So you are unable to actually address the points in my post. That's fine.

It was a con and made out to be one with producers now apologising and some crying. - Strange behaviour if nothing has happened.

Still, if you are not going to face and address the facts the first time, there is no point asking you to address them this time either.

The fact that you cut out all the actual facts that you can't address in my post says it all - More cover-up and avoidance than the BGT final!

Yes very true . Both dogs were so similar they could have been twins . I've watched the final a few times and all they mention is Matisse and skippy . No mention of Chase in the final clip . Cowell also is guilty . As a producer he definitely knew 3 dogs were involved .

Would the act have got the same number of votes if the public knew beforehand a double of Matisse was doing the high wire act . I'm not sure .

I disagree. If your act is Jules and Matisse, you should not be pretending that another dog is Matisse. If Matisse can't do the rope walk, then you shouldn't have the rope walk

What's that got to do with my post?

Whilst it is their choice not to get a smartphone or tablet, it is their fault for not buying one and using free votes the app offers because the show doesn't require you to spend money on votes.


I said 'We've known Chase was a part of her act since the semi final', which is true and gramatically correct. I didn't say Chase was used since her semi final.

Jules was told not to reveal the other dog by producers. There is no agreeing or disagreeing about it. It is a fact.

That's it exactly. The act is titled "Jules and Matisse" and deception was used in the act to make out that it was one dog and made obvious that was what they were trying to do by not mentioning it and hiding the extra dog at the end.

It's all very clear and clan cut, yet these facts are not being addressed here and all we are getting is a group of fans trying to tell others what is what and ignore the facts.

That wasn't her fault, though.

Jules wanted to call her act Jules & Friends but the producers generalised it to Jules & Matisse.

Jules wanted to bring Chase out but the producers told her not to.

Those are facts.

How many numerous other threads do you have and comments on others where you have made out that the whole thing is nonsense and now on this one you are just trying to narrow it down to getting her off after failing to get the whole show off.

She was complicit in the act and if she didn't like it she could have taken that section out of her act. She could have said a quick line about it whenever they stuck a mic in her mouth to ask how she was doing. It was she who committed the crime.

If I tell you to murder someone and you do it, then I can assure you that you will be in a lot more trouble than me and saying "He told me to do it!" won't get you off of the fact that you murdered someone. You have free will. So did she!

You are trying to make her out to be innocent when she freely chose to do that deception and if coerced into it she was free to object and to go to the papers about it afterwards. She just chose to actively deceive the voting public.

She couldn't take it out of her act because it would have ruined the narrative. And she probably wasn't allowed to talk about the third dog if the producers wouldn't let her bring it out. She was hardly going to risk losing her place on the show for the sake of a few angry forum members on a forum site.


That's a completely different scenario. This one is just a acting dog act with three dogs instead of two. It's not a murder.


Jules is innocent as Simon Cowell (the executive producer) has said as such. Her innocence is fact.

Has this issue really affected you so dearly that you think taking someone's life is the same thing as training a dog to walk a tightrope on a talent show. It's actually very depressing you have compared the two.

No she couldn't, not if the producers specifically told her not to mention it. Would you risk being thrown out of a competition when you'd made the finals by disregarding the producers? I sure as hell wouldn't! She mentioned it at the first available opportunity afterwards, seeing as nobody had apparently noticed the difference, she didn't have to say anything at all, but she did. Her dogs had collars with their names readable on them if viewers had paid the same attention as they were to the magician's lemon. Might I suggest that the reason people spotted the lemon and not the dog collars was because they really weren't as engrossed in the magic act , whereas the dog act had captivated them so much, they were concentrating fully on it rather than the techniques? Therefore proving the dog act was a much better act and fully deserved to win. If you have people more intrested in watching how you were doing an act as opposed to watching the act itself, you haven't got a very good act!

I wonder how these people cope with the trials of real life?

Perhaps they've found a way of avoiding it entirely, by just finding things to whine about on the telly.

Simon Cowell: "I was frustrated because I didn't really know what I was judging until afterwards so I felt like a bit of an idiot."

So if he didn't know what he was judging then sure as hell the voters who parted with money didn't either and Mr Cowell was there live watching everything. So all this nonsense about seeing that it was another dog with all the camera edits becomes laughable.

Clearly Mr. Cowell felt conned/Duped/Deceived by it and he didn't part with any money.

Simon Cowell would be stupid to feel conned given that:

1. It's caused controvesy and therefore given the show more publicity.
2. It's probably resulted in him gaining more money from people desperate to interview him and the show being featured more (it is copyrighted).
3. Chase was a part of the act from the semi final.

It was clearly a point of law. The fact that you didn't/don't see that is worrying.

People who go along with breaking the law are complicit in it. Whether murder or actively defrauding the public.

Lots more debating could get done on DS if it wasn't for all this deliberate avoidance of the points raised.

Except Jules didn't break the law. If you took it to the police, they'd laugh at you and you'd be fined for wasting police time.

Yes but we are not discussing your opinion on it we are debating what Mr Cowell actually said. "I didn't really know what I was judging until afterwards so I felt like a bit of an idiot." Well if he felt that way, can you imagine what the people who parted with money felt about it and also the other acts that were just beaten by someone working a con.

Opinion not fact. Ignored.

Sorry but it really is the only way to deal with your constant avoidance and acceptance of anything that doesn't meet with your opinion: And that includes reality.

I have taken the rouble to set out what happens in law and how people that are complicit in that law break are also guilty and yet you dismiss that fact and reality and just state the opposite with nothing to back you up.

You believe what Cowell says to the Sun?

You're either naïve or stupid. I can't decide which! He is an executive Producer and will have watched the rehearsals and known exactly what was going on.

Hahahahaha saying someone else can't accept reality in the same sentence as saying the 'law' is opinion and not fact. Hahahahaha.

You couldn't make it up.

I'm also highly amused that one of my posts was removed. I do wonder who complained about that hhmmm. First time I've had a post removed! Excellent!

And yes, because Cowell isn't a media mogul who never lies to the press to make himself seem blameless and I honestly believe the shows executive producer didn't know there were three dogs in the final. And pigs fly, daily.

Jules should have auditioned as a magician. Because hiding a dog the size of Chase from everyone involved. At all times besides when he was walking the ropes. Even whilst she was on stage is a far better trick then anything Jamie Raven managed.

So once again I ask. Murdering and taking another's persons life is the same thing as any sort of fraud?

Are you genuinely for real?

At his point I'll have to assume you're a troll.

Because likening a dog you didn't know was Chase (because you didn't see the collar he was clearly wearing) walking a tightrope to murder is nobodies idea of actual reality.

Good trolling effort. You had us all going!

Caller; I have an urgent crime to report
Operator; Please go ahead. Stay calm and tell us
as much detail as you can.
Caller; I voted for a dog....

Beep- your call has been disconnected. Please hang up. Beep- your call has been disconnected. Please hang up. Beep- your call has been disconnected. Please hang up.

No come on the police would have a field day with this. It would give them laughs for days. And in years to come you'd see it on those 10 most ridiculous police calls lists. It'd be great fun. And we should actively encourage them to report this crime.

I 100% think OE should call the police right away and report this heinous crime against humanity.

If that's not something they're prepared to do then I can only assume they don't actually believe what they're saying themselves. Either that or they're not a good, stand up citizen. Because good people report a crime if they see one.

Call the police right away is my advice.