Give him a minute to take that into its constituent parts. He wasn't expecting extended conversation, much less another direct line into the spoils of Ani's personal investigative process.
It's a lot of weight to throw behind an accusation that was light on detail. Some people will like that, find merit in the padding, proof in the past. There's good work here, connections drawn where so many of them wouldn't have known to draw connections.
But holes, too. And set dressing can't stick on the chasm between two different proposed victims.
The last time she'd given him her theories, he'd given her too many words and then nothing but silence. Now, he tries to take it one considered step at a time. Proofreader before the pitch goes out to print. ]
Spike wanted Armand for Giles. That seems to be the going theory. Who do you put on Giles, if you need Armand for Paul?
( doesn't mean she hasn't let the thought cook — just that it's come out rare. not quite to temperature, needs a little extra care before she can serve it and expect it'll satisfy any appetite for answers. the bubbles blip up, vanish. real-time footage of reeling through the options. for all they've faced and whatever's still waiting up ahead, stephen's a reliable pick for this — practice sessions for a mock jury before the real trial goes live. with its real teeth, hungry for blood and calling it justice.
she needs to get this right. koby needs her to get this right. )
if we're clearing august cuz his heads still holding up someone from doggy dog care who put their paws all over the crime scene his throat was torn into like a raw fucking steak. so i'm thinking newbie vamp or mutt with rabies
Edited (pretend i can spell PLEASE) 2025-10-21 23:47 (UTC)
[ For Giles, he means. Then again, for better or worse, no matter the evidence stacked against him, he's struggled to find Armand above anyone else in any of it. That makes it both easier and harder for him to say what comes next. ]
If your money's on him, I don't think creating doubt is going to help your numbers Shoring up an existing argument is one thing Providing an entirely new victim to fit a theory of tangled revenge one year in the making muddies the waters when you need them clear If Spike hadn't spoken up it would be different, but any public theory that contradicts his now will only show a lack of cohesion amongst those who believe Armand to be guilty, potentially weakening the argument for anyone undecided. Your word alone should be enough for the people already inclined to trust your insight.
[ In short: you don't need to do all that, if the priority is wanting him in cage. If the priority, however, is honesty, and to only put him there for reasons you're happy to stand behind - then back to the sounding board they go. ]
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Give him a minute to take that into its constituent parts. He wasn't expecting extended conversation, much less another direct line into the spoils of Ani's personal investigative process.
It's a lot of weight to throw behind an accusation that was light on detail. Some people will like that, find merit in the padding, proof in the past. There's good work here, connections drawn where so many of them wouldn't have known to draw connections.
But holes, too. And set dressing can't stick on the chasm between two different proposed victims.
The last time she'd given him her theories, he'd given her too many words and then nothing but silence. Now, he tries to take it one considered step at a time. Proofreader before the pitch goes out to print. ]
Spike wanted Armand for Giles. That seems to be the going theory. Who do you put on Giles, if you need Armand for Paul?
no subject
( doesn't mean she hasn't let the thought cook — just that it's come out rare. not quite to temperature, needs a little extra care before she can serve it and expect it'll satisfy any appetite for answers. the bubbles blip up, vanish. real-time footage of reeling through the options. for all they've faced and whatever's still waiting up ahead, stephen's a reliable pick for this — practice sessions for a mock jury before the real trial goes live. with its real teeth, hungry for blood and calling it justice.
she needs to get this right. koby needs her to get this right. )
if we're clearing august cuz his heads still holding up
someone from doggy dog care who put their paws all over the crime scene
his throat was torn into like a raw fucking steak. so i'm thinking newbie vamp or mutt with rabies
no subject
[ For Giles, he means. Then again, for better or worse, no matter the evidence stacked against him, he's struggled to find Armand above anyone else in any of it. That makes it both easier and harder for him to say what comes next. ]
If your money's on him, I don't think creating doubt is going to help your numbers
Shoring up an existing argument is one thing
Providing an entirely new victim to fit a theory of tangled revenge one year in the making muddies the waters when you need them clear
If Spike hadn't spoken up it would be different, but any public theory that contradicts his now will only show a lack of cohesion amongst those who believe Armand to be guilty, potentially weakening the argument for anyone undecided.
Your word alone should be enough for the people already inclined to trust your insight.
[ In short: you don't need to do all that, if the priority is wanting him in cage. If the priority, however, is honesty, and to only put him there for reasons you're happy to stand behind - then back to the sounding board they go. ]