Subject: Re: necklaces
From: podlozny@csli.Stanford.EDU (Ann Podlozny)
Date: 1990-04-18, 12:56
Newsgroups: alt.tv.twin-peaks,rec.arts.tv
Reply-to: podlozny@csli.stanford.edu (Ann Podlozny)

In article <1990Apr18.133017.4842@millipore.com> blu@millipore.com (Brian Utterback) writes:
> >Just a thought about the necklace(s); didn't we see Laura give James the 
> >Half-Heart in a flashback? 

yes.

> >If that is so, then why does it follow that the 
> >person with the half corresponding to the one at the scene of the crime is 
> >the murderer? 

I don't think it does, it just makes connections b/t people.

> >Wouldn't the half-heart be just as likely to prove that Laura 
> >and James were really in love, and that even if she said she couldn`t see her 
> >anymore she must still love him or she would have asked for it back? 
> >Seems to me that if the Sheriff finds out that Laura gave the half-heart to 
> >James and he no longer has it, then that casts suspicion on him.  (and how 
> >would James know that the Sheriff didn`t already know...it might have been in 
> >the diary). 

This is what makes me suspicious about Donna (although the poster who
made the Blue Velvet point about the squeaky clean in with the really
nasty was mighty perceptive...).  She had already been questioned by
Cooper, I think she knew they had the diary, they *certainly* had the
tape, and as above, just because he had the second half of the heart
wouldn't make him the killer anyway.  And he'd be brought in for
questioning once the relationship came out either way.  So why was
Donna so intent on getting rid of his half?  to protect him, fired
by her newly blooming love?  and if he's NOT guilty, then what's
all the fuss?  do they share some other secret, too?

> >Perhaps she did give half-hearts to all her lovers, making sure that it was 
> >always the same half.

that's what I thought at first, but no I'm not sure.  Someone with
a VCR should really check on the details of the necklaces/pendants...

ap