Well not really. There were three of them involved in bringing the knickers to everyone's attention. Tiffiany erroneously excluded the other two from having been jointly responsible and placed the blame only on John. Then having eliminated two of the culprits from her enquiries and drawn her conclusions, she then declares she is going to carry out an enquiry. :D
No she didn't. If there is a transcript available it should show that Tiffany asked who did it. Steph said that she thinks it was one of the boys. Tiffany asks who. Steph names the three boys involved. Then Tiffany asks her to narrow it down. Steph offers John's name.
It is only then that Tiffany said that it confirmed what she thought.
Christopher I'd count as innocent, as he said that they'd better get rid of them, but was stopped by John.
Darren hardly did anything.
It wasn't the laying them out on the table which was the problem. It was the laying them out and leaving them there for everyone to see which was.
John also made the point when the girls were mostly ignoring the red pants to bring direct attention to them by saying to them all "There's a pair of red panties I think you'll be interested in". Then the girls start getting all giddy about it. At which point John's expression was very telling.
Neither Christopher or Darren had any hand in that.
He didn't Chris did then called Darren over first and then John to look at them. Watch it again.
Oh and BTW, Disingenuous is very much a word, it means not being candid or sincere.
Yes, it's mostly the word to use when somebody feigns ignorance about something and pretends not to know about something or understand, when they actually do.
No she didn't. If there is a transcript available it should show that Tiffany asked who did it. Steph said that she thinks it was one of the boys. Tiffany asks who. Steph names the three boys involved. Then Tiffany asks her to narrow it down. Steph offers John's name.
It is only then that Tiffany said that it confirmed what she thought.
Christopher I'd count as innocent, as he said that they'd better get rid of them, but was stopped by John.
Darren hardly did anything.
It wasn't the laying them out on the table which was the problem. It was the laying them out and leaving them there for everyone to see which was.
John also made the point when the girls were mostly ignoring the red pants to bring direct attention to them by saying to them all "There's a pair of red panties I think you'll be interested in'. Then the girls start getting all giddy about it. At which point John's expression was very telling.
Neither Christopher or Darren had any hand in that.
Exactly. This is what happened. Why is everyone trying to down play John's significant role in this and somehow blame Tiff :o
No she didn't. If there is a transcript available it should show that Tiffany asked who did it. Steph said that she thinks it was one of the boys. Tiffany asks who. Steph names the three boys involved. Then Tiffany asks her to narrow it down. Steph offers John's name.
It is only then that Tiffany said that it confirmed what she thought.
Christopher I'd count as innocent, as he said that they'd better get rid of them, but was stopped by John.
Darren hardly did anything.
It wasn't the laying them out on the table which was the problem. It was the laying them out and leaving them there for everyone to see which was.
John also made the point when the girls were mostly ignoring the red pants to bring direct attention to them by saying to them all "There's a pair of red panties I think you'll be interested in". Then the girls start getting all giddy about it. At which point John's expression was very telling.
Neither Christopher or Darren had any hand in that.
That is correct. I just rewatched on catch up. But I don't have the same interpretation. As I saw if Tiff led her witness. She asked Steph a question. Steph answered honestly and accurately. Tiff rejected that answer and invited Steph to try again. On the third attempt Steph gave Tiff and answer that fitted Tiffs preconception.
Then later talking to John She says "I asked Steph earlier who was responsible. And do you know what she said Johnny? She said you.
She didn't mention that Stephs first answer was 3 people and only reduced that to one name when pressed by the prosecuting counsel.:D
Exactly. This is what happened. Why is everyone trying to down play John's significant role in this and somehow blame Tiff :o
I am not blaming Tiff for the incident which was reprehensible on the part of all three guys although had Steph had a little more diginity concerning her smalls it wouldn't have happened.
I am only commenting that Tiff carried out an investigation having already made up her mind and sought evidence to fit the outcome she expected. And I am not criticising. I think it was hilarious.
That is correct. I just rewatched on catch up. But I don't have the same interpretation. As I saw if Tiff led her witness. She asked Steph a question. Steph answered honestly and accurately. Tiff rejected that answer and invited Steph to try again. On the third attempt Steph gave Tiff and answer that fitted Tiffs preconception.
Then later talking to John She says "I asked Steph earlier who was responsible. And do you know what she said Johnny? She said you.
She didn't mention that Stephs first answer was 3 people and only reduced that to one name when pressed by the prosecuting counsel.:D
I am not blaming Tiff for the incident which was reprehensible on the part of all three guys although had Steph had a little more diginity concerning her smalls it wouldn't have happened.
I am only commenting that Tiff carried out an investigation having already made up her mind and sought evidence to fit the outcome she expected. And I am not criticising. I think it was hilarious.
Why is it hilarious Tiff was right. John lead, instigated and controlled that whole thing. I just can't believe I watched it and didn't really get it but she is right, John likes to control things and likes to and can lead and pull the whole house. I'm actually a little in awe of John now :cool:
No she didn't. If there is a transcript available it should show that Tiffany asked who did it. Steph said that she thinks it was one of the boys. Tiffany asks who. Steph names the three boys involved. Then Tiffany asks her to narrow it down. Steph offers John's name.
It is only then that Tiffany said that it confirmed what she thought.
Christopher I'd count as innocent, as he said that they'd better get rid of them, but was stopped by John.
Darren hardly did anything.
It wasn't the laying them out on the table which was the problem. It was the laying them out and leaving them there for everyone to see which was.
John also made the point when the girls were mostly ignoring the red pants to bring direct attention to them by saying to them all "There's a pair of red panties I think you'll be interested in". Then the girls start getting all giddy about it. At which point John's expression was very telling.
Neither Christopher or Darren had any hand in that.
But Tiffany had already assumed it was all Johns fault before she even spoke to Steph.
Seemed to me she was almost forcing Steph to say Johns name. It was like she wasn't satisfied with Stephs previous answer, but as soon as she said Johns name.......she got what she wanted.
Why is it hilarious Tiff was right. John lead, instigated and controlled that whole thing. I just can't believe I watched it and didn't really get it but she is right, John likes to control things and likes to and can lead and pull the whole house. I'm actually a little in awe of John now :cool:
Because Tiff presents things in a way that makes me laugh. She speaks with conviction and in manner that sounds so reasonable while often making very little actual sense.
The bit when John said "What do you want me to do then" And she goes off on the "Now thats exactly what I mean. You always do this Johnny" You ask people waht they want you to do" :D:confused:
And her reaction to Megan's departure was priceless. I do wonder if she has mixed up the words eviction and execution.
But Tiffany had already assumed it was all Johns fault before she even spoke to Steph.
Seemed to me she was almost forcing Steph to say Johns name. It was like she wasn't satisfied with Stephs previous answer, but as soon as she said Johns name.......she got what she wanted.
But Tiffany had already assumed it was all Johns fault before she even spoke to Steph.
Seemed to me she was almost forcing Steph to say Johns name. It was like she wasn't satisfied with Stephs previous answer, but as soon as she said Johns name.......she got what she wanted.
But she was right. It was John that controlled knicker gate. If he'd let Chris just cover them up like he wanted none of this would have happened.
Tiff knows that John has the ability to control and lead the HMs.
Because Tiff presents things in a way that makes me laugh. She speaks with conviction and in manner that sounds so reasonable while often making very little actual sense.
The bit when John said "What do you want me to do then" And she goes off on the "Now thats exactly what I mean. You always do this Johnny" You ask people waht they want you to do" :D:confused:
And her reaction to Megan's departure was priceless. I do wonder if she has mixed up the words eviction and execution.
That would be hilarious. If she has I don't blame her for game playing!
But she was right. It was John that controlled knicker gate. IFC he'd let Chris just cover them up like he wanted none of this would have happened.
Tiff knows that John has the ability to control and lead the HMs.
But Tiffany asked Steph a specific question........who put the knickers on the table.
Stephanie didn't know....but like any good prosecuting attorney, Tiffany got Steph to say she thought it was John, because that is what she wants to believe.
As for her chat with John in the bathroom, everything she accused John of....ruling the house, having people under his spell, stirring things up......all apply to her friend Gemma, not John.
No she didn't. If there is a transcript available it should show that Tiffany asked who did it. Steph said that she thinks it was one of the boys. Tiffany asks who. Steph names the three boys involved. Then Tiffany asks her to narrow it down. Steph offers John's name.
It is only then that Tiffany said that it confirmed what she thought.
Christopher I'd count as innocent, as he said that they'd better get rid of them, but was stopped by John.
Darren hardly did anything.
It wasn't the laying them out on the table which was the problem. It was the laying them out and leaving them there for everyone to see which was.
John also made the point when the girls were mostly ignoring the red pants to bring direct attention to them by saying to them all "There's a pair of red panties I think you'll be interested in". Then the girls start getting all giddy about it. At which point John's expression was very telling.
Neither Christopher or Darren had any hand in that.
That's exactly how I saw it. I wasn't clear in my earlier post where I was referring to a person posting (I was trying to say the poster was disingenuous, not Tiff, since disingenuous is a word...never mind). I also thought Tiff showed a lot of empathy for Steph. Steph is annoying and she seems to annoy Tiff (and others) but Tiff can set aside those minor annoyances and empathize with her humiliation. Tiff FTW!
Because Tiff presents things in a way that makes me laugh. She speaks with conviction and in manner that sounds so reasonable while often making very little actual sense.
The bit when John said "What do you want me to do then" And she goes off on the "Now thats exactly what I mean. You always do this Johnny" You ask people waht they want you to do" :D:confused:
And her reaction to Megan's departure was priceless. I do wonder if she has mixed up the words eviction and execution.
Well obviously that was bloody funny but I really don't think you give her any credit for for intelligence and maybe that's because of her histrionics that she displays at times.
I thought that little exchange was pretty clear. When John said 'what do you want me to do' it was in response to her calling him out for manipulation and leading the House. His response was classic deflection and that is why she said 'now that's exactly what I mean . . . ' He was trying to control Tiff and manipulate her like he does others.
I think she's been pretty spot on tonight and I for one am impressed.
Well obviously that was bloody funny but I really don't think you give her any credit for for intelligence and maybe that's because of her histrionics that she displays at times.
I thought that little exchange was pretty clear. When John said 'what do you want me to do' it was in response to her calling him out for manipulation and leading the House. His response was classic deflection and that is why she said 'now that's exactly what I mean . . . ' He was trying to control Tiff and manipulate her like he does others.
I think she's been pretty spot on tonight and I for one am impressed.
I am not saying she is unintelligent only that she has an angle and don't we all.
That's exactly how I saw it. I wasn't clear in my earlier post where I was referring to a person posting (I was trying to say the poster was disingenuous, not Tiff, since disingenuous is a word...never mind). I also thought Tiff showed a lot of empathy for Steph. Steph is annoying and she seems to annoy Tiff (and others) but Tiff can set aside those minor annoyances and empathize with her humiliation. Tiff FTW!
Or when it hands her a lever to help her fry her own fish (if you will forgive the mixed metaphor) maybe?
In my opinion there was only one person responsible for knicker gate and it wasn't any of the men it was the dirty bint that left them laying around in the first place.
Well obviously that was bloody funny but I really don't think you give her any credit for for intelligence and maybe that's because of her histrionics that she displays at times.
I thought that little exchange was pretty clear. When John said 'what do you want me to do' it was in response to her calling him out for manipulation and leading the House. His response was classic deflection and that is why she said 'now that's exactly what I mean . . . ' He was trying to control Tiff and manipulate her like he does others.
I think she's been pretty spot on tonight and I for one am impressed.
good catch on her not letting him deflect away from the "you are manipulating the house" with a "well what do you want me to do". Tiff is much brighter than I initially thought....now I like her even more and she was/is my favorite. I also like how she got Steph's permission before going in on John. She didn't try to steal camera time from Steph. Also she showed real empathy in person to Steph and behind her back in the DR (empathetic to her face and when not in her face). "Behind her back" sounds bad but I use it here in a good way:-) since she was real to her face and when not in her face. Tiff FTW
I feel like there's a big difference between saying 'someone has left their dirty knickers lying around, who was it?' and laying knickers out on the table for all to see, but hey ho.
But Tiffany asked Steph a specific question........who put the knickers on the table.
Stephanie didn't know....but like any good prosecuting attorney, Tiffany got Steph to say she thought it was John, because that is what she wants to believe.
As for her chat with John in the bathroom, everything she accused John of....ruling the house, having people under his spell, stirring things up......all apply to her friend Gemma, not John.
Exactly :cool: She is a very good as she knows John is an instigator and controller and she was right in this instance. Putting the knickers on the table is a red herring as we all know. Chris did that but wanted to hide them however John wouldn't let him and John brought the knickers to the house attention and John said 'name and shame'
Gemma had a bit part in this particular instance of humiliating Steph whereas John was an instigator so she went for the instigator.
Comments
No she didn't. If there is a transcript available it should show that Tiffany asked who did it. Steph said that she thinks it was one of the boys. Tiffany asks who. Steph names the three boys involved. Then Tiffany asks her to narrow it down. Steph offers John's name.
It is only then that Tiffany said that it confirmed what she thought.
Christopher I'd count as innocent, as he said that they'd better get rid of them, but was stopped by John.
Darren hardly did anything.
It wasn't the laying them out on the table which was the problem. It was the laying them out and leaving them there for everyone to see which was.
John also made the point when the girls were mostly ignoring the red pants to bring direct attention to them by saying to them all "There's a pair of red panties I think you'll be interested in". Then the girls start getting all giddy about it. At which point John's expression was very telling.
Neither Christopher or Darren had any hand in that.
Yes, it's mostly the word to use when somebody feigns ignorance about something and pretends not to know about something or understand, when they actually do.
Exactly. This is what happened. Why is everyone trying to down play John's significant role in this and somehow blame Tiff
That is correct. I just rewatched on catch up. But I don't have the same interpretation. As I saw if Tiff led her witness. She asked Steph a question. Steph answered honestly and accurately. Tiff rejected that answer and invited Steph to try again. On the third attempt Steph gave Tiff and answer that fitted Tiffs preconception.
Then later talking to John She says "I asked Steph earlier who was responsible. And do you know what she said Johnny? She said you.
She didn't mention that Stephs first answer was 3 people and only reduced that to one name when pressed by the prosecuting counsel.:D
I am not blaming Tiff for the incident which was reprehensible on the part of all three guys although had Steph had a little more diginity concerning her smalls it wouldn't have happened.
I am only commenting that Tiff carried out an investigation having already made up her mind and sought evidence to fit the outcome she expected. And I am not criticising. I think it was hilarious.
Who cares. She was right :cool::D
Why is it hilarious
He did do it to everyone in the bedroom
But Tiffany had already assumed it was all Johns fault before she even spoke to Steph.
Seemed to me she was almost forcing Steph to say Johns name. It was like she wasn't satisfied with Stephs previous answer, but as soon as she said Johns name.......she got what she wanted.
Because Tiff presents things in a way that makes me laugh. She speaks with conviction and in manner that sounds so reasonable while often making very little actual sense.
The bit when John said "What do you want me to do then" And she goes off on the "Now thats exactly what I mean. You always do this Johnny" You ask people waht they want you to do"
And her reaction to Megan's departure was priceless. I do wonder if she has mixed up the words eviction and execution.
Yes exactly - classic witness leading.
But she was right. It was John that controlled knicker gate. If he'd let Chris just cover them up like he wanted none of this would have happened.
Tiff knows that John has the ability to control and lead the HMs.
That would be hilarious. If she has I don't blame her for game playing!
But Tiffany asked Steph a specific question........who put the knickers on the table.
Stephanie didn't know....but like any good prosecuting attorney, Tiffany got Steph to say she thought it was John, because that is what she wants to believe.
As for her chat with John in the bathroom, everything she accused John of....ruling the house, having people under his spell, stirring things up......all apply to her friend Gemma, not John.
That's exactly how I saw it. I wasn't clear in my earlier post where I was referring to a person posting (I was trying to say the poster was disingenuous, not Tiff, since disingenuous is a word...never mind). I also thought Tiff showed a lot of empathy for Steph. Steph is annoying and she seems to annoy Tiff (and others) but Tiff can set aside those minor annoyances and empathize with her humiliation. Tiff FTW!
Well obviously that was bloody funny but I really don't think you give her any credit for for intelligence and maybe that's because of her histrionics that she displays at times.
I thought that little exchange was pretty clear. When John said 'what do you want me to do' it was in response to her calling him out for manipulation and leading the House. His response was classic deflection and that is why she said 'now that's exactly what I mean . . . ' He was trying to control Tiff and manipulate her like he does others.
I think she's been pretty spot on tonight and I for one am impressed.
I am not saying she is unintelligent only that she has an angle and don't we all.
Or when it hands her a lever to help her fry her own fish (if you will forgive the mixed metaphor) maybe?
good catch on her not letting him deflect away from the "you are manipulating the house" with a "well what do you want me to do". Tiff is much brighter than I initially thought....now I like her even more and she was/is my favorite. I also like how she got Steph's permission before going in on John. She didn't try to steal camera time from Steph. Also she showed real empathy in person to Steph and behind her back in the DR (empathetic to her face and when not in her face). "Behind her back" sounds bad but I use it here in a good way:-) since she was real to her face and when not in her face. Tiff FTW
Exactly :cool: She is a very good as she knows John is an instigator and controller and she was right in this instance. Putting the knickers on the table is a red herring as we all know. Chris did that but wanted to hide them however John wouldn't let him and John brought the knickers to the house attention and John said 'name and shame'
Gemma had a bit part in this particular instance of humiliating Steph whereas John was an instigator so she went for the instigator.
I don't blame any of them for game playing and there is a reason for that. ;-)
It would be nice if she fried up Gemma with John but that may be a bit much to wish for;-)