This is really interesting~ it also begs for a debate between the readers and questioning their morals~
My personal belief is that if a murder is committed, to be forgiven the murderer must either be: 1. In a dire situation with limited options 2. Acting in a way that would prevent future murders/ future harm 3. Done with no bad/ill intentions (negotiable depending on the case) 4. Showed regret and redeemed themselves (negotiable, because this can usually only be judged by the victim)
So let’s analyse the verdicts with my standards and beliefs set out ᕦ(ò_óˇ)ᕤ
Gentle is quite an easy verdict, and it makes sense because he’s the first, I believe he is guilty. He was not in a dire situation, he did not do it to protect someone and he did it with very bad intentions. It could be argued that he saved someone by accident by I ask you to reread this sentence. ‘By accident’, if that man didn’t happen to be a murderer, he would not care if he killed an innocent man. He also didn’t show any regret or remorse after the murder, not even happy he helped someone. Sure, he had a sister who was dying, but I ask, what about the man he killed? Does he not also have a family? He killed for pleasure and because he wanted to. Guilty.
Nervous is a bit of an interesting case. I think her past of self harm is very sad, but that past does not justify killing someone. So let’s push that aside for now and instead discuss what is more difficult. Her murder was done in revenge of her senpai who she admired. Let’s go through my checklist shall we? Was she in a dire situation? No. Was she acting in a way that would prevent future harm? This is negotiable. I believe that if he hypothetically lived, he would not kill/harm other people. I would also like to know how she was killed though because it would give more insight. Did he kill her? Did the senpai kill herself? But we can only work with what we have. Did she do it with bad intentions? Also negotiable, she did it in order to revenge her senpai. This is my personal belief, ‘overbearing revenge done for the dead is for the selfish living’. Basically, the dead all deserve the right to want their death known, but forgiveness and punishment should only be decided by the victim. If the victim is dead and someone alive wants revenge, they are arguable selfish. From what Nervous tells us about her senpai, I think she would be the type to forgive them. Of course, I assume and this is from Nervous’ perspective. I think she should have had the evidence given to her handed over to the police. This is a situation that needed a third person perspective because Nervous is obviously biased. I believe she is guilty, but I am open to a discussion on what you think.
This is really interesting~ it also begs for a debate between the readers and questioning their morals~
My personal belief is that if a murder is committed, to be forgiven the murderer must either be:
1. In a dire situation with limited options
2. Acting in a way that would prevent future murders/ future harm
3. Done with no bad/ill intentions (negotiable depending on the case)
4. Showed regret and redeemed themselves (negotiable, because this can usually only be judged by the victim)
So let’s analyse the verdicts with my standards and beliefs set out ᕦ(ò_óˇ)ᕤ
Gentle is quite an easy verdict, and it makes sense because he’s the first, I believe he is guilty. He was not in a dire situation, he did not do it to protect someone and he did it with very bad intentions. It could be argued that he saved someone by accident by I ask you to reread this sentence. ‘By accident’, if that man didn’t happen to be a murderer, he would not care if he killed an innocent man. He also didn’t show any regret or remorse after the murder, not even happy he helped someone. Sure, he had a sister who was dying, but I ask, what about the man he killed? Does he not also have a family? He killed for pleasure and because he wanted to. Guilty.
Nervous is a bit of an interesting case. I think her past of self harm is very sad, but that past does not justify killing someone. So let’s push that aside for now and instead discuss what is more difficult. Her murder was done in revenge of her senpai who she admired. Let’s go through my checklist shall we? Was she in a dire situation? No. Was she acting in a way that would prevent future harm? This is negotiable. I believe that if he hypothetically lived, he would not kill/harm other people. I would also like to know how she was killed though because it would give more insight. Did he kill her? Did the senpai kill herself? But we can only work with what we have. Did she do it with bad intentions? Also negotiable, she did it in order to revenge her senpai. This is my personal belief, ‘overbearing revenge done for the dead is for the selfish living’. Basically, the dead all deserve the right to want their death known, but forgiveness and punishment should only be decided by the victim. If the victim is dead and someone alive wants revenge, they are arguable selfish. From what Nervous tells us about her senpai, I think she would be the type to forgive them. Of course, I assume and this is from Nervous’ perspective. I think she should have had the evidence given to her handed over to the police. This is a situation that needed a third person perspective because Nervous is obviously biased. I believe she is guilty, but I am open to a discussion on what you think.