Before Norton's character Aaron/Roy was arrested, i.e. while he was living in the church place, was he living his life as Aaron, Roy, or somebody else? Depending on the answer, I have lots of additional questions.
This is a kind-of-cool movie on its own, but it doesn't seem to hold up to questions about Norton's background.
- DDB
That does seem to be a little snag, as there was no one other than Alex who could really say what Aaron/Roy's persona was before the arrest.
I don't need you to tell me how good my coffee is. .
Alex expected him to murder the archbishop, so there's a good chance Aaron's stuttering, gentle & naive "personality" was created during/after the arrest.
sharefinally. someone gets it.
share[deleted]
I thought ‘Roy’ made it clear when he told Martin that there never was an ‘Aaron’. That was the most important aspect of the film. It’s what put everything into perspective. I don’t know how some people missed it.
The only thing to fear is fear itself
As others have stated, the artificial personality was "Aaron". "Roy" had always existed, in terms of the psyche. Aaron was name-only - behavior-wise, "Aaron" was a creation. That was the twist.
shareI think the end made it pretty clear that Roy was the real personality.
shareWow, I can't believe how obtuse some people are on the Primal Fear IMDb forum. English must not be a first language for quite a few people on this board ... maybe that's why they misunderstood the finale when they watched the film?
The point of the penultimate conversation between Martin Vail and Aaron Stampler (his REAL name) is that Aaron Stampler did NOT have multiple personality disorder.
The innocent, stuttering "I'm innocent" personality? FAKE.
The hostile, confrontational bully personality (named "Roy")? FAKE.
The smug, giggly and sinister personality that we witnessed in the final scene? THAT was Aaron Stampler in his true, non-acted form.
Vail thought only "Roy" was the fake personality, and Stampler corrected him and told him his so-called "I'm innocent" personality was an act, too. (that's what he meant by "there never was an Aaron". But his name was still Aaron Stampler.)
If you re-read the OP's post, you'd see he understood that there was never an Aaron. He wanted to know whether "Bad Aaron" was living the life of "Nice Aaron" to disguise the "Bad Aaron" self before the murder(s), or had he been "Bad Aaron" before the murder, e.g. created "Nice Aaron" during or after the arrest.
Were other people - who knew him before the murder(s) - aware of "Bad Aaron"? If they were, why didn't they say anything about the personality difference before and after the high-profiled murder?
It's safe to assume "Bad Aaron" wouldn't dare to commit murder so blatantly without a back-up plan. The Archbishop was highly respected pillar of the community. Anyone who killed him would be in prison for the rest of their life. "Bad Aaron" obviously didn't want that. There had to be a way around it.
The answer to the OP's question:
Bad Aaron was living the public life of Nice Aaron before the murder(s), and created "Roy" - using his own hidden but real self - during or after the arrest to deceive the likes of Vail.
As you say, there was never an Aaron, e.g. "Nice Aaron" is artifical, something he created as a survival tool, and that "Roy" is "Bad Aaron".
This twist is old and classic: "Hidden in plain sight."
I totally agree with you, Movie Alien. I've watched this movie about 50 times (it's one of my favorites), and as I watch the beginning each time I think that Aaron ran as far as he could before tiring out and hiding under the railroad tracks. And as he lay there in the fetal position, knowing he was about to be caught and arrested, THAT'S when he decided to use the stuttering- Aaron/violent-Roy-multiple-personality game. It's like he's running and knowing he's not going to get away and thinking the whole time, whatever I come up with, it better be good. That "smug, giggly and sinister personality that we witnessed in the final scene" is a true testiment to Norton's acting skills. He really brings us three characters in this film and he did so well enough to make an real movie and storyline buff like me say "OMG, he really GOT me!!!" Stunning performance, stunning career debut.
shareBut whichever Aaron is real.... why did he kill the archbishop in the way he did... he is supposed to be smart.. very smart ...but he obviously just was overwhelmed by rage... so overwhelmed he was unable to plan an escape or story.
But as for Edward Norton ... I knew the scene where "Roy" makes his appearance to Vail for the first time... but I recently watched it with a friend who knew nothing of the story. When Edward became "Roy" my friend just about leapt out of his seat. Norton's change is stunning... and scary ... and he seemed to grow physically an amazing performance!!
He wasn't overwhelmed by rage.
It was all planned and coldly executed.
He butchered the archbishop. Cut off his fingers. Carved the numbers into his chest. Allowed himself to be captured by the police. Began the Aaron/Roy charade.
And then got away with murder scot-free.
As they said, he'll be out on the street after a month-long evaluation in the looney bin.
He's an evil genius.
"What the f-ck is the internet?" -Jay, Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back
Agreed - the murder was planned. There's NO WAY he decided two minutes before he was caught to invent the other personality. In order to trick a psychiatrist, he'd have to have read up on the condition and prepared his personalities/approach.
shareVail thought only "Roy" was the fake personality, and Stampler corrected him and told him his so-called "I'm innocent" personality was an act, too. (that's what he meant by "there never was an Aaron". But his name was still Aaron Stampler.)Okay, good. That makes sense. It wasn’t too clear exactly what was what. When they threw in the twist, it only served to further complicate the already spaghetti story.
You make an excellent point in that the strong-Roy of Norton's character wouldn't have put up with such horrific abuse and being used by the sick freak archbishop.
But he wouldn't have to be Aaron's level of weak to have taken it without resistance, especially since he was still a kid with not much life experience.These scum work their way in slowly, a bit at a time, so the victim doesn't realize until it's too late, then they also have the guilt and shame factors, which of course the POS use to their advantage as well.
Aaron could have been just a regular kid before it all started, not Aaron-weak, but not Roy-strong, either, and when the POS had him where he had nowhere to turn, this was his way out.
At that point, he (and perhaps his friends/schoolmates) figured he had to kill the POS to make it stop, worked out a plan to do so and also a plan to get out of it.
Kids go through so many changes, phases, mindsets, etc through puberty and young adulthood, that
the signs of both Aaron-weak and Roy-strong, as the real Aaron formulated his plan and researched multiple personality disorder, could have been attributed to growing pains.
The main flaw in Aaron's plan, it seems to me, is that anyone who knew him before the murder was even plotted would have instantly realized that his stuttering, Aaron-weak personality was an invention.
If this had been a real murder investigation/trial, the police would have talked to his landlady, neighbours, friends, altar boys, people at the archbishop's house, etc. And his defence would have called some of these people as character witnesses. Any one of them (unless they were in cahoots with Aaron) would have blown his Aaron-weak cover as soon as they started to describe him.
The movie plot only works because the cops don't seem to do any investigating, and the defence lawyer doesn't call any witnesses except Shaughnessy (who didn't know Aaron) and a psychiatrist who didn't meet Aaron until after the murder.
This, but was there any mention of all the other altar boys staying quiet or leaving after the archbishop's death?
shareIf this is so, then how come in the tape Stampler was like the "Aaron" character (something I infer based on the fact that no one suspected anything different about him from the tape.)
Oh, wait. Was she a great big fat person?
The smug, giggly and sinister personality that we witnessed in the final scene? THAT was Aaron Stampler in his true, non-acted form.
Pentultimate doesn't mean the most important it means 2nd from the last....
shareFirst, consider the murder- the hacking off of the Archbishops ring, the multible stabs, the carving of the reference to a Hawthorn qoute: does this seem like the actions of a sane individual? The shoe prints, the bloody clothes, the running rather than hiding: does this seem like a well pre-thought-out plan?
Given that we only have the information supplied by the characters, there was a boy who had been abused by his father, who ran away, to beg on the streets of Chicago. According to Aaron, his father abused him - but he somehow through incredible bravery escaped to a potential worse fate (living on the street and freezing to death in a Chicago winter - something he probably wouldn't have been much aware of coming from Kentucky.)
Then in comes, as he tells it himself, a new father figure: the Archbishop. This man also abuses him, and humiliated him (possibly/probably) in front of the girl.
During that last scene Aaron claims to have killed and disposed of the girl, after which killing the Archbishop was necessary.
I think most people have both a passive and an aggressive side. In extremely passive people ( especially those who have suffered from cruel dominance) there becomes a fine line, a trigger, where the pent up anger and frustration literally explodes. I don't think most recognize or identify their `out of control' rage personalities with a separate name. But I do think they recognize when they've had an episode. (Not to be sexist, but some women during PMS act in ways that they are shocked by- when the phase has ended.)
In that last scene Aaron explained that he thought he knew what his attorney wanted- to show his other self- the angry self. You are right in saying that the key to the film is the boy saying there are no two people here- only one, one who is passive and happy to be obliging until a line is crossed, and then who looses control. Jeckle/Hyde like.
In conclusion, the boy is no less mentally ill with this revelation - he has uncontrollable rage issues, he has extreme self esteem issues (he probably actually thought he was showing his new father figure (Gere) that he as Gere was, able to be clever- hopping this would please his attorney. He was sexually abused- and the female districs attorneys rant on what she would do, in his place, makes his so called crime even more understandable.
Brilliant explanation. Kudos mate.
He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither ~ B. Franklinshare
I think the question is: If "Roy" were the only personality as it was clearly stated at the end, why would he have been living the life that the Aaron character was supposed to have been living.
The whole motive for the killing was the abuse, and clearly Roy was not an abusable person. And in that case the whole living as an alterboy life was pretty nonsensical.
The persona of Aaron couldn't have been created during or after the arrest because the Bishop calls him Aaron in the home movie. That really threw me off. I don't even know if there's a Roy. If they're both fake. Although if it's a fake name I'm not sure how he eluded police of that. I admit I was a bit confused with the ending. Some things just didn't add up.
share[deleted]
OMG! Still people don't understand there is no Aaron and never was. There was no MPD at all. Roy acted as Aaron to be taken in by Bishop and faked the whole Aaron while being there to learn how bad Bishop really was and killed him as Roy. Roy never came out as the real person until later on. Roy finally at the end confesses that he was Roy the whole time, just never was any Aaron at all. Really, this is not that hard to understand but people out there are making it harder than it really needs to be.
Roy killed Linda and Roy killed the Archbishop. No one else. No MPD at all. It was all a sham the whole time to get away with murder and he confessed at the end to that. Roy attacked the lady because he was always Roy. She came at Aaron to stir him up but did not know anything about a Roy at all, and his attorney just let it go until Roy attacked her. That sealed the deal with him winning the case of insanity.
The thing is that there was never an insane person in the trial and he did not know there was just one person doing the whole thing until the end when he specifically said there was never anyone else, just a Roy. People keep making up a bad Aaron and a good Aaron but really there was never an Aaron, just a Roy. That is why I said that Roy already knew about the Archbishop being a pedophile. He just wanted to be taken in to do what he wanted and that is to kill him.
Linda was just was just caught up into the Roy killing and he killed her. Oh well, I will let the people on here keep wandering around like there was something that never was and that was an Aaron.
No more IMDB boards for me!
Well done.
Presumably, the people who didn't get the ending are the same people who don't understand:
-Rosebud is a sled
-Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker's Father
-Bruce Willis is dead in "The Sixth Sense"
-Charlton Heston never left Earth
-Verbal Kint is Keyser Soze
-Soylent Green is people.
___________________________________
Never say never...
Roy made up Aaron in order to get what he wanted from others. Roy is the real person and Aaron was made up. There was never any Dissociative Personality Disorder either. Roy made that up in order to beat the murder rap.
shareI agree that there is no way he could have come up with that plan while running after having murdered the archbishop. It was too well thought out - the black outs, the abusive childhood, the "I don't remember" at just the right points, the stutter. I agree with the other poster who said he had to have read up on dissociative identity disorder way in advance.
shareLike I asked on the other thread, if there was no Aaron, what was Roy doing playing victim to the Archbishop in the first place? Roy is no one's victim.
Let's just say he faked Aaron for whatever reason to stay with the Archbishop ...then, why murder him at all? Again, Roy's not the kind of guy who lets others manipulate or victimize him.
That's the only thing that bothers me about this movie. I too can't see "Roy" being anybody's victim.
shareHere's the thing. There was no "Roy" and there was no "Aaron". There was Aaron (the real guy) but the 2 polar opposite personalities were BOTH made up. Aaron was a smart kid who was abused by the archbishop. He thought up a plan to kill the archbishop and get away with it out in the open. This is when he created the two personalities. I don't believe he was always "bad" but being sexually abused by the man who you thought was trying to help you, might take away your faith in GOD and people. I think Aaron snapped and became homicidal but was intelligent enough to cover his tracks in advance. That would explain how he could be sexually abused and still an evil genius. He was just a man who figured out how to exploit the system....and he did it well.
Psychos do not explode when sunlight hits them. I don't give a *beep* how crazy they are!
Fantastic evaluation, that pretty much cleans everything up.
TDKR official trailer -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHQsmt_yUsI
I'm still a little confused.
Am I right in assuming that Aaron, before the murder, walked about in his normal(aaron right at the end) persona and Not the Roy or stuttering "Aaron" persona?
If so surely he is running the risk of when he starts the fake "aaron" one in court etc, there could be someone to say, hold on a second, that guys never acted like that in his life before.
Also in some other posts on here I see folk saying Aaron was abused growing up by his dad, but surely that was part of his act to make sure to tick all the boxes of multiple personality disorder.
There is also no way that he planned it to go this way from the start. It only went wrong when the bishop managed to break the windows alerting the postman.
I dont think there was ever a Roy, Because Aaron claim he suffered black outs. But if he messed up by saying I hope that woman's neck is ok... I believe Aaron created the split personality to get a miss trial on insanity which he got..
I dont think he ever was "roy" He knew what he was doing the whole time...
Ok I agree that Aaron was always simply Aaron, the personality disorder he plainly made up by reading on the stuff before. That has to be it,
Before the murder, Aaron spent most of his time with the priest and the rest of the kids. I don't think he was being seen by many other people. An abused kid must keep quiet and not be too full of life. People who knew Aaron must have known him to ressemble "Nice Aaron". Submissive and shy. The guy has not become a genius overnight, so he must have used patience.
As for the "Evil Genius", I disagree. A genius, yes, evil, arguably no. Screw that pedophile, good thing he got butchered the way he did. Even the girl lawyer admitted in court that she would have wanted to skin the bastard.
So, I'm thinking maybe Aaron waited for the girl to vanish to kill the priest. She could have harmed his mascarade because she might have been the person who knew him best. That, and/or when she left or was sent away, that is what convinced Aaron to break free of the sh*t he was in.
He had a backup plan in case in got caught, which he did. If he could have gotten away without being seen, it would have changed nothing. Either he stays free all his life, or he gets caught at a later time and starts playing his game anyway.
As for the part of Aaron being abused by his dad, who knows? Yes it must be fake, but would that change anything? The kid got abused for an old holyman. Sodomite dad or not, he got abused throughout his life, plain and simple.
I flipped through catalogs and wondered: What kind of dining set defines me as a person?
So, I'm thinking maybe Aaron waited for the girl to vanish to kill the priest. She could have harmed his mascarade because she might have been the person who knew him best. That, and/or when she left or was sent away, that is what convinced Aaron to break free of the sh*t he was in.
Indeed, from what I've heard here and there, faking psychiatric diseases is a serious challenge and would fail very easily when confrontonted to a correct evaluation. So I'm guessing a real, specialized psychiatrist could probably pickup on the fact that it's actual textbook bipolar disorder (which is most likely rare and thus potentially suspect) and, after thorough testing, end up unravelling the act.
I think there was no Aaron, he was just a supplement to get roy in the door and he needed his innocence to coexist with regular people. Aaron was just a mask to hide the monster. In reality it was a dance one that Vail started and Roy led the entire way. I don't think he had MPD he just knew how to really play the game. It seemed the whole way that Vail and Aaron were playing chess and when Vail thought he won, he really played right into Roy's hands. the final moment was his checkmate.
shareI agree with nearly everything you said in your last post but as a training clinical psychologist I just wanted to add a supplement to this point here - that actually it's worryingly easy to fake psychiatric disorders! There was a classic study done by a psychologist called David Rosenhan where he and some accomplices presented themselves at psychiatric units with a few textbook symptoms (unwashed, complaining of hearing voices etc), and were all admitted with diagnoses of schizophrenia - not only that, but they then all started acting normally and couldn't get discharged! I find it entirely plausible that not only would a non-specialist neuropsychologist like Molly fail to realise he was acting, but the state psychiatrist or any forensic psychiatrist would be duped too (to keep things simple I guess they just made the character a non-specialist to close off the whole debate). Don't mean to be pedantic but it's multiple personality disorder btw - not bipolar.
I think that Aaron was caught because he went to far. I believe he fully intended to kill the archbishop and Linda. However, being abused by the archbishop caused him to lose control and take killing the archbishop to another level, resulting in him getting caught. The reason he allowed himself to get abused by the archbishop was because he probably needed time to kill him. So he stayed with him until the moment presented himself. There probably also weren't many places for him to go.
As for whether or not MPD or DID or Bipolar disorder or whatever can or cannot be faked? That's irrelevant IMO. It's a movie. I don't think the plausibility of Aaron faking a disease matters.
As for Aaron's past? We don't know it's all speculative. As far as I'm concerned there are many many possibilities that have already been listed here. IMO there is no Aaron personality or Roy personality. We don't know his true personality. We only get a glimpse of what it might be at the end.
As for whether or not MPD or DID or Bipolar disorder or whatever can or cannot be faked? That's irrelevant IMO. It's a movie. I don't think the plausibility of Aaron faking a disease matters.
[deleted]
Wow, I only just saw this (I rarely check my account), and this is the rudest reply I've ever seen. OK Melissa, a training clinical psychologist means someone who is training in clinical psychology. Trust that clears that mystery up. Secondly, although what we in Europe call Multiple Personality Disorder (we use a system called ICD) was reclassified as DID in the DSM (used in the USA), we still use the original term here, and it is also (as I can tell by reading discussion boards such as these), more commonly used by non-psychologists the world over, and so is handy to use in general discussion. "Nice try though moron"? To me the truly moronic thing is to fall into the trap of thinking disparaging other people makes oneself look more intelligent. It really doesn't.
shareClarisse.....
I'd be careful from now on...
I took the ending that Aaron crated his Aaron and Roy personality a long before hand. That he planned this murder out and in the church he used his Aaron personality to seem like someone who is weak and people could control and use Roy as this uncontrollable personality. The real is was smart and controlling, the whole time everything was in his control.
shareI agree with nearly everything you said in your last post but as a training clinical psychologist I just wanted to add a supplement to this point here - that actually it's worryingly easy to fake psychiatric disorders! There was a classic study done by a psychologist called David Rosenhan where he and some accomplices presented themselves at psychiatric units with a few textbook symptoms (unwashed, complaining of hearing voices etc), and were all admitted with diagnoses of schizophrenia - not only that, but they then all started acting normally and couldn't get discharged! I find it entirely plausible that not only would a non-specialist neuropsychologist like Molly fail to realise he was acting, but the state psychiatrist or any forensic psychiatrist would be duped too (to keep things simple I guess they just made the character a non-specialist to close off the whole debate). Don't mean to be pedantic but it's multiple personality disorder btw - not bipolar. MPD is indeed very rare, and very little is known about it (some even think the whole condition is fake anyway), so this would make it even more likely that an intelligent, motivated faker who's done his homework would be impossible to catch out.
The whole legal system is shown to be based on a fiction, and where narcissism and antisocial hypocrisy and manipulation are the norm, and so which is only capable of acknowledging wildly artificial displays as "insanity", while the real insanity is present with them all the time.
From watching the movie it seemed evident that not a lot of people knew Aaron personally. Two of three people in the video footage were dead and the third one was the only one who could have spelt doom for his plan had he showed up in court but he never did. So Aaron's plan worked as intended.
He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither ~ B. Franklinshare
He answers that in the movie... "There never was an Aaron."
shareThis movie's ending didn't surprise me at all, I guessed it right after the scene where Roy appears and talks to Vail, I figured the multiple personality thing was an act. When he apologized for hurting the prosecutor's neck I had no surprise, I figured that would happen. I also figured that Linda was dead and noticed how Aaron was always uncomfortable talking about her, especially on camera.
Apparently his real name was Aaron Stampler, he was identified with that name when he got caught after the murder, but he probably faked his innocent, shy, stuttering persona to seem like an innocent bystander to the police and to Vail. He claimed amnesia, which is common, and maintained he was innocent, but when Vail confronted him with the sex tape and told him he knew he was lying about something, he came up with the violent "Roy" to avoid responsibility by being insane, then he and Vail used his alter personality in trial to get the trial stopped.
It was clear to me he made up both of his main personalities in the movie.
Actually the Roy personality came out to the psychiatrist before Vail confronted him about the tape, so I don't think this is the explanation. When Vail comes with the tape, the doctor already wanted to tell him she suspected MPD in Aaron but he didn't let her finish cause he was in a hurry to confront Aaron about the sex tape. So I maintain he had it planned long before the actual murder and arrest took place, his plan all along was to use an insanity defense and Vail's help made it easier for him.
shareBoth Roy and the stuttering, child-like Aaron was fake personalites
The real Aaron is the one you see at the end of the movie
As to people who say "it's very difficult to fake multiple personality disorder"
Well.. Edward Norton was pretty convincing, was'nt he? ;)
Jack Nicholson, Robert DeNiro, Leonardo diCaprio, Matt Damon (and many others) could easily do it as well
My understanding of the whole story with fake personalities is as follows:
The Aaron Stampler we see in the very last scene is the real Aaron.
Both Roy and the stuttering shy Aaron were inventions. I imagine that he had invented this shy Aaron years before in order to worm into the archbishop's trust and inner circle. He would've been looked at by the bishop as someone too innocent and naive to ever tell on him or do anything about the abuse and very easily manipulated with a little kindness. This Aaron was the perfect candidate for an altar boy, the voyeur tapes and he knew the bishop would see it this way too.
He probably knew about the past allegations of child sex abuse the archbishop had against him and saw that the DA's office was covering for him. So he invented this new Aaron in order to gain access to the archbishop and be able to kill him.
I do not believe he invented the timid Aaron at the time of his arrest, that seems very improbable, no matter how capable an actor and shrewd thinker he was. Besides, if they asked any witnessed from the church who knew him to testify, they would've blown his cover immediately by saying that he was never this shy, timid Aaron before the murder and the whole insanity case would've gone down the drain immediately.
OK so I haven't read all the responses on here or any other threads yet so forgive me for that, but if Roy is fake and Aaron is fake (I got that Aaron was fake and hadn't really seen that Roy was until starting to read these responses) was he just playing along with being raped, ie. he wanted to be seen as a victim of rape? How does that part figure into everything else?
shareThis is purely speculation on my part but the way I thought of it was that Aaron (the real one) had possibly been a victim of child sex abuse himself many years prior, which is why he specifically decided to go after the accused pedophile bishop. And the sex tapes they made, he might've actually enjoyed, who knows what kind of weird sexual stuff he was into, possibly as a result of being victim of abuse earlier in life. Maybe he didn't enjoy it but played along anyway. None of this is explained in the movie as far as I'm aware. Regardless, the tapes figured in nicely with his whole story and making him more sympathetic to whoever found out what kind of pervert the bishop was.
shareThis is purely speculation on my part but the way I thought of it was that Aaron (the real one) had possibly been a victim of child sex abuse himself many years prior
---
correct, but not speculation.
any film must be VERY careful in dealing with REAL pedophilia [the "rich man's sport"] so here it was done via the "uncredited" person Michael O'Donnell that Marty "invites" to court and then reveals that his "bad bad thing" was to in fact to get the bishop off a pedophile investigation when Michael was about 10
we are therefore expected to assume Aaron was a friend of Michael and had also been abused at same age [as Roy of course].
hence THAT was his motive in creating Aaron and getting even by worming his way back into the bishop's household and planning the murder.
the "sex tapes" were in fact little more than a MacGuffin as the murder motive had been set long before.
a very clever movie, especially the softly softly treatment of pedophilia that saw the director survive the movie [unlike with Kubrick and Eyes Wide Shut where he was "taken out" along with his pedophile footage]
http://www.kindleflippages.com/ablog/
I've read most of what was written in the board and they're really great theories but I want to give everybody a bit of clarification. The book offers an explanation to the "Real Aaron" problem. (Though the book and movies are mutually independent since they have somewhat different storylines.)
According to the book, Aaron was a good kid when he was living in Crikside. This was supported by interviews from people who lived in there (including his teacher, Rebecca, who was a great influence to him.) Interviews from the people from Aaron's previous homes before Saviour House agreed indicated that Aaron was good. This makes it clear that Aaron was indeed "Aaron" right before the start.
However, as he grew up, he developed confused beliefs on religion and sex. This triggered psychopathic tendencies (resorting to desperate measures like murder.) To make this shorter, he became psychopathic on the inside while he maintained to composure on the outside.
When he was arrested due to the Bishop's murder, he overheard two guards talking about Dr. Molly Arrington and that she was "an expert in dual personality disorders." This gave Aaron an idea to split his two sides into two personalities. Since he read a lot of books, including the so-called "bible of psychology", and with the help of a Genius level IQ, he was able to pull of the trick. Right under their noses.
Also because of this, he was sent to a mental institution until he's cured then he'll walk free. Vail fears this because he let a psycho slip his grasp. According to the book, Vail was haunted by it. It became his primal fear.
However, as he grew up, he developed confused beliefs on religion and sex
---
absolute utter and total Hairy Legged Lesbian CRAP
the issue was the Bishop being a REEEEEAL pedophile [not like the pronked meaning ascribed to Lester in American Beauty].
Aaron's mate O'Donnell [and probably Aaron himself] tried to prosecute but law turned a blind eye to what the lousy Catholic Church has done since Jesus was a boy
he took revenge [as my own father did for me back in 1958]. He knocked the priest's teeth out of his mouth and that ended his sermons and made him a fearful little PRIMATE. But he never touched another boy
http://www.kindleflippages.com/ablog/
It actually happened. In the book. But if you choose to deny why what had happened in the original story, it is your choice. Either way, Aaron still ended up psychotic.
shareyou can't explain yourself in English [or even american] - where are you from.
http://www.kindleflippages.com/ablog/
[deleted]
so you and dominic are the 2 latest "people" paid by american govt to follow me around - you both joined this week and only posts are to try to "engage" me by making stupid claims re movies
simple, as for the rest, you go on ignore
sorry about your day job, like didn't last long.
http://www.kindleflippages.com/ablog/
so you and dominic are the 2 latest "people" paid by american govt to follow me around - you both joined this week and only posts are to try to "engage" me by making stupid claims re movies
My advice......read the books if you liike the story....they provide a lot more details about it.
share