Innocent Victims

Dr. Lawrence Gordon's family (Wife and Daughter), Zep's task was to kill them if Gordon failed, they did nothing wrong so killing them would have gone against everything Jigsaw stands for (As he lost his own wife and child).

Bobby Dagen's wife, she was innocent, she had no idea her husband was lying, so why did she get killed because of something her husband did, another epic flaw.

These 3 victims were killed because of what there husbands had done, they could have all been included in the games but they didnt have to die.

Eric matthews son Daniel was put into Erics game but Daniel wasnt designed to die he was just being used as a pawn, Jeff and Lyns daughter Corbett Denlon was also used as a pawn but was never designed to die.

My point being Gordons family and also bobby's wife could have been used as pawns also and didnt have to die, 3 innocent people were meant to die but 2 were not meant to die, IMO epic fail.

Correction: I know Gordons family survived but that was only because David Tapp saved them and chased after Zep, if it wasnt for Tapp they would be dead, they were designed to die.

I know what you mean,
I also think some victims were put into a test way above the seriousness of their 'crime'.

No, Addison and Diana (Gordon's family) were never meant to die. John's plan was for Hoffman to plant Gordon's penlight so that Tapp would get obsessed with Gordon. John knew that Tapp had an apartment near Gordon's and he knew that Tapp would be watching Gordon's house somehow. Addison and Diana were SAVED by Tapp. Gordon's family was never meant to die just another part of John's "lies."

	tdaigle23 wrote:
	No, Addison and Diana (Gordon's family) were never meant to die. John's plan was for Hoffman to plant Gordon's penlight so that Tapp would get obsessed with Gordon. John knew that Tapp had an apartment near Gordon's and he knew that Tapp would be watching Gordon's house somehow. Addison and Diana were SAVED by Tapp. Gordon's family was never meant to die just another part of John's "lies."

Sometimes the twists and turns of the Saw series can make your head spin. John had Gordon framed for being Jigsaw, but that didn't go over with the police, then Gordon was put in a trap. Did he plan this all along? When he put Gordon in the trap, was it with the idea that Gordon was being 'tested' for an apprenticeship?

As far as innocent victims go, I agree that Gordon's family was probably not meant to die, however, Bobby Dagen's wife was set up to die if he failed his game, and she didn't deserve it. I would have liked it better if the threat against her life was there, but it wasn't a reality, that if he didn't pass his test, he would have been the one to die, not his wife, who was shown from the beginning to have been innocent.

ya that always bothered me about Bobby's wife, she was so innocent. She seemed like the nicest person in the world. But i think that jigsaw was showing him how far a simple lie can go.

By now you should've realized that Jigsaw is a hypocrite and murderer.

	Rob wrote:
	By now you should've realized that Jigsaw is a hypocrite and murderer.

I think it's a question of semantics. For example, we say "murder" and he says "choice." And he is a hypocrite because he says he never kills anyone but he has set up traps where death is inevitable for some people (such as the carousel trap in Saw VI).

Mrs Kramer wrote:

	Rob wrote:
	By now you should've realized that Jigsaw is a hypocrite and murderer.

I think it's a question of semantics. For example, we say "murder" and he says "choice." And he is a hypocrite because he says he never kills anyone but he has set up traps where death is inevitable for some people (such as the carousel trap in Saw VI).

Even if we completely ignore our own moral and if Jigsaws games would be considered "murder" by the law (they definitely would), Jigsaw is a murderer by his own definition. He clearly states what he views as murder and what he views as a "test". Traps like, let's say, Michael's eye trap with the death mask can be considered a "test" according to Jigsaws own definition, because Michael can prove his survival instinct to survive.

Traps like the freezer room give the victim no chance to prove their survival instinct and thus are inescapable, which is what Jigsaw calls "murder". So, he's a MURDERER.

Quote:

Even if we completely ignore our own moral and if Jigsaws games would be considered "murder" by the law (they definitely would), Jigsaw is a murderer by his own definition. He clearly states what he views as murder and what he views as a "test". Traps like, let's say, Michael's eye trap with the death mask can be considered a "test" according to Jigsaws own definition, because Michael can prove his survival instinct to survive.

Traps like the freezer room give the victim no chance to prove their survival instinct and thus are inescapable, which is what Jigsaw calls "murder". So, he's a MURDERER.

I agree mostly, I think we're susposed to have our own views on John, I think some people think we're susposed to like him and understand what he's doing, which we can sometimes, but some of his traps are controversial. Either way it is illegal and sort of under the definition of murder or attempted murder if you kidnap someone and put them in a situation where they may kill themselves when they don't want to, even if they do deserve it. Smile

And yes I do agree that he can sometimes come under his own definition.

In some situations a trap is designed so that someone will die, with no possible chance of survival, such as in Saw VI where William had to choose between his secretary and the file clerk. The way the trap was designed, one or both would die. There was no way to save them both. And in the carousel trap William could only save two people. The trap was only designed to save two and William's only choice was to decide which two would live. Four people would have to die. So in those instances alone he would be considered a murderer.

There is an entire topic on the forum called The Trial of John Kramer where it is discussed whether or not John is guilty of murder. It's very interesting what the different opinions are!

I haven't seen that topic I should look.
But yeah I get what you're saying, it's just he says he hates murderers but he often puts people in the situation where one has to die.

	Carnage wrote:
	I haven't seen that topic I should look. But yeah I get what you're saying, it's just he says he hates murderers but he often puts people in the situation where one has to die.

Yes, and in those situations he is definitely a hypocrite. His logic is flawed.

	tdaigle23 wrote:
	ya that always bothered me about Bobby's wife, she was so innocent. She seemed like the nicest person in the world. But i think that jigsaw was showing him how far a simple lie can go.

But was she put there because Hoffman was in charge of the test? Do we actually know how many test/ traps John had planned prior to his death?

Andserkiel wrote:

	tdaigle23 wrote:
	ya that always bothered me about Bobby's wife, she was so innocent. She seemed like the nicest person in the world. But i think that jigsaw was showing him how far a simple lie can go.

But was she put there because Hoffman was in charge of the test? Do we actually know how many test/ traps John had planned prior to his death?

Because of the flashback with John and Bobby Dagen, it would appear that the game was created by him. I think that Hoffman re-worked the trap with the wife, the way he fixed other traps so that survival was not an option.