Whose fault was it?

Of course.


I just think that if the wife told the ferryman of what was going on, he could possibly give her a free ride and get a poliece officer or something...

But I believe most of the fault goes to the wife and the lover.

 

You bring a good point there. If she did tell him what was going on, he would've given her a free ride across. I don't think anyone would put somebody in danger when a situation like that comes across.

 

not really. say it wasn t present day.
say it was 1400 AD. they would just shrug it off, not giving a ****.

 

I wouldn't know about that, I don't know much about the past and stuff. So you lost me there.

 

sorry....
the thing is, no one cared much about other peoples lives too much. yeah sure, a dad or brother.... but they wouldnt give a **** for someone they didnt know. but hey, it was a hard life. you had to look after your family and yourself.

 

Yeah, I really don't pin the ferry man much at all with it since he didn't do anything other than deny the woman a free ride.

The lover was a jerk because he could obviously have sex with her but he too was just out for sex, and that seems in the end what their whole relationship was about. However, in the end he's not responsible for her. It's really cold and all but that's the reality of situation with an outside sex affiliate most often any way. You may want them to care but they are messing with a married person on purpose because there's no commitment most of the time. If she had lived, maybe she'd have learned that and stopped being stupid.

I still think that the woman and the murderer are the most at fault because she could have just waited instead of walking right to death's hands and well, the murderer was going to kill someone if he caught them.

 

Wording it just right, I agree with you on that. The woman is the person who's mostly at fault here. <_< I pointed out that she caused everything to happen in a way.

 

the wife.

1.She has a husband but she is not that loyal to him instead she has a lover which she is cheating on her husband if she didn't cross she would not have been murder.

 

obviously the murderer. murder is a bigger sin than cheating on someone. and if the murderer wasn't there, none of this would've happened (well....except the cheating)

 

I would object. the murderur had a right to be there. well, you know what i mean. what i am saying.... the wife would never had been murdered if she hadnt been cheating. so... she wouldnt have died if she wasnt cheating.

 

I have seen this before.....Oh it was in a novel called the Pigman by Paul Zindal.... It may take a while to locate!
*looks for book*
Ah here it is!
It says that you are suposed to list them in the order you think they are most guilty and then translate them into:
wife=fun
Husband=love
lover=sex
assasin=money
boatman=magic
Whichever you chose first is the one you are most interested in! Well that is what the book says! Mine was Magic, Fun, Sex, Money, Love!
P.S Sorry Hadn't read the first post well!

 

yeah, that was it. i was gonna write that, but couldnt find the book.

didnt both of the characters choose the boatman first?

 

Yep! That they did! I liked that book it was good!! And I agree If it wasn't for the boatman she would've lived!

 

well... i would say evrery has a tiny bit of fault in this. the wife mostly though.

 

Yeah but it really wasn't the husbands fault!

 

well, if had taken her, she wouldnt have been there.. but yeah.

 

But how was he to know that She was cheating on him? Oh what order did you get?

 

1st page...

 

Sorry like I said didn't read the first post too well.....

 

no problem! :D

Bobo...