>>97353574>By that logic, though, wouldn't it carry that the claims that Rose killed Pink Diamond should end up being the truth?
No, entirely the opposite. If Rose really had done it, then it would be retarded to cast suspicion only for it to be meaningless.
Episode of Scooby Doo.
Only two new characters shown, and one gets a huge amount of suspicion on them, to the point that clues entirely point to them and them alone.
Behind the mask ends up being, the other guy with NONE of the clues connecting to him at all, and him with no motive to set the other guy up either.
It would make no sense, and would be better to do it the opposite way. Have the hints on the person that DID do it, but make them more subtle.
THAT's how shows work. You lay truthful basic hints, and never lie to the audience about these. You can have red herrings AFTER the basic hints, but not during forming the foundation.
Basically, if Rose did it, why having the lawyer scene at all? Why have the lawyer accuse a diamond? Why cause confusion about something that was already straight forward?>>97353622
Yes, that's entirely it. Its obvious that Yellow regrets it, and if a person is so fucking stupid that they "can't imagine that kind of situation", then they are hopelessly lacking in tv show experience.
I still remember when people would say that "Tobi" having only one eye was a red herring to make people think it was Obito when it wasn't.