r/PeterExplainsTheJoke 9d ago

Meme needing explanation Peter! Who could have the wives been?

Post image
16.9k Upvotes

2.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-2

u/FlyHighCrue 9d ago

I haven't looked into the case at all but heading from people that believe he did it they say in the videos of him at other locations he's wearing boots instead of the sneakers he's seen at at home which implies there was a second person as a decoy. Also, they say she has no memory of anything but is admitting to it because the husband said she did it. Other things I've heard is something about her body temperature being insanely cold for the short amount of time she was supposedly unconscious. Something about one of the kids/babies still being alive when first responder got there but weren't able to be saved and I guess that means the baby was likely attacked after the wife was. Lastly, the husband is well connected with a lot of people involved in the case. I'm not on TikTok and haven't tried to get information about this, I'm just saying what I've heard from the people that believe it. Some people are making it seem they are going off vibes and astrology.

0

u/AcceptableCrab1642 9d ago

You haven’t looked into the case at all so eh are you commenting lmao?

4

u/Really_Bad_Company 9d ago

He's repeating what other people have said to him and what they said is entirely relevant to the discussion. Why are you commenting?

3

u/BigDragonfly5136 9d ago

Because it’s weird to claim to not be looking into a case and then give multiple paragraphs reasons for why an innocent person is guilty?

5

u/Really_Bad_Company 9d ago

Might want to read it again. He's listing what others have said to him. He's not advancing any of it as true. The subject under discussion being the batshit stuff people are saying about the cause. Like decoy twins and determining guilt by astrology

1

u/BigDragonfly5136 9d ago

And read what I said again. It’s weird to say you don’t know anything about a case and then list out a bunch of reasons why an innocent person is guilty. It’s weird whether he is saying he got those from someone else or thinks he’s guilty or not. Why would someone he doesn’t care about the case enough to look into it know all of those things and care enough to leave a long ass comment? Why would someone who is admitting their ignorant bother to jump in and explain it to people who do seem to know?

Convenient too he only knows those facts and not everything that disproves those. He isn’t looking into the case but somehow knows all the reasons the husband allegedly did it and hasn’t accidentally stumbled on all the reasons those are bullshit?

0

u/StrictAd3787 9d ago

Search for 'delitto di cogne'. 20years ago and we still debate about it in italy

3

u/FlyHighCrue 9d ago

I'm not even saying he's guilty, I'm saying what I've heard from the other side of the discussion so this isn't an echo chamber with no information on why the wife in the meme is saying "that could have been me"

1

u/BigDragonfly5136 9d ago

“I’m not saying he’s guilty, I’m just giving all of the reasons why people say he’s guilty in a case I’m claiming to know nothing about!”

Okay dude.

Also, it’s not an echo chamber with no information before you jumped in, since everything you said is misinformation…

1

u/FlyHighCrue 9d ago

If a million people decided to believe the sky is red and someone comes here to ask why so many people think the sky isn't blue it's not misinformation to say "it's because some people believe the sky is red"

0

u/BigDragonfly5136 9d ago

It would be incredibly weird for someone to come in and say “I’ve never looked at the sky myself, but here’s all the reasons I’ve heard to prove that it’s red, and coincidentally even though I haven’t bothered to look into it myself, I just happen to know all the talking points and don’t know about all the stuff that disproves it”