List of Shows



    Around the Web


    Tell your friends

    TELL YOUR FRIENDS

    The Young and the Restless - MESSAGE BOARDS

    Soaps Boards :: The Young and the Restless Forum :: SPECULATON: HOW Phyllis CAN PROVE HER SHE DIDN'T

    Please register and login to be able to post in this message board.

    SPECULATON: HOW Phyllis CAN PROVE HER SHE DIDN'T

    Started by vampiresrule at 2012/07/14 07:02AM
    Latest post: 2012/07/18 09:24AM, Views: 7116, Replies: 232
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 » »| page:
    #1   2012/07/14 07:02AM
    SPECULATON: HOW Phyllis CAN PROVE HER SHE DIDN'T
    vampiresrule
    image

    NOT A SPOILLER!

    mean to kill Christine or Paul. She could take a lie detector test. That would prove whether or not she was trying to scare them or kill them. It's not admissible in court but it does prove INTENT.

    I find it very interesting that the Paul and Michael are the ones involved in this case against Phyllis! She could take both of them down with her! Kidnapping is a federal crime, NOT a state crime!

    #2   2012/07/14 07:14AM
    Re: SPECULATON: HOW Phyllis CAN PROVE HER SHE DIDN'T
    lil73
    image

    Quote vampiresrule: NOT A SPOILLER!

    mean to kill Christine or Paul. She could take a lie detector test. That would prove whether or not she was trying to scare them or kill them. It's not admissible in court but it does prove INTENT.

    I find it very interesting that the Paul and Michael are the ones involved in this case against Phyllis! She could take both of them down with her! Kidnapping is a federal crime, NOT a state crime!


    Well Phyllis would not pass a lie detector test. Phyllis has given two reasons now for her actions. To Daniel she said it was an accident her foot hit the wrong pedal and to Nick she said it was a Mistake and when pushed by Nick she said she did not know why she did it. So which is it?????

    #3   2012/07/14 08:03AM
    Re: SPECULATON: HOW Phyllis CAN PROVE HER SHE DIDN'T
    lovinthesoaps
    image

    Other than a lie detector test, there is no way to prove that Phyllis did not try to kill Paul and Christine. All the evidence points to the contrary. She rented a car, disguised herself, hated Christine and covered her behind when the deed was done. These are not the actions of a person who hit someone with their car by accident.

    #4   2012/07/14 08:12AM
    Re: SPECULATON: HOW Phyllis CAN PROVE HER SHE DIDN'T
    Backstreet
    image

    A friend of mine suggested this and I believe that it makes perfect sense. It is a creative and sensable explanation for it all.

    Since the rerun is being rewritten to show that Dr. Tim knew about this hit and run then I think that Dr. Tim should be held accountable for Phyllis's actions. Phyllis was seeing Dr. Tim professionaly and it would stand to reason that he put her on medications that he thought would help her with her OCD and anxiety. It wasn't known, however, until later that the drugs that he had Phyllis on would have adverse reactions on the patients that he gave them to. Phyllis was on medications that made her OCD worse and her moments of obcession more magnified and the reason that Dr. Tim is not able to practice today is because he had his license pulled for not advising his patients of the severe side effects of the medications that he was giving them without monitoring thier results.

    That would explain all of this that happened to Phyllis and why it was not really her intention to do any of this but the medication that she was taking because she trusted that Dr. Tim knew what he was giving her. She was deathly afraid of what she did and couldn't explain herself and probably still can't because she was never told that the medication could and did make her react this way.

    It makes perfect sense to me because if the writers want to bring up this 20 year old antique and they want to redeem themselves for this writer mistake, this would make sense and be a respectable and very believable end to it.

    #5   2012/07/14 08:28AM
    Re: SPECULATON: HOW Phyllis CAN PROVE HER SHE DIDN'T
    Niore Beaute
    image

    [quote]Quote Backstreet: A friend of mine suggested this and I believe that it makes perfect sense. It is a creative and sensable explanation for it all.

    Since the rerun is being rewritten to show that Dr. Tim knew about this hit and run then I think that Dr. Tim should be held accountable for Phyllis's actions. Phyllis was seeing Dr. Tim professionaly and it would stand to reason that he put her on medications that he thought would help her with her OCD and anxiety. It wasn't known, however, until later that the drugs that he had Phyllis on would have adverse rreactions on the patients that he gave them to. Phyllis was on medications that made her OCD worse and her moments of obcession more magnified and the reason that Dr. Tim is not able to practice today is because he had his license pulled for not advising his patients of the severe side effects of the medications that he was giving them without monitoring thier results.

    That would explain all of this that happened to Phyllis and why it was not really her intention to do any of this but the medication that she was taking because she trusted that Dr. Tim knew what he was giving her. She was deathly afraid of what she did and couldn't explain herself and probably still can't because she was never told that the medication could and did make her react this way.

    It makes perfect sense to me because if the writers want to bring up this 20 year old antique and they want to redeem themselves for this writer mistake, this would make sense and be a respectable and very believable end to it.[/quote

    Thr Hippicratic oath clears Dr. Reid. He is sworn by silence due to patient/doctor privilege

    Modified 1 times(s), last time at: 2012/07/14 08:31AM
    #6   2012/07/14 08:41AM
    Re: SPECULATON: HOW Phyllis CAN PROVE HER SHE DIDN'T
    Backstreet
    image

    [quote]Quote Niore Beaute: [quote]Quote Backstreet: A friend of mine suggested this and I believe that it makes perfect sense. It is a creative and sensable explanation for it all.

    Since the rerun is being rewritten to show that Dr. Tim knew about this hit and run then I think that Dr. Tim should be held accountable for Phyllis's actions. Phyllis was seeing Dr. Tim professionaly and it would stand to reason that he put her on medications that he thought would help her with her OCD and anxiety. It wasn't known, however, until later that the drugs that he had Phyllis on would have adverse rreactions on the patients that he gave them to. Phyllis was on medications that made her OCD worse and her moments of obcession more magnified and the reason that Dr. Tim is not able to practice today is because he had his license pulled for not advising his patients of the severe side effects of the medications that he was giving them without monitoring thier results.

    That would explain all of this that happened to Phyllis and why it was not really her intention to do any of this but the medication that she was taking because she trusted that Dr. Tim knew what he was giving her. She was deathly afraid of what she did and couldn't explain herself and probably still can't because she was never told that the medication could and did make her react this way.

    It makes perfect sense to me because if the writers want to bring up this 20 year old antique and they want to redeem themselves for this writer mistake, this would make sense and be a respectable and very believable end to it.[/quote

    Thr Hippicratic oath clears Dr. Reid. He is sworn by silence due to patient/doctor privilege[/quote

    With all due respect, this is over your head. You just missed the point completely. This has nothing to do with the Hipa. This is a doctor who had his license pulled for giving medications to his patients that wasn't fully FDA approved. He didn't tell his patients that the drug was experimental. Phyllis had no idea of what happened to Tim and she had no idea of the complications of medications that she was taking at the time. If They are looking for Dr. Tim, and I am sure that they will want to dig him up out of the dark, it will come up why he lost his license to practice and he may have to testify that he, in fact, gave Phyllis this medication and for how long she was on the medication. And yes, he will have to testify to that, under oath.

    #7   2012/07/14 08:42AM
    Re: SPECULATON: HOW Phyllis CAN PROVE HER SHE DIDN'T
    Its not real
    image

    Quote vampiresrule: NOT A SPOILLER!

    mean to kill Christine or Paul. She could take a lie detector test. That would prove whether or not she was trying to scare them or kill them. It's not admissible in court but it does prove INTENT.

    I find it very interesting that the Paul and Michael are the ones involved in this case against Phyllis! She could take both of them down with her! Kidnapping is a federal crime, NOT a state crime!


    Oh boy, I would love love love to see her try. Phyllis has known about what Paul and Michael did for years and kept quiet about it. I'd be so happy if she brought this up now, then they could add, accessory after the fact to kidnapping, to her other charges.

    And doing this would put the final nail in any chance she had of having any friend...heck probably even anyone who felt the least bit of sympathy for her. All of GC would want to see her fry.

    Yes, please have her try to take Paul and MIchael down with her!

    Modified 1 times(s), last time at: 2012/07/14 08:43AM
    #8   2012/07/14 08:52AM
    Re: SPECULATON: HOW Phyllis CAN PROVE HER SHE DIDN'T
    mdtuttle
    image

    Quote vampiresrule: NOT A SPOILLER!

    mean to kill Christine or Paul. She could take a lie detector test. That would prove whether or not she was trying to scare them or kill them. It's not admissible in court but it does prove INTENT.

    I find it very interesting that the Paul and Michael are the ones involved in this case against Phyllis! She could take both of them down with her! Kidnapping is a federal crime, NOT a state crime!


    While I will not say intent is not important. In this case I don't think it would matter much. The fact is she did hit them what her intention was at this point would br diffucult at best to prove. It is very easy to say at this stage in the game that she was only trying to scare Christine.

    To be fair, I don't think Phyllis really wanted to kill anyone. Of course back then she was a very diffrent person. I find it interesting that Paul is saying that it happened so long ago it does not matter. Of courde he is focused on what is going on in his own life right now and the charges he may face. But Christine almost seems like a woman possesed. Don't get me wrong, I think she has every right to be angry. I can even understand her wanting to confront Phyllis and make her tell the truth. I just can't help but wonder if Christine would be so hot to prosecute if it were anyone else but Phyllis.

    I am not saying Phylis should not have to face up to what she did, nor am I saying Christine should not want her to pay in some way. It just seems like prosecution and jail at this point in time serves little or no purpose. Christine is not in danger. Phyllis is not a psyco on the loose that is going to go around killing people. I think justice would be better served by Phyllis having to admit what she did and perhaps doing community service as well as some intensive counseling to help her get to the root of her anger and insecurity issues.

    #9   2012/07/14 08:54AM
    Re: SPECULATON: HOW Phyllis CAN PROVE HER SHE DIDN'T
    Trish12
    image

    With all the gum and arm flapping she does, she can't even minipulate the lie detector. If she did though, it still doesn't stand ground the evidence is still there. People have a way of minipulating the machine. Also Phyllis hasn't done a good job of hiding how she hate Christine. Any lawyer or doctor or cop can see she's a lier.

    #10   2012/07/14 09:21AM
    Re: SPECULATON: HOW Phyllis CAN PROVE HER SHE DIDN'T
    Backstreet
    image

    Quote mdtuttle:
    Quote vampiresrule: NOT A SPOILLER!

    mean to kill Christine or Paul. She could take a lie detector test. That would prove whether or not she was trying to scare them or kill them. It's not admissible in court but it does prove INTENT.

    I find it very interesting that the Paul and Michael are the ones involved in this case against Phyllis! She could take both of them down with her! Kidnapping is a federal crime, NOT a state crime!


    While I will not say intent is not important. In this case I don't think it would matter much. The fact is she did hit them what her intention was at this point would br diffucult at best to prove. It is very easy to say at this stage in the game that she was only trying to scare Christine.

    To be fair, I don't think Phyllis really wanted to kill anyone. Of course back then she was a very diffrent person. I find it interesting that Paul is saying that it happened so long ago it does not matter. Of courde he is focused on what is going on in his own life right now and the charges he may face. But Christine almost seems like a woman possesed. Don't get me wrong, I think she has every right to be angry. I can even understand her wanting to confront Phyllis and make her tell the truth. I just can't help but wonder if Christine would be so hot to prosecute if it were anyone else but Phyllis.

    I am not saying Phylis should not have to face up to what she did, nor am I saying Christine should not want her to pay in some way. It just seems like prosecution and jail at this point in time serves little or no purpose. Christine is not in danger. Phyllis is not a psyco on the loose that is going to go around killing people. I think justice would be better served by Phyllis having to admit what she did and perhaps doing community service as well as some intensive counseling to help her get to the root of her anger and insecurity issues.


    I think that the cart was put before the horse in this story, but I like your post. The writers, in thier own frail way, tried to explain why Phyllis was like she was back then by bringing back her sister that she never had and showing us that her conflict was brought on by family that turned thier backs on her because she knew her father was guilty. However, this story is being regurgitated to show that Christine has deep conflict in her own life. Phyllis is basically the victim of that deep conflit and this story is about hatred and revenge. Phyllis is the victim of a very long and probably substantial conflict in Christine about her life and her need to stay in the past. Paul, is not living there and has moved far from there in his life. He is remorseful and looking for forgiveness of his own, he is far removed from vengeful hatred. Christine has no life and I believe that she blames Phyllis for that but in truth, it is her own fault. This story is as much about this sick creature as it is about exposing Phyllis. Hatred, jealousy and revenge are what is motivating the sweet and perfect, Christine. While the hatred that is driving this story is blinded by the revenge they seek, they are missing the real underlying story here.

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 » »| page:

    Please register and login to be able to post in this message board.

    « Go back to topic list