| Author | Message | ||
| Jennifer (Tigger32382)
|
did eddie spend more time with bert than with his parents? did he pick up a bad habit from bert? contract a disease from bert? | ||
| Haenlomal (Haenlomal)
|
Just to clarify: if Bert had not met Eddie after Simon had let the former go, Jane would not have comitted suicide? Simon would not have commited suicide? | ||
| Jens Weber (Sundowner)
|
Jennifer did eddie spend more time with bert than with his parents? From some point on, yes. did he pick up a bad habit from bert? No. contract a disease from bert? No. Haenlomal Just to clarify: if Bert had not met Eddie after (FA) Simon had let the former go, Jane would not have comitted suicide? Yes. Simon would not have commited suicide? Yes. There might be a fundamental false assumption behind all these questions ... | ||
| Jennifer (Tigger32382)
|
Did Bert already know Eddie before Simon let him go? Was Eddie a baby when Simon let Bert go? Was he a young child? teenager? young adult? | ||
| Jens Weber (Sundowner)
|
Did Bert already know Eddie before Simon let him go? Yes. Was Eddie a baby when Simon let Bert go? No. Was he a young child? teenager? young adult? Teenager. (around 17) (FA became obvious) | ||
| Haenlomal (Haenlomal)
|
Ok...so Bert met Eddie before Simon let Bert go? If that's true, would Simon have let Bert go if Bert has never met Eddie? | ||
| Jens Weber (Sundowner)
|
Ok...so Bert met Eddie before Simon let Bert go? Yes. If that's true, would Simon have let Bert go if Bert has never met Eddie? Probably not. Good question!  | ||
| Ixoye724 (Ixoye724)
|
Did Eddie help Bert commit a crime? Therefore if Simon had prosecuted Bert, he'd have to prosecute his own son as well? | ||
| Haenlomal (Haenlomal)
|
And just to tie up a potential lose end....after Simon had let Bert go, did Bert meet up with Eddie? | ||
| Jens Weber (Sundowner)
|
Antique Greek Fish 724 Did Eddie help Bert commit a crime? Actually, yes. (but beware of a false conclusion) Therefore if Simon had prosecuted Bert, he'd have to prosecute his own son as well? At least it would have been more difficult to avoid, once the High Court of Saxony had opened a trial against Bert and the link between Bert and Eddie came to the knowledge of the higher judicative. Haenlomal And just to tie up a potential lose end....after Simon had let Bert go, did Bert meet up with Eddie? Yes. You might wish to clear up a false assumption that is still behind your questions. (No .. don't blame me -- I answered all questions accurately and pointed out the FA many times.) | ||
| Ixoye724 (Ixoye724)
|
Was Simon an unknowing accomplice to the crime? Was Eddie an unknowing accomplice? Did Eddie voluntarily abet Bert? | ||
| Jens Weber (Sundowner)
|
Was Simon an unknowing accomplice to the crime? No. Was Eddie an unknowing accomplice? This is hard to answer, due to the nature of the "crime". Did Eddie voluntarily abet Bert? Yesish. | ||
| Tim A. Dowd (Bodo)
|
Was the crime committed against Eddie? Sodomy or something similar? Were there others involved in the crime besides Bert and Eddie? | ||
| Jens Weber (Sundowner)
|
Was the crime committed against Eddie? No. Sodomy or something similar? What is similar to sodomy, in your eyes? Were there others involved in the crime besides Bert and Eddie? No. You don't want to clear up the FA, do you? | ||
| Ixoye724 (Ixoye724)
|
I guess we'd clear up that pesky FA if we knew what it dealt with... Is Bert related to Simon? (I think we covered this but want to be sure) Was Bert a teenager at the time of his offense? Was he the same age as Eddie at the time? | ||
| Jens Weber (Sundowner)
|
I guess we'd clear up that pesky FA if we knew what it dealt with... I know ... Is Bert related to Simon? No. (I think we covered this but want to be sure) Was Bert a teenager at the time of his offense? I'm not sure what offense you mean, but he started his criminal career around the age of 18 and was 28 in 1795. Was he the same age as Eddie at the time? He was 11 years older, and not only at that time. | ||
| Jens Weber (Sundowner)
|
THE THIEF OF ... Characters: Simon, local judge Jane, Simon's wife Eddie, Simon's and Jane's child Bert, a criminal Local people, peasants, woodcutters, cattle traders, grocers, fishwives. The High Court of Saxony, soldiers. Scene 1: A small town in Saxony, 1795. The High Court sends out soldiers to arrest Bert and to end his long lasting criminal career. Simon, the local judge, instead of assisting the soldiers, goes to Bert's cabin and warns him. He does this not to help Bert in the first place, but to avoid unpleasant consequences for himself and his child, Eddie. These unpleasant consequences are related to a crime in which both, Bert and Eddie, were involved. A trial before the High Court would very likely bring this crime to the knowledge of the honorable members of high judicative and Simon would not have another chance but to jail in his own child. Thanks to Simon's warning, Bert escapes prosecution and flees over the border to Bohemia. Scene 2: Many places, 1795-1807. Many things happen during these years of turmoil in Europe. Including the Reichsdeputationshauptschluss which was the true reason that for centuries no German was elected Pope. Completely irrelevant here, though. However, some events of relevance happened. Scene 3: The same small town, 1807. Jane drinks poison. Although her suicide is a highly emotional act, it has something planful in it and is a reaction to the development the things took during the last 12 years. Some hours after finding Jane, Simon commits suicide as well, out of sadness and despair for the loss of his wife. Your job is now to find out: 1) What is Bert's and Eddie's common crime? 2) What is the false assumption still prevalent here? 3) What is the unusual thing in the relationship between Simon and Jane? (not really necessary, but could help you to discover the reason for Jane's suicide) | ||
| Ixoye724 (Ixoye724)
|
Simon and Jane aren't brother and sister, are they? cousins? other family relation? Were Bert and Eddie the only two people involved in the original crime/crimes? | ||
| Haenlomal (Haenlomal)
|
Trying to clear up FA: Was it something to do with Bert? Something to do with Simon? Something to do with Jane? Something to do with Eddie? Something about the relationship between Simon and Bert? Something about the relationship between Simon and Jane? Something about the relationship between Simon and Eddie? Something about the relationship between Bert and Eddie? Something about the relationship between Bert and Jane? Something about the relationship between Eddie and Jane? Something to do with when the crime was committed? Something about the crime itself? Something to do with the time when Bert and Eddie met? Something about the number of times total that Bert and Eddie met? Something about how Simon let Bert go? Something about how many times Simon let Bert go? Something else? Oh, one final thought, does the false assumption have something do with assuming someone (or multiple someones) are dead when they were in fact alive? Vice versa? | ||
| Jennifer (Tigger32382)
|
did they both aid and abet another criminal? were they involved in robbery? treason? vandalism? murder? some other violent crime? tax fraud? | ||
| Jens Weber (Sundowner)
|
Ixoye724 Simon and Jane aren't brother and sister, are they? No. cousins? Neither. other family relation? No. They are not related by blood in any way. Were Bert and Eddie the only two people involved in the original crime/crimes? Yes. Haenlomal Trying to clear up FA: Good idea. Was it something to do with Bert? Something to do with Simon? Something to do with Jane? Something to do with Eddie? Yes. Something about the relationship between Simon and Bert? Something about the relationship between Simon and Jane? Something about the relationship between Simon and Eddie? Something about the relationship between Bert and Eddie? Yes. Something about the relationship between Bert and Jane? Something about the relationship between Eddie and Jane? Something to do with when the crime was committed? Something about the crime itself? Possibly. Something to do with the time when Bert and Eddie met? Something about the number of times total that Bert and Eddie met? Possibly. Something about how Simon let Bert go? Something about how many times Simon let Bert go? Something else? No to the rest. Oh, one final thought, does the false assumption have something do with assuming someone (or multiple someones) are dead when they were in fact alive? Vice versa? No. In Scene 1 Simon, Jane, Bert, and Eddie are alive. At the end of scene 3, Simon and Jane are dead, Bert and Eddie are alive. Jennifer did they both aid and abet another criminal? No. were they involved in robbery? treason? vandalism? murder? some other violent crime? tax fraud? Nothing like this. | ||
| Jennifer (Tigger32382)
|
did Bert and Eddie never actually meet? were they both members of the same crime ring/organization/something else that comitted this crime, and maybe knew of each other, but didn't meet? did Bert know Eddie was Simon and Jane's son? |
