away from her broken-hearted well before Nathan got killed.

[Sharonm745]

Right now I can't look at the exact wording but when eva walked into the apartment there was music on in Carey's bedroom. She assumed someone was in there with him. I'm wondering when Gideon showed up was someone still in Carey's room

 

It wasn't mentioned yet but I assume there is.  I think Eva will check and give an all clear before Gideon leaves.

[julie54]

I agree with you...I think.  All indications are that Gideon did it.  I don't hate him if he did, in fact, I completely understand it.  Monica has to be involved somehow even if it is just that fact that she knows what he did. 

At least if Monica knew he did it, Stanton and Monica won't throw him to the wolves if the police come knocking. Eva would never forgive her mother if she did that.

[Sharonm745]

The more I think about this, the more I think (hope) our least favorite brunette is buh-bye sooner than later. Like maybe Day Two of Entwined.

 

And not just because Gideon 1. doesn't want to cause another minute of pain to Eva and 2. the cops aren't buying the Corrine lie anyway, so he doesn't have to keep it going.

 

"Plausible deniability." That legal term Gideon's mentioned, something that's a fancy way of saying "lack of evidence."

 

Bear with one of my mini lessons in how the U.S. justice system works, per the way the U.S. Constitution set up the protections citizens have against the government, when the government seeks to criminally prosecute citizens.

 

• The government (the prosecution side of the trial) has the "burden of proof." That side always has the uphill battle of proving to a jury the defendant is guilty.
• The defense does NOT have to prove the defenant is innocent. In fact, technically the defense doesn't have to lift a finger. This is why, among other things, people have the "right to silence." The suspect doesn't have to convince the cops -- and ultimately the jury -- that he/she is innocent. The prosecution has to do all the work.
• In practice, the defense is very active in trials -- busy punching holes in the prosecution's case. Under the "right to face an accuser" the prosecution has to put its witnesses on the stand, and then the defense gets to question them too.
• Usually, the defense will put its own witnesses up as well, witnesses to sow doubts about the prosecution's side of the story. Witnesses who can convince the jury that something else happened, not what the prosecution claims happened.
• The defendant himself/herself does NOT ever have to testify. If the defense does not put the accused on the stand, for tactical reasons, then the judge has to pretty much bend over backwards to explain to the jury the jury cannot hold that against the accused in any way.
• Because there's a very good reason why defendants sometimes do not take the stand -- they don't have to face questions from the prosecutor. If a defendant does take the stand, he/she gives up the right to silence, and the prosecutor gets to ask him/her questions.

 

OK, with all of that in mind, how could this all apply to the fake Corrine-Gideon-Eva triangle?

• Gideon does NOT have to prove he loves Corrine.
• Gideon does NOT have to disprove he loves Eva.
• The cops/prosecutors are the ones who HAVE to prove Gideon loves Eva.
• If they cannot prove Gideon loves Eva, then Gideon has "plausible deniability" he loves her.

 

I think that when Gideon started taking out Corrine again, and he set up the party as an alibi, he was hoping that between the two, the cops would quickly eliminate him as a suspect. Other people who loved Eva enough to conceivably kill for her -- like Eva's mother -- also had motive. Why would he have motive if he had already dumped her? Going out with Corrine just made it more believable he dumped Eva. He didn't dump Eva for the ###### of it, he dumped her for Corrine.

 

Gideon's got a couple of alternative believable reasons why he dumped Eva while Nathan was still very much alive:

• He never was in love to begin with -- Eva was just some hot summer fling that burned itself out in a few weeks, and the fling was already over before Nathan got killed.
• He had been in love, but Eva broke his heart by "cheating" on him with Brett. He walked away from her broken-hearted well before Nathan got killed.

 

So do you think that by day 2 Gideon is publicly back with Eva?  According to the one snippet she is out dancing pretending to be single.  I noticed that a few snippets are from Chapter 1/1.5 so they aren't necessarily in order.   Maybe the dance is day 2 and they decide to go public again.  I hope.  I want them to be together and working on their issues instead of apart (in appearance only) and working on their issues. 

[julie54]

The more I think about this, the more I think (hope) our least favorite brunette is buh-bye sooner than later. Like maybe Day Two of Entwined.

And not just because Gideon 1. doesn't want to cause another minute of pain to Eva and 2. the cops aren't buying the Corrine lie anyway, so he doesn't have to keep it going.

"Plausible deniability." That legal term Gideon's mentioned, something that's a fancy way of saying "lack of evidence."

Bear with one of my mini lessons in how the U.S. justice system works, per the way the U.S. Constitution set up the protections citizens have against the government, when the government seeks to criminally prosecute citizens.

• The government (the prosecution side of the trial) has the "burden of proof." That side always has the uphill battle of proving to a jury the defendant is guilty.
• The defense does NOT have to prove the defenant is innocent. In fact, technically the defense doesn't have to lift a finger. This is why, among other things, people have the "right to silence." The suspect doesn't have to convince the cops -- and ultimately the jury -- that he/she is innocent. The prosecution has to do all the work.
• In practice, the defense is very active in trials -- busy punching holes in the prosecution's case. Under the "right to face an accuser" the prosecution has to put its witnesses on the stand, and then the defense gets to question them too.
• Usually, the defense will put its own witnesses up as well, witnesses to sow doubts about the prosecution's side of the story. Witnesses who can convince the jury that something else happened, not what the prosecution claims happened.
• The defendant himself/herself does NOT ever have to testify. If the defense does not put the accused on the stand, for tactical reasons, then the judge has to pretty much bend over backwards to explain to the jury the jury cannot hold that against the accused in any way.
• Because there's a very good reason why defendants sometimes do not take the stand -- they don't have to face questions from the prosecutor. If a defendant does take the stand, he/she gives up the right to silence, and the prosecutor gets to ask him/her questions.

OK, with all of that in mind, how could this all apply to the fake Corrine-Gideon-Eva triangle?

• Gideon does NOT have to prove he loves Corrine.
• Gideon does NOT have to disprove he loves Eva.
• The cops/prosecutors are the ones who HAVE to prove Gideon loves Eva.
• If they cannot prove Gideon loves Eva, then Gideon has "plausible deniability" he loves her.

I think that when Gideon started taking out Corrine again, and he set up the party as an alibi, he was hoping that between the two, the cops would quickly eliminate him as a suspect. Other people who loved Eva enough to conceivably kill for her -- like Eva's mother -- also had motive. Why would he have motive if he had already dumped her? Going out with Corrine just made it more believable he dumped Eva. He didn't dump Eva for the ###### of it, he dumped her for Corrine.

Gideon's got a couple of alternative believable reasons why he dumped Eva while Nathan was still very much alive:

• He never was in love to begin with -- Eva was just some hot summer fling that burned itself out in a few weeks, and the fling was already over before Nathan got killed.
• He had been in love, but Eva broke his heart by "cheating" on him with Brett. He walked away from her broken-hearted well before Nathan got killed.

Hello from windy England .

IF, it did go to trial, would the jury be told about Nathan's past, his raping Eva and mental health problems. Plus any other misdemeanours that we don't know about. Could the defence use this information?

By the way, loving the history and law lessons. I look forward to them daily now. :)

[LN Cronan]

So do you think that by day 2 Gideon is publicly back with Eva?  According to the one snippet she is out dancing pretending to be single.  I noticed that a few snippets are from Chapter 1/1.5 so they aren't necessarily in order.   Maybe the dance is day 2 and they decide to go public again.  I hope.  I want them to be together and working on their issues instead of apart (in appearance only) and working on their issues. 

 

NO, Gideon can't go back to Eva yet. But he doesn't HAVE to stay with Corrine any more. In fact, it might be more plausible if he quit seeing Corrine and spent some time "unattached."

[LN Cronan]

Hello from windy England .

IF, it did go to trial, would the jury be told about Nathan's past, his raping Eva and mental health problems. Plus any other misdemeanours that we don't know about. Could the defence use this information?

By the way, loving the history and law lessons. I look forward to them daily now.

 

They could. Especially if the defense wanted to paint a picture that Gideon wasn't the only one who could have killed Nathan (or arranged to have him killed.) The defense could lay out the history of years of measures taken on Eva's behalf to protect her. Measures taken by her mother and also measures taken later by Stanton as well.

 

This does NOT mean the defense would throw Monica and Stanton under the bus, saying "they did it!!!" All the defense would need to do, by laying out all that old history, would be to plant seeds of doubt in the minds of the jurors, get them to think that "Well, maybe they, not Gideon Cross, were the ones who did it. So how can the prosecution say absolutely it must have been Gideon?" If the jurors can reasonably doubt Gideon must have done it -- then they cannot find him guilty.

[sscrph]

I hope there are not any babies yet. They need time to get to know each other, they are too emotionally screwed up at the moment with each other. Then we have the matter of Nathan's death. Could you imagine the pain of Gideon if the unspeakable did happen, never to see or hold his child or be involved in its upbringing. It would kill him.

I know Julie I am trying not to go down that road but I am 98percent sure that card says Happy Fathers Day unless it alludes to Victor returning. But also white roses have significant meaning. They symbolize purity, innocence, and secrecy. They also signify new beginnings so as I said before anything is possible in this series . I just don't understand why the new snapshot on FB?? Any ideas?

[julie54]

They could. Especially if the defense wanted to paint a picture that Gideon wasn't the only one who could have killed Nathan (or arranged to have him killed.) The defense could lay out the history of years of measures taken on Eva's behalf to protect her. Measures taken by her mother and also measures taken later by Stanton as well.

 

This does NOT mean the defense would throw Monica and Stanton under the bus, saying "they did it!!!" All the defense would need to do, by laying out all that old history, would be to plant seeds of doubt in the minds of the jurors, get them to think that "Well, maybe they, not Gideon Cross, were the ones who did it. So how can the prosecution say absolutely it must have been Gideon?" If the jurors can reasonably doubt Gideon must have done it -- then they cannot find him guilty.

Would they have to name Eva personally? I can't see Gideon letting her be subjected to all that questioning, it would slay him. But I do think if things got messy, Eva would take the stand. Anything to save her man.

[sscrph]

At least if Monica knew he did it, Stanton and Monica won't throw him to the wolves if the police come knocking. Eva would never forgive her mother if she did that.

I do not think Monica or Stanton KNOW Gideon didi it. They may have their suspicions but Gideon would never entrust this secret to anyone other than his inner circle meaning Angus or Eva. Monica and Stanton are not the inner circle. No way I think Gideon would ever divulge that info IMO...

[julie54]

I know Julie I am trying not to go down that road but I am 98percent sure that card says Happy Fathers Day unless it alludes to Victor returning. But also white roses have significant meaning. They symbolize purity, innocence, and secrecy. They also signify new beginnings so as I said before anything is possible in this series . I just don't understand why the new snapshot on FB?? Any ideas?

The new beginning, could be them not having to creep around anymore, and come out as a couple. But I doubt that, as the book only covers 2 weeks. Is this all going to go away in such a short time?

[sscrph]

NO, Gideon can't go back to Eva yet. But he doesn't HAVE to stay with Corrine any more. In fact, it might be more plausible if he quit seeing Corrine and spent some time "unattached."

Maybe he should take Deanna out again to make it look like he's a ladies man again !!! LOL

[LN Cronan]

Would they have to name Eva personally? I can't see Gideon letting her be subjected to all that questioning, it would slay him. But I do think if things got messy, Eva would take the stand. Anything to save her man.

 

Unfortunately, Eva's name would used, used very, very extensively in any trial. And this all would go on in open court, meaning reporters would be there. If news organizations chose to do so, they could name Eva in stories. In fact, under the circumstances, because everyone would be able to easily figure Eva was involved anyway, there wouldn't be much sense in leaving her name out.

 

Some of the U.S. constitutional rights of people accused of crimes is "right to face accuser" and "open trial"  These protections prevent the government from using secret evidence against people and from putting them on trial in secret. If the government is going to accuse a person of a crime, bring him/her to trial, and try to send the person to prison, the government has to handle the whole case out on the open where the citizenry (and the press) is fully aware of what the government is doing. It's meant to keep the government accountable.

[julie54]

I do not think Monica or Stanton KNOW Gideon didi it. They may have their suspicions but Gideon would never entrust this secret to anyone other than his inner circle meaning Angus or Eva. Monica and Stanton are not the inner circle. No way I think Gideon would ever divulge that info IMO...

I know Gideon won't have told them, but I'm sure the three of them were in cahoots. Monica is not as innocent as she makes out. Something is going on in the background. *d annoying!

[julie54]

Maybe he should take Deanna out again to make it look like he's a ladies man again !!! LOL

NO MORE BRUNETTES!!!

[sscrph]

They could. Especially if the defense wanted to paint a picture that Gideon wasn't the only one who could have killed Nathan (or arranged to have him killed.) The defense could lay out the history of years of measures taken on Eva's behalf to protect her. Measures taken by her mother and also measures taken later by Stanton as well.

 

This does NOT mean the defense would throw Monica and Stanton under the bus, saying "they did it!!!" All the defense would need to do, by laying out all that old history, would be to plant seeds of doubt in the minds of the jurors, get them to think that "Well, maybe they, not Gideon Cross, were the ones who did it. So how can the prosecution say absolutely it must have been Gideon?" If the jurors can reasonably doubt Gideon must have done it -- then they cannot find him guilty.

I think this is a good way for the defense to go if it comes to that. Knowing what we know about Nathan the possibility of other victims being out there opens a world of possibilities to others who may have wanted Nathan to pay for his misdeeds.. We dont know where Nathan has been these past years but who knows his DNA may show up as a match in other unsolved rape cases...

[julie54]

Unfortunately, Eva's name would used, used very, very extensively in any trial. And this all would go on in open court, meaning reporters would be there. If news organizations chose to do so, they could name Eva in stories. In fact, under the circumstances, because everyone would be able to easily figure Eva was involved anyway, there wouldn't be much sense in leaving her name out.

 

Some of the U.S. constitutional rights of people accused of crimes is "right to face accuser" and "open trial"  These protections prevent the government from using secret evidence against people and from putting them on trial in secret. If the government is going to accuse a person of a crime, bring him/her to trial, and try to send the person to prison, the government has to handle the whole case out on the open where the citizenry (and the press) is fully aware of what the government is doing. It's meant to keep the government accountable.

Gotcha.