830 replies to this topic

[LI_Ann]

If we were in the "real world" as opposed to TVLand..... Peter would never be responsible or have his career damaged by anything Neal did unless he actually helped him do it. Let's remember that Neal was released and placed "under Peter's supervision." When a criminal is released from prison on parole, they are assigned to a Parole Officer (under the PO's supervision). They often break the law again when on parole and no one blames the PO. It's just what happens sometimes.

Everyone seems to imply that Peter got Neal out of prison. Peter may have picked him up and told the higher ups that Neal would be a useful asset. Let's not kid ourselves, Peter isn't high enough on the FBI food chain to make such a decision. He's not even a Supervisory Special Agent (SSA) which he should be IMHO.

Edited by LI_Ann, 14 January 2012 - 11:40 PM.

[Surreal44]

Yes and no....Since Fowler was with OPR and OPR offered Neal and Kate that deal....Peter's career would not have been affected. Of course that plan didn't work out. If it had, we wouldn't have White Collar or we'd be stuck with Kate.

The lie detector test Neal passed in In the Red was Sara's voice detector on a laptop thingey. It wasn't the same as an FBI polygraph.

Neal wouldn't have had Alex go to Diana's to steal the music box if Peter hadn't stolen it from the FBI evidence locker. So let's call that one a wash.

Neal and Mozzie may have played a role in Keller's actions but it was Mozzie who stole the treasure and the FBI who let Keller escape (more than once)

No one is flawless - not even Peter I admit Neal is not flawless. If he was, he would be useless to the FBI and not as interesting as he is.

Edited to add: I don't know about Peter being in the clear for Neal running off with OPR's blessing. It was a secret deal; the paper work would have been buried, and I'm not really sure the deal was so cut and dry. I suspect Neal was going to be captured or killed, and then OPR wouldn't back up his deal. That would leave Peter with an escaped fugitive on his watch and care. His reputation would have been tarnished, and after everything with Fowler, he would have probably been fired.

I don't think it matters to Peter whether or not Neal could lie to a voice stress analyzer or not. The fact is that he lied and passed. And knowing how Neal is, would you really believe how honest he is? Really? If you were in Peter's shoes, knowing as much about Neal as you do...would you have believed him?

About the music box...Neal stole it AFTER he found out the truth. He was supposed to be working with Peter, remember? Instead, he decided to go his own way and have the box stolen. It's not a wash, because Peter was protecting Neal. Neal was furthering his own interests. There's a huge difference in intent.

With regards to Keller, I will once again point out that Neal did not take the threat of his presence very seriously. He seemed more irritated than alarmed at Keller's presence. And he was far more interested in saving his own butt -- and the treasure -- than he was with Keller. The FBI hasn't managed to hold onto Keller, but Neal, with all his awesome skills, hasn't managed to figure out a way to stop him either. So pooh pooh the FBI, but I'm not impressed with Neal's laziness about Keller popping back on the radar.

Wasn't it Sara's "voice analyzer test" that Neal passed and not an actual FBI lie detector? He spent about 5 minutes with it and answered approximately 2 questions. In "On Guard", Peter asks him questions for five hours with a standard, FBI issue lie detector. I really don't see any comparison, and it's just one of the things I don't understand/like about season 3. I could understand Peter's reaction to the test if he were only able to ask Neal a couple of questions before he got interrupted. I don't know why the writers had Peter question him so long and still not believe him. For me, it made Peter look like a some kind of a lunatic.

As far as who is to blame - I blame the writers for taking my favorite characters and making them all behave stupidly. I can't wait for Tuesday's show, but I also can't wait for this whole mess to be resolved.

I don't think Neal was hooked up to the lie detector for five hours. The responses would have been so wild after an hour that none of them would have been reliable. I think Peter interrogated Neal for five hours, but again...knowing Neal's history, why is it even a question of why Peter would bother to believe him?

Even if Sara's test and the FBI test (I don't think the FBI test is better...it's really more about the questions asked, and Peter didn't ask the right ones) are not similar, Neal planted that seed about his ability to lie through a test. It may not be fair, but again, that's his own fault.

I think that the characters have been excellent this season (with the exception of the episode "Scott Free", which I refuse to admit is even canon, and of course, Sara). I like the tension, because if you actually pay attention, under that tension the bromance still exists. Peter and Neal still have each others' backs for when it counts, and that's really what's important. I don't need them to be arm-in-arm and happy with each other. In fact, in Season 2 I thought things were getting a little ridiculous. It was too early for them to be that comfortable with each other. In RL, no, it would have been fine, but not for a tv show that needs to continue on for several more seasons.

I do agree that Bancroft appears to be the head with Hughes next in line. Hughes office being in the White Collar Unit may just be to give him more screen time.

But Neal didn't break into Sara's house, Mozzie did, so he wasn't lying. Sara's test was actually a voice analyzer and not a polygraph, so that's not really an even comparison.

In The Pilot and in Threads, I think it's 'understandable' to see Neal trying ways to get out of the anklet. After that, the only time he tried to get out was to save Kate. Then came the treasure and the accusation from Peter. Neal has 'withheld' information from Peter, which many can say is the same as lying. But Peter has also lied to Neal and withheld information as well. They both gave each other reasons to doubt. Peter is the FBI agent who tells everyone that he keeps his word and can be trusted. Neal is the conman who lies for a living. I would expect more from Peter than Neal simply because of who Peter is and what he represents.

The closest that Neal ever came to a blowout with Peter was during Hard Sell at Avery's party. That blowout was nothing compared to Under the Radar.

Sara asked Neal if he know who broke into her house. He said no. So he flat-out lied to her then. And as I said above, Neal planted that seed of doubt in Peter's mind.

I didn't say I didn't understand Neal's reasoning. I said that Neal was planning to betray Peter, and it wasn't for Peter's benefit. Neal got angry at Peter, but the circumstances for the accusations were totally different. Neal hadn't just been kidnapped, dealt with the fear of the explosion (Peter had agents and Neal to worry about), seen his partner held at gun point, and then be forced to kill a man.

The emotional circumstances were completely different.

And again, I'm not saying Neal was necessarily wrong for feeling the way he felt. I'm saying that Neal is not so innocent. Also, Neal is a big boy. He is responsible for his actions -- just like Keller. So if you don't want to lay the blame at Neal's feet for Keller's actions, I can't imagine why you'd blame Peter for Neal's actions.

Edited by Surreal44, 14 January 2012 - 11:59 PM.

[CathysOpinion]

If we were in the "real world" as opposed to TVLand..... Peter would never be responsible or have his career damaged by anything Neal did unless he actually helped him do it. Let's remember that Neal was released and placed "under Peter's supervision." When a criminal is released from prison on parole, they are assigned to a Parole Officer (under the PO's supervision). They often break the law again when on parole and no one blames the PO. It's just what happens sometimes.

Everyone seems to imply that Peter got Neal out of prison. Peter may have picked him up and told the higher ups that Neal would be a useful asset. Let's not kid ourselves, Peter isn't high enough on the FBI food chain to make such a decision. He's not even a Supervisory Special Agent (SSA) which he should be IMHO.

Criminal Minds is the only FBI themed show that uses the title Supervisory Special Agent. Without A Trace, Sam Malone, was the supervisor, but he didn't have the SSA title. Numb3rs, Don Epps, was the supervisor, without the SSA title. I've never heard the SSA title except for Criminal Minds (and it's short lived spin off).

We know Peter is a boss. In 'Forging Bonds', he was put in charge of a special White Collar team. Ruiz is in charge of Organized Crime, and Kimberly Rice is in charge of Missing Persons. White Collar just doesn't use the SSA title.

[Surreal44]

If we were in the "real world" as opposed to TVLand..... Peter would never be responsible or have his career damaged by anything Neal did unless he actually helped him do it. Let's remember that Neal was released and placed "under Peter's supervision." When a criminal is released from prison on parole, they are assigned to a Parole Officer (under the PO's supervision). They often break the law again when on parole and no one blames the PO. It's just what happens sometimes.

Everyone seems to imply that Peter got Neal out of prison. Peter may have picked him up and told the higher ups that Neal would be a useful asset. Let's not kid ourselves, Peter isn't high enough on the FBI food chain to make such a decision. He's not even a Supervisory Special Agent (SSA) which he should be IMHO.

This isn't parole. This is Neal serving out a jail sentence. Neal isn't "released" -- he's still a ward of the state. Because Peter is in charge of him (like a warden), I do think that Peter's reputation and career would be damaged if Neal ran off on him. If Neal ran, it would show a lack of good judgement on his part, an inability to control his surroundings, and it would make him look incompetent.

Peter did get Neal out of prison. He accepted the idea of the deal. He's the one who had to push for Neal's release. I'm sure he probably had to call in favors to not be laughed right out of the building. You're right -- the ultimate decision was up to a panel of some sort, but Peter is the one who approached them about it.

So, technicality aside, Peter got Neal out of prison.

[LI_Ann]

1326603946[/url]' post='1529251']
This isn't parole. This is Neal serving out a jail sentence. Neal isn't "released" -- he's still a ward of the state. Because Peter is in charge of him (like a warden), I do think that Peter's reputation and career would be damaged if Neal ran off on him. If Neal ran, it would show a lack of good judgement on his part, an inability to control his surroundings, and it would make him look incompetent.

Peter did get Neal out of prison. He accepted the idea of the deal. He's the one who had to push for Neal's release. I'm sure he probably had to call in favors to not be laughed right out of the building. You're right -- the ultimate decision was up to a panel of some sort, but Peter is the one who approached them about it.

So, technicality aside, Peter got Neal out of prison.

White Collar is often a bit vague or fuzzy on some of the details we pick up. There's simply not enough time in a one hour show (42) minutes to explain these type of details. it's probably not as clear cut as either of us believe.

[ASLAN95]

"Blame" is too harsh a word, but I can't come up with a better phrase. ^^ The blame for the kidnapping obviously lays at the feet of Keller and his minion(s). They are the ones taking such a horrible action.

It's when people blame Peter or the FBI for Keller that I kind of blink and wonder what happened, because while they are not totally 'blameless', they certainly didn't play as big a role in Keller's actions as say Moz and Neal have.

Neal and Mozzie are not responsible for Kellers actions , period. You have put responibility on Neal for Keller.. Further Neal and Mozzie are not law enforcement., It is not their job to capture or stop Keller. It is the FBI and the FBI has let him escape several times. Neal did lure Keller and FBI let him escape. Peter knew as well Neal that Keller was dangerous but he switched his focus on capturing Neal.

One thing I wanted to bring up that had been in the spoiler thread was people seem flabbergasted when I mention that Neal has betrayed Peter. Whatever you think about Peter's actions in the series, his goal has always been to protect Neal from himself. Peter never hid anything from Neal with the intent to hurt him, or to be malicious.

This line brings to mind the old quote, " The road to Hell is paved with good intentions."

BUT Neal has done things like that -- planning to break out of the anklet after Peter went to the trouble of getting him out of prison "Threads", chasing after the music box and running off to be with Kate (I count this as a betrayal because Neal basically didn't care that he was going to screw Peter's career up), stealing the music box again (by breaking into a friend's home)...the list goes on with Neal.

Neal never signed on that he had to protect Peter's career. Besides what is more important? Peter's career or saving Kate? Neal was manipulated into escaping by OPR. The whole seeking the music box was because Kate was held by Fowler supposedly. Neal would have served his time and be free without the intervention of a government agent. So who was betrayed ? I say Neal right from the start. Also in Coutdown Peter was definately trying to get the evidencce to arrest Neal. That is not for Neal's good. Unless you think prison is good for Neal? Peters actions speak louder. Neal just excercised his natural right for survival in getting the manifest to protect himself. Peter stole the music box and substituted a forgery. Neal just had it stolen back and gave to the Russian museum. I agree not from an altruistic goal. But Neal is not hypocritical, Peter is. Peter stole the box from evidence because he wanted to solve the mystery, not from motivations of nobility. Peter's reason as well as Neal's are not noble. Their reasons are the same to solve the mystery. But it is criminal if Neal does it, but not when Peter does it. Why? Because Peter has a badge? This is not to say that Peter is all bad, just that both do the same things.

Neal never agreed that he had to forsake all others for Peter, just that he would help solve crimes , and he fulfilled that promise and duty.

Maybe he never intends to harm Peter, but there is an emotional price Peter has to pay every time Neal does something. It's no wonder he blew up at him at the end of "Under the Radar". You can only take so much damage to your heart before you get angry.

How about Neal getting framed ? . Does that equal emotional pain to Neal. How about Neal's pain when Peter hid Kate, kept him from her. Peter lied to Neal about the box and hid Kate and Neal's love died. Yet it is OK for Peter to used a stolen treasure for his El. How about some equality? Yet Neal does not blow up at Peter.

Also, as a note to people who always seem to wonder why Peter didn't believe the lie detector test -- In "In the Red", Neal passed a lie detector test, and then was later found to you know...be lying. So Neal's own history came back to bite him once again. Peter knows he can pass a lie detector test, even if he's lying.

There is a difference between a voice stress test and a lie detector. Why give an illegal test to Neal? Violates law of self incrimination. If Peter won't believe the evidence of innocence but only evidence of guilt? I wonder if Neal was shown to have lied in the test, would Peter believe that?

How is Peter supposed to trust Neal when Neal has misled him about so many other things?

Disclaimer: I promise that I really do love Neal. I just like to point out that he is not as flawless, shiny and selfless as fanon makes him out to be sometimes. ^^

I don't blame Peter for not trusting Neal. But why should Neal trust Peter when Peter has lied to Neal? In order to recieve trust one has to give it back. Neal gave his trust, Peter never returned the trust. Again an unequal friendship.

Neal and Mozzie are not LEO so the job to stop or protect from Keller belongs to the FBI and they failed several times.

[LI_Ann]

When I commented about Neal's release from prison, I forgot to mention that whatever influence Peter had in that decision wasn't for Neal or for some other noble purpose. Peter did it because he knew Neal could help him catch the Dutchman so he did whatever he did ( most likely a recommendation) to further his career (basically a selfish motivation) and not to help Neal.

Edited by LI_Ann, 15 January 2012 - 12:56 AM.

[ASLAN95]

When I commented about Neal's release from prison, I forgot to mention that whatever influence Peter had in that decision wasn't for Neal or for some other noble purpose. Peter did it because he knew Neal could help him catch the Dutchman so he did whatever he did ( most likely a recommendation) to further his career (basically a selfish motivation) and not to help Neal.

Absolutely right. Peter agreed to the work release for his own reasons. Of course it helped that he liked Neal and that Neal was smart and non violent.

Peter is an FBI agent. It is expected that he would arrest Neal if he caught him and got evidence that Neal had or stole the treasure. Peter may feel bad that Neal would go to prison, but his feelings would not stop him. Neal knows that and Neal's job is not to get caught. Based on that Neal had a duty and obligation to make sure Peter did not get any evidence the treasure existed.

Remember that Neal said that to Alex. His job was to catch her and her job was not to get caught.

Both Peter and Neal are conflicted by their roles and friendship. So Peter vacilates between hunt mode and partner mode. Neal is torn between old fiends and a lot of money and new friends and new job.

Neal has shown he will sacrifice his life for Peter and so has Peter. Peter went willing went into the limo with Adler. Peter knew that it was Neal that they wanted and that Neal would be the one to get them out, which he did.

[Sglab]

About the music box...Neal stole it AFTER he found out the truth. He was supposed to be working with Peter, remember? Instead, he decided to go his own way and have the box stolen. It's not a wash, because Peter was protecting Neal. Neal was furthering his own interests. There's a huge difference in intent.

cut your post for space and mainly focus here. This ITA. I don't understand what Neal was thinking having the box stolen. Peter had told him everything and he was being completely honest at this point. Peter was totally focused on Fowler and he even told Neal in the van they had found him. To me it was mainly the breaking into Diana's home that was a betrayal.

I also agree Peter has always had good intentions with Neal.

Oh and someone mentioned the fact Peter originally got Neal out of prison to help him with the Dutchman case I guess referring to Peter doing that for his own gain. Well yes he did but then that's hardly a secret. Neal knew that.

Peter as much suspected Neal wanting the deal for his own gain. But then they got closer and Peter kept things from Neal to protect him.

I know now I sound like I hate Neal. LOL. I really don't. He's really an interesting and complex character.

[Surreal44]

Neal and Mozzie are not responsible for Kellers actions , period. You have put responibility on Neal for Keller.. Further Neal and Mozzie are not law enforcement., It is not their job to capture or stop Keller. It is the FBI and the FBI has let him escape several times. Neal did lure Keller and FBI let him escape. Peter knew as well Neal that Keller was dangerous but he switched his focus on capturing Neal.

I have said that Neal and Mozzie's actions have led Keller to taking Elizabeth. I have never said they were to 'blame' for it, because that is Keller's sole responsibility. And I do believe that Neal and Mozzie were lazy in dealing with Keller. The moment Keller threatened Mozzie, he should have concocted a better plan to get rid of Keller.

Neal has set other people up in this series to make sure they get caught. But when Keller showed back up, he was solely concerned about his own butt. The FBI needs to make sure that Keller remains in custody, yes. But Neal and Mozzie were too busy being greedy to consider Keller as a real danger, and that was just stupid of them. There isn't really an excuse, especially because Neal flat-out lied to Peter (by using Keller). He said in front of Peter, "I don't have the treasure". Nope, he didn't lie directly to Peter...but he did lie.

As for the rest of the post, I think we are not connecting on what I've been trying to say. The point of my posts is not to point out what a horrible person Neal is, or to put him down for following his nature or his own desires. It's who he is. The point of the post is to say, "Look, this is why Peter can't, doesn't, and won't believe Neal". It's not a justification of Peter's actions. It's an explanation of them.

I don't really care about who is 'right' or who is 'wrong'. I'm just tired of seeing Peter basically being called a self-centered jerk who doesn't care about Neal, when canon has clearly proven that statement to be false.

And the last statement about Peter lying to Neal: Yes, trust has to be earned. Neal had not earned the trust that Peter could come to him with that information, because Peter knows Neal. He knows that Neal will throw commonsense to the wind and do something stupid (like have the music box stolen, thus proving Peter's beliefs about Neal to be correct).

So again, if you look at the reasons behind the lies, the two don't compare. Peter lied to protect Neal; Neal lied (indirectly) in order to save his own hide.

One more note: Peter was checking into Kate without Neal's knowledge. He didn't like what he found. Granted, the Kate-is-a-hostage story was one giant plot hole, and if you think about it too long it will make your head explode, but come on. I just don't think that Kate had Neal's best interests at heart, and I think (as Peter did) that Neal was so blinded with love that he wouldn't see the truth until it was too late.

When I commented about Neal's release from prison, I forgot to mention that whatever influence Peter had in that decision wasn't for Neal or for some other noble purpose. Peter did it because he knew Neal could help him catch the Dutchman so he did whatever he did ( most likely a recommendation) to further his career (basically a selfish motivation) and not to help Neal.

I don't totally agree. Peter saw something in Neal that was worth the effort of getting him out of prison. If you watch the pilot, Peter alternates between exasperation and regret when dealing with Neal. He doesn't want to send Neal back to prison. You can see it on his face. He gave Neal a few lectures on proper behavior, not to save his own skin, but to straighten Neal out and try to help him stay out of prison.

And this is before the true bromance blossomed. ;-) Peter likes Neal enough to take chances on him that he would never take with anyone else. He got Neal out of prison to help solve the case of the Dutchman...but I think he got Neal out of prison too because he didn't want to see Neal waste away for another four years.

cut your post for space and mainly focus here. This ITA. I don't understand what Neal was thinking having the box stolen. Peter had told him everything and he was being completely honest at this point. Peter was totally focused on Fowler and he even told Neal in the van they had found him. To me it was mainly the breaking into Diana's home that was a betrayal.

I also agree Peter has always had good intentions with Neal.

Oh and someone mentioned the fact Peter originally got Neal out of prison to help him with the Dutchman case I guess referring to Peter doing that for his own gain. Well yes he did but then that's hardly a secret. Neal knew that.

Peter as much suspected Neal wanting the deal for his own gain. But then they got closer and Peter kept things from Neal to protect him.

I know now I sound like I hate Neal. LOL. I really don't. He's really an interesting and complex character.

Saying that Neal is sometimes wrong doesn't mean that you hate a character. ;-) It means that you have a clear vision of the character, and where they go wrong.

I would pick Peter apart more, but since so many people already do it for me, it's totally not necessary. -pets Peter - He's not perfect, but I feel like people twist him into something that he's not in order to make Neal look better. Neal doesn't need to look better. Neal is an excellent character in his own right, with all the good and the bad attached to him.

Ok, so for future speculation based on spoilers: So if Peter decides to possibly give Neal a chance to commute his sentence, is that Peter still being selfish? Is it ok that he does so? And (although I don't believe this will happen) if Neal gets a commuted sentence, what then will happen? He likes his life now, so if he's freed, what will he do?

[WildHorseFantasy]

I have said that Neal and Mozzie's actions have led Keller to taking Elizabeth. I have never said they were to 'blame' for it, because that is Keller's sole responsibility. And I do believe that Neal and Mozzie were lazy in dealing with Keller. The moment Keller threatened Mozzie, he should have concocted a better plan to get rid of Keller.

Neal has set other people up in this series to make sure they get caught. But when Keller showed back up, he was solely concerned about his own butt. The FBI needs to make sure that Keller remains in custody, yes. But Neal and Mozzie were too busy being greedy to consider Keller as a real danger, and that was just stupid of them. There isn't really an excuse, especially because Neal flat-out lied to Peter (by using Keller). He said in front of Peter, "I don't have the treasure". Nope, he didn't lie directly to Peter...but he did lie.

As for the rest of the post, I think we are not connecting on what I've been trying to say. The point of my posts is not to point out what a horrible person Neal is, or to put him down for following his nature or his own desires. It's who he is. The point of the post is to say, "Look, this is why Peter can't, doesn't, and won't believe Neal". It's not a justification of Peter's actions. It's an explanation of them.

I don't really care about who is 'right' or who is 'wrong'. I'm just tired of seeing Peter basically being called a self-centered jerk who doesn't care about Neal, when canon has clearly proven that statement to be false.

And the last statement about Peter lying to Neal: Yes, trust has to be earned. Neal had not earned the trust that Peter could come to him with that information, because Peter knows Neal. He knows that Neal will throw commonsense to the wind and do something stupid (like have the music box stolen, thus proving Peter's beliefs about Neal to be correct).

So again, if you look at the reasons behind the lies, the two don't compare. Peter lied to protect Neal; Neal lied (indirectly) in order to save his own hide.

One more note: Peter was checking into Kate without Neal's knowledge. He didn't like what he found. Granted, the Kate-is-a-hostage story was one giant plot hole, and if you think about it too long it will make your head explode, but come on. I just don't think that Kate had Neal's best interests at heart, and I think (as Peter did) that Neal was so blinded with love that he wouldn't see the truth until it was too late.



I don't totally agree. Peter saw something in Neal that was worth the effort of getting him out of prison. If you watch the pilot, Peter alternates between exasperation and regret when dealing with Neal. He doesn't want to send Neal back to prison. You can see it on his face. He gave Neal a few lectures on proper behavior, not to save his own skin, but to straighten Neal out and try to help him stay out of prison.

And this is before the true bromance blossomed. ;-) Peter likes Neal enough to take chances on him that he would never take with anyone else. He got Neal out of prison to help solve the case of the Dutchman...but I think he got Neal out of prison too because he didn't want to see Neal waste away for another four years.



Saying that Neal is sometimes wrong doesn't mean that you hate a character. ;-) It means that you have a clear vision of the character, and where they go wrong.

I would pick Peter apart more, but since so many people already do it for me, it's totally not necessary. -pets Peter - He's not perfect, but I feel like people twist him into something that he's not in order to make Neal look better. Neal doesn't need to look better. Neal is an excellent character in his own right, with all the good and the bad attached to him.

Ok, so for future speculation based on spoilers: So if Peter decides to possibly give Neal a chance to commute his sentence, is that Peter still being selfish? Is it ok that he does so? And (although I don't believe this will happen) if Neal gets a commuted sentence, what then will happen? He likes his life now, so if he's freed, what will he do?

Won't that depend on HOW he's given it? If the FBI (not Peter) say "Thanks for the help, Sayonara" that will cut him adrift with no options. He's hardly going to work at flipping burgers! And what about the other alleged crimes? I doubt everyone will forget them (I really don't like DC art crimes sniffing around and I bet Peter will live to regret it.) If Neal thinks they are after him, he's going to be tempted to split and feel betrayed. I don't think Peter would do all that, however mad he is. He cares about Neal staying straight now and would probably try and find a way to keep him on.

[ASLAN95]

I have said that Neal and Mozzie's actions have led Keller to taking Elizabeth. I have never said they were to 'blame' for it, because that is Keller's sole responsibility. And I do believe that Neal and Mozzie were lazy in dealing with Keller. The moment Keller threatened Mozzie, he should have concocted a better plan to get rid of Keller.

Neal has set other people up in this series to make sure they get caught. But when Keller showed back up, he was solely concerned about his own butt. The FBI needs to make sure that Keller remains in custody, yes. But Neal and Mozzie were too busy being greedy to consider Keller as a real danger, and that was just stupid of them. There isn't really an excuse, especially because Neal flat-out lied to Peter (by using Keller). He said in front of Peter, "I don't have the treasure". Nope, he didn't lie directly to Peter...but he did lie.

You may be tire of seeing Peter as portrayed as self centered, but that is exactly what you did by stating Neal and Mozzie were just being too greedy to take care of Keller. I have said several times it is not Neal's or Mozzie's job or responsibility to take care of Keller It was Peter's job and instead on focusing on Keller after he escaped again, Peter went after Neal.

Neal was speaking to Keller and yes he knew he had an audience. But tell me why telling the truth to Keller would have done anything to deflect Keller's intention of getting the treasure. Instead that would have focused Keller more intently on his goal to get the treasure and would have sent Neal to jail. Why should Neal not lie if it is to protect him from jail? I think that he has trod a fine line stating the truth to Peter yet not implicating himself.

As for the rest of the post, I think we are not connecting on what I've been trying to say. The point of my posts is not to point out what a horrible person Neal is, or to put him down for following his nature or his own desires. It's who he is. The point of the post is to say, "Look, this is why Peter can't, doesn't, and won't believe Neal". It's not a justification of Peter's actions. It's an explanation of them.

Your statement repeated above that Neal was too busy and greedy with deflecting suspicion with the Dega is definitely saying Neal was a horrible person . I can't see any to to see otherwise.

I don't really care about who is 'right' or who is 'wrong'. I'm just tired of seeing Peter basically being called a self-centered jerk who doesn't care about Neal, when canon has clearly proven that statement to be false.

Peter is just as self centered as Neal. He has relentlessly said he would arrest Neal if he stole the music box, then he did not. He refused Neal any acess to the woman he loved and Neal never got a chance to speak freely with her before she dies. I know that was because Peter believed she was bad news and I might agree, but Peter was deciding that for Neal. Peter does exhibit self righteous and all the negatives that implies. I really don't care if his intentions are good. More evil has been done in this world under good intentions. Hence, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

And the last statement about Peter lying to Neal: Yes, trust has to be earned. Neal had not earned the trust that Peter could come to him with that information, because Peter knows Neal. He knows that Neal will throw commonsense to the wind and do something stupid (like have the music box stolen, thus proving Peter's beliefs about Neal to be correct).

So again, if you look at the reasons behind the lies, the two don't compare. Peter lied to protect Neal; Neal lied (indirectly) in order to save his own hide.

A lie is a lie. If good intentions are all that makes a difference, then most of Neal's actions were based on good intentions. No, to differentiate those lies is just hypocrisy.

O

I don't totally agree. Peter saw something in Neal that was worth the effort of getting him out of prison. If you watch the pilot, Peter alternates between exasperation and regret when dealing with Neal. He doesn't want to send Neal back to prison. You can see it on his face. He gave Neal a few lectures on proper behavior, not to save his own skin, but to straighten Neal out and try to help him stay out of prison.

And this is before the true bromance blossomed. ;-) Peter likes Neal enough to take chances on him that he would never take with anyone else. He got Neal out of prison to help solve the case of the Dutchman...but I think he got Neal out of prison too because he didn't want to see Neal waste away for another four years.

Several times you have read more in the show that what is there. Like no difference between stress analyzer and lie detector Neal did not go under a 5 hour interrogation with the lie detector you said earlier. There is nothing in the show that said that he did not go under 5 hour interrogation with the lie detector.



The real point that I have made is that Peter and Neal do the same things. Neal does'nt say the full truth and neither does Peter. Peter hides news from Neal and so does Neal. I don't hate Peter, but during the season 3.5 I have been angry and annoyed at his schism. Also it has annoyed me that Peter always threatens Neal with prison . That was not funny the first time.

Peter can be a better friend by giving up his missionary zeal and accept that Neal has stayed for his own reasons not because he has been restrained. Peter has also been on a power trip, Neal can't have any personal life but what Peter approves. This is not an equal friendship and that makes it endurance very suspect.

[LI_Ann]

Oh and someone mentioned the fact Peter originally got Neal out of prison to help him with the Dutchman case I guess referring to Peter doing that for his own gain. Well yes he did but then that's hardly a secret. Neal knew that.

Of course Neal knew that but the fact that Neal knew the reason why Peter did it doesn't change that reason. Peter did it for himself and no one else.

A lie is a lie. If good intentions are all that makes a difference, then most of Neal's actions were based on good intentions. No, to differentiate those lies is just hypocrisy.

That's exactly the point I've been trying to make for the past two and a half years. It's hypocritical to accept Peter lying or tampering with evidence, i.e., stealing the music box from the FBI evidence locker and at the same time condemn Neal for the same behaviors. Peter isn't always right just because he has a badge and Neal isn't always wrong just because he was in prison.

[Zetsuei]

That's exactly the point I've been trying to make for the past two and a half years. It's hypocritical to accept Peter lying or tampering with evidence, i.e., stealing the music box from the FBI evidence locker and at the same time condemn Neal for the same behaviors. Peter isn't always right just because he has a badge and Neal isn't always wrong just because he was in prison.

I second that !
Both of them made mistakes in thier patnership. But we keep arguing in circles....

[LI_Ann]

1326686440[/url]' post='1529499']
I second that !
Both of them made mistakes in thier patnership. But we keep arguing in circles....

at least we're really good at it!

[Sglab]

Of course Neal knew that but the fact that Neal knew the reason why Peter did it doesn't change that reason. Peter did it for himself and no one else.




That's exactly the point I've been trying to make for the past two and a half years. It's hypocritical to accept Peter lying or tampering with evidence, i.e., stealing the music box from the FBI evidence locker and at the same time condemn Neal for the same behaviors. Peter isn't always right just because he has a badge and Neal isn't always wrong just because he was in prison.

He did it for the case (frankly not such a horrible motivation) to begin IMO but quickly realized he liked Neal and wanted to give him a chance at something different.

Personally it's less about committing crimes-because let's face it, Neal gets sent back to prison the show Is over-and more about their individual intentions. Yeah I know hell is paved with good intentions.

[Surreal44]

Of course Neal knew that but the fact that Neal knew the reason why Peter did it doesn't change that reason. Peter did it for himself and no one else.

That's exactly the point I've been trying to make for the past two and a half years. It's hypocritical to accept Peter lying or tampering with evidence, i.e., stealing the music box from the FBI evidence locker and at the same time condemn Neal for the same behaviors. Peter isn't always right just because he has a badge and Neal isn't always wrong just because he was in prison.

Is it as hypocritical as complaining incessantly about how awful Peter is, while hand-waving Neal's actions as charming or necessary?

No one is arguing that Peter is always right. But surely, he isn't always wrong either, and that is the issue I'm trying to discuss with so many people -- and obviously, it's not going anywhere. -shrug-

Basically, what I get is this:

It's ok for Neal to lie, steal, or hide things from Peter.
It's not ok for Peter to lie or hide things from Neal.

It's ok for Neal to be a criminal.
It's not ok for Peter to try to help him reform.

It's ok for Neal's actions to be blamed on Peter.
It's not ok to blame Keller's actions on Neal.

It's ok for Neal to be a criminal.
It's not ok for Mozzie to be a criminal.

It's ok for Neal to be selfish (if any of his actions could ever be viewed as such)
It's not ok for Peter to be selfish (if any of his actions could ever be viewed as such)

It's not ok to say Neal is wrong.
It's correct if one says Peter is wrong.

I know not everyone feels this way, and if I misunderstood what's been said, I ask your forgiveness. But this is really the impression I get from most of the viewers.

So is Neal ever wrong, and is Peter ever right?

[ASLAN95]

Is it as hypocritical as complaining incessantly about how awful Peter is, while hand-waving Neal's actions as charming or necessary?

No one is arguing that Peter is always right. But surely, he isn't always wrong either, and that is the issue I'm trying to discuss with so many people -- and obviously, it's not going anywhere. -shrug-

Basically, what I get is this:

It's ok for Neal to lie, steal, or hide things from Peter.
It's not ok for Peter to lie or hide things from Neal.

It's ok for Neal to be a criminal.
It's not ok for Peter to try to help him reform.

It's ok for Neal's actions to be blamed on Peter.
It's not ok to blame Keller's actions on Neal.

It's ok for Neal to be a criminal.
It's not ok for Mozzie to be a criminal.

It's ok for Neal to be selfish (if any of his actions could ever be viewed as such)
It's not ok for Peter to be selfish (if any of his actions could ever be viewed as such)

It's not ok to say Neal is wrong.
It's correct if one says Peter is wrong.

I know not everyone feels this way, and if I misunderstood what's been said, I ask your forgiveness. But this is really the impression I get from most of the viewers.

So is Neal ever wrong, and is Peter ever right?

Neal's actions are consistent with his character's role as a thief and a conman. Most of his actions are based on the desire to protect the friendship and protect himself and Mozzie. Peter on the other hand is a almost schizo with his desire to protect Neal and and yet wants to catch Neal in the criminal act to arrest him. That is not consistent with his role as a friend.

If Peter was consistent he should have dropped the treasure hunting once he one got evidence that Neal was innocent and two because chasing after Neal would lead to bad reprecussions. Instead Peter's zeal for the truth endangers the friendship and Neal's freedom. Of course it was required to put Neal in the untenable position to protect himself and Mozzie and also to protect his friendship with Peter. The writers did that .Neal knows that the friendship would die if Peter knew the truth because Peter is a FBI guy and it would compromise him too much not to arrest Neal if he knew. The writers decided they had to in introduce the mistrust and Peter's tenacity to get the truth.

We have all focused on Neal's choice to be a consultant or be a thief. But really Neal made that choice long ago. His problem is the temptation. Peter's choice has been worse. His desire to for the truth versus protection of Neal and his friendship Peter's role as a FBI person or his need to get things done regardless of method. Peter is faced with the hard decisons that go with changing from a black and white world to a world of shades of gray. Peter has yet to develop rules to deal with the world of grey.

Peter said in Home invasion that Neal had a lot of rules for a guy that goes without rules and that is true. Neal 's rules are fairly simple. It is OK to steal , lie etc for personal gain. But not to go after people who can't afford it or use methods of violence. Neal also has strong loyalty to friends that is not bounded by the law.

Legality is not important to Neal, but it is for Peter and he has strayed from that. But the writers don't focus on that , I guess because it would show Peter as having doubts about his vocation.

[shakespeareskate]

If Peter was consistent he should have dropped the treasure hunting once he one got evidence that Neal was innocent

This is what I have been trying to explain for ages now. Investigating the treasure's disappearance and investigating what Neal did are two different things. Peter is aware that they might end up being the same but for the sake of an investigation it makes a huge difference whether you investigate what a person did or whether you are looking into whether or not something disappeared or not.

At the end of On Guard Peter still suspected that Neal might be involved but the only evidence he had that suggested that the treasure was still out there had proven to be a false lead (because Neal switched the painting scrap), therefore what he was investigating was the existence of the treasure! Officially the treasure was destroyed but someone other than Neal or Mozzie could have taken it. It's Peter's job to find out these kinds of things. Only if he could prove that it wasn't he'd be able to go investigate the theft.
And while investigating he gave Neal quite a few openings to come clean which Neal couldn't take because he didn't steal the treasure in the first place. That's what makes this mess so interesting.

[LI_Ann]

So is Neal ever wrong, and is Peter ever right?

Yes.

However, the opposite is also true.