So Im Hoping The Next Ep Is 40 Mins Again To Account For Surprise! Its Actually A Third Person! - Tumblr Posts
DRDT SPOILERS
all the theories/evidence/etc I still want answered before we wrap up this trial:
- what was the ball of clothes for? why/how were they starchy?? (and how did the culprit know about the old clothes)
- how and when did the culprit get the fish w/out Nico noticing
- what did Nico tell Hu to get the wire from her
- did the culprit use turpentine? if so, how did they get it, and if not, how did they knock Arei out?
- is the origin of anything else in the crime scene in any way important (where and when did the culprit get the rope, empty jugs, something to cut the rope with, etc.)
- how on earth did Nico come up with that crazy murder method???
- why the hell was MonoTV so urgent and insistent on cleaning up Nico’s crime scene so fast (I don’t think we’re actually gonna get an answer to that but why?????)
- what’s up with the scuffs on the ground + the broken light
- what’s up with Arei’s missing glove!!
- was someone actually following Eden in that scene where she thought she was being followed?
- how did the culprit figure out how Nico’s hanging attempt worked without seeing it in action (5 secs while actively being murdered shouldn’t count!)
- why did the person who took the tape think to do so (and do so without anyone else noticing) considering the circumstances
- why hasn’t anyone brought up that someone could’ve easily stolen the tape from whoever took it? (or even just asked to borrow it??) we just recently addressed how dangerous it is to narrow down the suspect pool without solid proof but I don’t think Teruko will make another ‘mistake’ this trial??
- why and how did the culprit listen in on the Eden/Arturo/Arei scene
- why did the culprit target Arei specifically?
- the fact that the culprit misspelled a bunch of stuff in their letter has to be relevant right
- why and how did the culprit move Arei’s body to the swingset?
- why hasn’t anyone brought up that Arei theoretically could’ve been murdered at night and then moved in the morning!!
- why haven’t we addressed that the murderer could’ve had an accomplice, rendering many alibis useless??
like I dunno, it just feels like David just brought up that we need to consider every possibility when looking at suspects and yet we narrowed down the suspects to two people when theoretically it could still be someone else even with the evidence? i don’t think I’m wording this well but… (like it doesn’t have to be likely or even plausible, it just has to be possible for it to be something Teruko should consider? or maybe I’m reading to deeply into David’s latest monologue idk)