Couldn't Arthur make his son not prosecute Linderman with his power? Why have him killed instead? I might have missed something...could someone enlighten me?

That's a good point, I haven't thought about that before

Too many people know. You can't mind wipe that many people and not have it seem suspious, it's too large - whole killing Nathan stops the bit bull and scares people.

I thought that Arthur just wanted Nathan dead and prosecuting Linderman was as good of an excuse as any other. He didn't try very hard verbally to stop Nathan either.

Having him be "persuaded" would be way less suspicious then having Nathan die. Having him die days before the investigation started looks extremely bad on linderman.

And if the investigation was way more than just Nathan, then how would killing just one person make everything go away?

Having Arthur persuade him would have made way more sense, but the accident was never meant to have him involved and now the writers are trying to force it into that situation, whether or not if it makes sense.

So he changes the minds of like 100 people, or kills the man who has the vendetta perhaps scaring the next guy in the process.

He wouldn't have to change the minds of 100s of people, make Nathan believe its not worth following through anymore, and get him to have the case dropped.

And having Nathan killed to make everyone scared to investigate linderman would just make him all the more suspicious. Plus, I doubt the DA would just run away if it had just become even more obvious that Linderman is bad.

Well, it worked in ever mob movie I ever saw, it's not like Heroes made this idea up. I had no issues with this storyline.

If Arthur could permanently brainwash all of the necessary people in the state government and in the media then he would have taken the world over already 20 years ago. We're talking a boatload of lawyers, paralegals, secretaries, lawmakers, reporters... hundreds of people likely knew about the potential investigation. Nathan obviously wasn't the only one working on this..

Arthur can't turn them all - he'd be too powerful. And Visitor is right. You kill off the guy that was the most gung-ho about filing suit and everyone else suddenly decides it is not worth pursuing.

Well they actually wanted it to look like an accident didn't they?
This way they would had talked about bad luck, the case would had been taken down or were less effective for the people vs lindeman and arthur would had stayed covered.

I don't believe that Nathan is Arthur's son.

The creative staff sure likes to talk about much Robert and Cristine look like Adrian...

And I agree.

Believe all you want, it isn't gonna change facts. Nathan is Arthur's son. He's the spitting image of Arthur at the same age, and he had started walking before Arthur ever met Linderman.

Ingtar,

Go back and re-read GN#25 (War Buddies, part 2). It should help. Peace.

Creator

Arthur says it: "Once Nathan sinks his teeth in, he doesn't let go." He knew that Nathan would be one tough cookie and not easily dissuaded from going after Linderman. I like how there's a certain, twisted sort of pride in Arthur's words as he says it. He acknowledges Nathan's tenacity, but only the way a torero acknowledges the courage of a bull before he kills him. To Arthur, there's only Arthur. If anyone, even one of his sons, gets in his way, he won't rest until he's made sure he's the one left standing.

Great assessment! Yeah, I think there was a sense of pride, as sick as that is, for he gets it from Arthur.

Arthur made it sound like he just didn't want Nathan continuing with the case "I'm asking as your father" that whole deal "strain on the family" I think Arthur would have been willing to take even more drastic actions if his son wasn't involved with the case.



As for Nathan being Arthur's son, he has to be. Again, in reference to War Buddies, they even drew Arthur to look like Nathan. They are too similar, looks, personality, "tenacity". Add in the fact that Angela tells Nathan his father was upset he didn't have the "genetic code" it doesn't sound like the kind of interest you'd take in a kid who wasn't your own.

I think it was more if Nathan wasn't involved in the case he wouldn't have to kill him. "I'll talk to him one more time, I at least owe him that."

I actually didn't think about that. It really would have made sense for Arthur to just change Nathan's mind. Even if Nathan was really strong minded or whatever, we've never seen the power of persuasion NOT work on a person.

I bring up a point I've made elsewhere:

Nathan's sudden decision not to investigate/prosecute Linderman would have raised eyebrows and been, itself, cause for investigation.

Nathan's death in a car crash would not.

I considered this to be the reason.

Nathan was just too determined.

My only problem with it is that that means that Angela's concern for Nathan was not very strong, and I loved her in this episode for her heart. Dilemma.

How does that mean Angela didn't care for her son?

This is the problem with framing a whole new and previously unintended explanation on established events in your continuity; the puzzle pieces don't always fit terribly well. Surely, with all the powers and connections Arthur has, there are a hundred ways he could stop prosecution of his and Linderman's nefarious activities that don't involve killing Nathan, or even DO involve killing him, but are far more surefire and less obvious than sending goons to run him off the road. Unfortunately, though, the writers already showed this method used in the attempt on Nathan's life, and so they just have to go with it, even when it is no longer logical.

If Arthur had used mind control on Nathan, he would have gotten even better results by leaving Nathan in his position and manipulating the investigation/prosecution from there. As another lawyer, he would have the understanding to make subtle, unnoticeable changes in Nathan's thoughts that could have lead to a mistrial, dismissed case or some other exculpatory result. Just make Nathan forget some basic little stuff that could be attributed to carelessness.

Aurthur is smart, Linderman might be smarter...

Killing Nathan stops any fingers pointed at Arthur since Nathan knows of a conection beyond Linderman and Arthur being legal clients...

Notice he didn't care about Linderman going down, just that he didn't want any fingers being directed his way...

If he alters Nathan's mind, there are people around him that still have a case built, and even if Arthur tries to trigger a response in Nathan to forget or let it go, the people he works for won't let it slide... They would reconvince Nathan to go after Linderman, or question his sudden change of heart... Nathan is surrounded by people, namely the fbi, that want this case tried before a court of law...

If Arthur has his son killed, He can claim Linderman was the one that ordered the hit, since it was Linderman's people that tried to kill Nathan... And Arthur can let Linderman take the fall for that and anything he might have a connection to basically making Linderman his "fall guy".


Linderman probably realized this as well since he took measure to make sure that Arthur would end up dead, namely bringing Angella up to speed... I'm also sure he didn't want to kill Nathan for whatever reason; compassion, guilt, or his own purposes...

Either way, it shows that Arthur is a driving force behind the scenes and uses other means besides his powers to effect the changes he wants...

Great post, Gnosis

Which is exactly why killing Nathan would be ineffective, and why I suggested Arthur keep Nathan on the case. The case would still exist. If they killed Nathan, the government would just assign another DA to the case.

Influencing Nathan's mind while he prosecuted the case would have been the best way to make the case go away permanently and without great suspicion. For example, Arthur could have influenced Nathan into using evidence that had been illegally obtained. Most people would chalk that up to an over zealous DA. At least it would be less suspicious than having him knocked off, and it would destroy the case they had built.

You seem to have only replied to part of my post to try and support you arguement...


Arthur can take a memory, or implant ideas, but even if he did what you propose, it doesn't mean that Nathan would do it. There are other people around helping to prepair the case and if Arthur is smart, which he is, he knows that altering Nathan's mind isn't a sure-fire thing and can either be undone by people around him supplying him with his lost memories incidentally, or having his motives questioned under suspicion... With Angela it was easy because she was always around Arthur and therefore any information she got about what he was up to wasn't in jepordy of being conflicted by information given by others, until Linderman healed her memories...

Arthur knows Nathan can link his activities to Linderman, if Nathan dies by Linderman's associates, Linderman, not Arthur will be blamed for the murder and anything tying Arthur to Linderman dies with Nathan..

Nathan is around too many people that are informed on what he is doing to effectively alter his mind without memory conflicts or questions being raised... Even if he tried to make him use illegally gaind evidence, there is no sure-fire way that would work, especially if the people in the D.A's office go over the case and the evidence... (Which they do at every step of the case...)

Questions will be raised about Nathan's death, but who will they look at? Linderman. Linderman's men will say their boss ordered the hit. Nathatn is Arthur's son, why would anyone believe that Arthur, Linderman's attorny would kill his own son just to free his client? Most people do not Know Arthur and Linderman are friends/Associates... Linderman would be the fall guy, there is no risk in having Nathan killed (who knew he would fly or even manifest powers?) plus it seperates Arthur from Linderman. I'm sure Linderman caught on, since he was quick to heal Angela's mind and set Arthur's death in motion...

The problem with that is that might be considered erratic behavior from Nathan, so the other people working in the office would stop him from using said evidence ether by talking him out of it or changing DA (due to him being to emotionally involved) to keep him from doing anything foolish.

No, not at all. You think the DA who has just announced his intent to prosecute the most notorious mobster around suddenly and mysteriously crashing to his death wouldn't be cause of suspicion?! Particularly when there would be physical evidence the car had been rammed by another vehicle? If Nathan changes his mind, people will think he got cold feet, was bribed, etc., but it won't be any major headline news. If Nathan suddenly and shockingly turns up dead, THAT raises the question of foul play.

To the position that Nathan is the only one who knows of a special connection between Arthur and Linderman- how so? It's public knowledge that Linderman is Arthur's client, and has probably been so for decades. Nathan and Peter recall dinner parties in their home to which Linderman and the other elders would be invited, one of which we see in this last episode. Surely there are a number of other people who are aware that Arthur and Linderman have a long-standing personal association. Moreover, Nathan has seldom if ever demonstrated any specific knowledge of a deep relationship between the two that wouldn't be obvious to a whole lot of folks. When a potential illegal campaign contribution is mentioned to Nathan in the first season, he refers to Linderman as a "friend of his father's" as though it's public knowledge, and when yelling at his father in this last episode, he calls Linderman "your client." He obviously wasn't all that deeply involved in their dealings, since he didn't even know powers existed until he flew to catch Peter several months after his father's "death" (he apparently rationalized away the reflexive flight at the car crash), and when discussing the prosecution with Peter, neither of them seems to think their father was actually involved in any of Linderman's nefarious activities, but rather that he's simply his attorney.

Arthur can read and control minds, erase memories, and probably a heck of a lot of other things we don't know about (given that he absorbs powers through touch). He has people working for him who can project powerful illusions, turn anything into gold (think of the bribing power!), etc. Rigging an investigation or a trial would be extremely easy for someone in that position (it's probably been a longstanding strategy in his career as a lawyer, I'll wager)- control witnesses, create fake witnesses and evidence at your whim, control prosecutors, judges and juries, the works. And even if you were so lazy that killing your son seemed like a better way to go, there would be far more surefire ways of doing so- you could just use telekinesis to pull his car off the road, for example, or do so through illusions (eg. changing the "apparent" trajectory of the road to cause him to drive into some trees). That way, you'd leave no tire marks or dents indicating a chase and attack on the road, and would be more or less positive to kill him, whereas the haphazard "ram-him-with-goons-in-a-car" method obviously failed. I think it's pretty clear that the writers decided in writing this season that it would turn out Arthur was still alive and was a bad guy, and then went back and retroactively framed this explanation on events they had already established without that idea in mind, and consequently that the resulting sequence of events portrayed is not terribly logical. Not a huge deal, but true nevertheless.