Brokeback Mountain: Our Community's Common Bond > Brokeback Mountain Fan Fiction & Poetry
Zero at the Bone by MadLori
ifyoucantfixit:
This was a particularly high anxiety chapter..Lots of no dont do thats, and holy craps...Then leaving the open ending duh!!! I am hoping she posts again soon.. I love it when she gets on these rolls.
mariez:
--- Quote from: ifyoucantfixit on October 19, 2007, 08:10:31 am ---
..Lots of no dont do thats, and holy craps...
--- End quote ---
Ditto to what everyone has said - and especially this, Janice. That's what I was saying as I read - and a lot more. LOL!
Sure hope the next chapter comes soon - and that it picks up precisely where this one leaves off!
Marie
Mikaela:
Don't get me wrong, I absolutely, totally love Zero, love Jack and D, and am waiting most eagerly for it to continue - and for the sequel. :) Still I though this last chapter was high on "huh?" moments, events that I couldn't quite make sense of.
So.... perhaps anyone can make sense of them to me? Here they are:
If the "evil lawyer" frequently made use of the "what colour are my eyes" ploy, and everyone knew it, why hadn't the DA and the people prepping Jack warned him of that beforehand?
Now that Jack's testimony is on record, why didn't the hitman just kill Jack in the bar, or outside the bar? Why the intricate plot to abduct him somewhere first - risking the hitman's life up close and personal, and involving hidden helpers, and syringes and whatnot - much that could go wrong? I thought at this stage the whole point for the brothers would be to kill Jack to show other potential witnesses what happens to anyone who don't keep mum. And if so - they'd want the death as public as possible, wouldn't they? Shooting Jack in the bar would be perfect to get that point across. And if Jack could have a note pressed into his hand, he sure could be killed. (Eeep!! :o )
Did the Dominguez (sp?) brothers *know* about Jack and D? I mean, of course they know D was supposed to kill Jack and didn't do it, but protected him instead. But how did they know or guess that Jack would go all out to put his life on the line for D? The mysterious "others" who are after D and still wants him to kill Jack, know much more about J&D's relationship, sure enough - but... I though they were an entirely separate entity from the Brothers. Or....are the two "bad guy groups" communicating?
ifyoucantfixit:
There are a few plot holes..like why did Churchill take him to the f***ing bar at all..Why did Jack decide to
go out back,...Why didnt D just stay in the room with him as before..? But once that was set into motion the
rest of it makes sense...They want D, not Jack..Jack is merely a means to the end. If they kill Jack D will still
be out of pocket...so they needed to capture jack in order for their plan to complete...
mariez:
--- Quote from: Mikaela link=topic=5212.msg271900#msg271900 date=
1192834224 ---If the "evil lawyer" frequently made use of the "what colour are my eyes" ploy, and everyone knew it, why hadn't the DA and the people prepping Jack warned him of that beforehand?
--- End quote ---
Mikaela, that is an excellent point - and Jack's lack of preparation regarding his cross-examination is something that I raised in my comments on Lori's lj. It makes me suspicious of Brad, the prosecutor. As a prosecutor myself (not a big-shot fed, just a lowly county assistant prosecutor), I know that the direct testimony of your witness is the easier part - you can control that. You know exactly what you're going to ask and your prep your own witness accordingly. It's the cross that holds all the minefields, and a good prosecutor will always role play with his witness, actually go through a mock cross-examination to try to anticipate where the defense will trip him up and prepare him for that. When we heard Jack thinking that he didn't know what to expect from the defense lawyer, I thought "uh oh." You can't know exactly, of course, but he should have had at least some idea of what to expect. And then when Brad mentioned at the bar that the defense guy used that eye color thing before - that rang all kinds of warning bells for me.
--- Quote from: Mikaela on October 19, 2007, 06:50:24 pm ---Now that Jack's testimony is on record, why didn't the hitman just kill Jack in the bar, or outside the bar? Why the intricate plot to abduct him somewhere first - risking the hitman's life up close and personal, and involving hidden helpers, and syringes and whatnot - much that could go wrong? I thought at this stage the whole point for the brothers would be to kill Jack to show other potential witnesses what happens to anyone who don't keep mum. And if so - they'd want the death as public as possible, wouldn't they? Shooting Jack in the bar would be perfect to get that point across. And if Jack could have a note pressed into his hand, he sure could be killed. (Eeep!! :o )
--- End quote ---
I believe Janice is right - they wanted D, not Jack - they know Jack has a personal relationship with D because of Jack's own testimony that he was involved with someone while in hiding (it had to have been D - they were on the run together) so they were counting on the fact that Jack would risk his life for D. I did understand why Jack went outside, I thought his internal dialogue and the way he argued with himself was great, but I don't think we know yet whether the two separate bad guy groups are communicating - we don't even know yet exactly why the second group wants D.
And, I have to agree with Janice - Churchill agreeing to let Jack go to that bar was a bonehead move, letting him out of his sight at the bar was another bonehead move, you just can't take chances like that, no matter how sorry you feel for the witness ..... but, it did bring D and Jack together! I am so anxious for the next chapter!
Marie
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version