She killed Matthew. He clearly has a learning disability, was coerced by the others and is not fully responsible for his actions. I was very surprised the film makers considered it acceptable for Jennifer to kill him.
share[deleted]
Gosh you're right, boohoo, BAD murderess! She should have just left them alone and maybe let them try to kill her again!
shareMr_Joekzalott, you have experience in how long it takes a victim to get over things?
http://www.cgonzales.net & http://www.drxcreatures.com
He was smart enough to know right from wrong...he knew it was wrong, that's why he was reluctant to do it in the first place and why he apologized after.
If someone of his mental capacity raped my daughter, I would want his head.
Matthew knew exactly what he was doing. He deserved it just as much as the rest of them. He had enough sense during that conversation with her to recognise precisely why what he did was wrong. She'd offered to be his friend, but he'd been so keen to be accepted by local thugs that he was prepared to hurt her horrifically even though he knew it was wrong.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
Ah, yes. I see a poster is applying obnoxious political correctness to old movies. A learning disability? What, just because he was behind in learning his multiplication tables, he didn't know right from wrong? He deserved EVERYTHING she did to him, and more, if you ask me.
shareIf it went to trial and he got off just for being stupid, what would that prove? That is like letting a person get away with murder after drinking and driving then killed someone in the automobile accident.
share