2 perplexing questions

Remember Godfather 2, and the bar scene where Pentangeli is about to be
murdered, Danny Aiello says "This is a message from Michael Corleone..."

What does he mean? Obviously, Pentangeli is going to be killed, and what
difference does it make to him who did it?

So, why does he say it? Is Michael involved in his death/murder?

Also, in Godfather 2 Michael says "Killed by someone close to us..." he
must mean Fredo. However, Fredo could not kill anyone (!) and who is that
other person? Also, as they fish the bodies out, we never know who those
peope were. (Were they part of Fredo's gang? If so, then how could
Michael, Rocco and Tom not know who they were?)

I have read the postings for the second question, but I am not satisfied with the responses that makes sense.

Maybe someone else can help....

If Turnbull comes in here he will be able to explain in great detail about your questions.

Calling Turnbull!

Unlike the senator, I can deal with anyone who has some insight into these issues.

In my opinion it's a flaw in the movie. Unless you want to figure it either one of two ways...Roth wanted Pentangelli to die thinking it was Michael who ordered his hit, or...Roth never intended for the hit to be successful, but to set up Frankie to turn on Michael. Personally the former makes more sense and it worked out in Roth's favor (temporarily) that Frankie turned on Michael anyway.

At this point he isn't referring to any one specific person...just knows that someone close would have to have been able to carry it out.

The hitmen found in the ditch were Roth's men. I dount Fredo ever had a 'gang'.


Oh, and the beauty of this board AND of a work of fiction is that if you fail to get responses that are satisfactory you can always offer your own suggestions. Who knows, maybe yours will be the most logical explanation yet!!!

Apple

Turnbull knows who killed the tahoe assassins?

Hey, Turnbull! Quit holding out on us....the people have a right to know!

The line ("Michael Corleone says hello") doesn't make any sense (for the reasons stated above). That dialogue wasn't written for the movie, but rather ad-libbed by Danny Aiello. Coppola liked what he heard and without regard to the storyline, he left the line in the movie.

That whole scene was based on a real life incident involving the Gallo Bros and Joe Profaci. A line similar to what Danny Aiello ad-libbed was actually spoken back in 1961 during an attempted hit on Larry Gallo.

Welcome to the boards, mcorleone!

No one really knows who killed the assassins,could have been someone who knew about it(most likely) or someone who saw them on the grounds trying to escape after the alarm had been sounded(unlikely)It was not however,Fredo,who killed them.
Turnbull's answer to the "MC says hello",which I believe,is that it was not meant for Frankie,who they truely intended to kill, but they said it for Richie, the bartender.Since he wasnt a mafioso,he wasnt necessarily under omerta,and could tell the cops that the assassins were sent from Mike,to mislead them.Sorry if I stole your thunder TB

which would make sense, but the fact that roth had intended for michael never to live past new years would not make sense as to why he would want to set up michael and then kill him before the trial.

Aiello admits he ad-libbed the famous line, and Francis Coppola, for some reason (probably inadvertence), permitted the ad-lib to remain in the film, to the eternal bafflement of Godfather fans. But it’s also possible that Coppola, the most careful of directors, allowed it to remain because it fit the plot, even though Carmine intended to kill Frankie all along. “Michael Corleone says hello” was intended not for Frankie—but for Richie, the bartender, whose ginmill was being used to set up Frankie.
It’s obvious that Richie is a “civilian,” not a Made Man, and he’s nervous as hell about his bar being used for a murder (“Carmine, NO, not HERE!” he screams after the cop enters and Rosato draws his gun). Carmine knows that Richie might be squeezed by the cops investigating Frankie’s murder. Richie would be too fearful of Carmine to identify him as the killer. Still, as a civilian, Richie is not bound by the code of omerta. So Carmine hands Richie something he can give the cops so that Richie can get off the hook: “The murderers said, ‘Michael Corleone says hello.’ ” That line would set the police after Michael, and would be picked up by the press-- another nail into the coffin of Michael Corleone’s “legitimacy.” Clever Roth!
As for "someone very close to us," it's the number-one stumper on these boards. No one knows for sure who killed the Tahoe shooters. Some people here (including me) believe Fredo opened the drapes to allow the shooters to machine-gun Michael and Kay's bedroom. But who killed them????

Sorry but I really don't believe that Fredo opened the drapes. Sure, he wanted to "handle things", but I seriously don't believe that he would do that. I'd like to believe that when Johnny Ola came on board, some of his men sneaked in and opened the drapes way before the party ended. Also, hasn't anyone consider that maybe Fredo's men could have killed Roth's assasins-to-be? You see, they could approach Fredo after the hit, Fredo is scared the living hell of it and orders his men to kill them, without leaving a trace. Remember, when Michael gave control to Tom, he mentioned that he would have power over all, and among other people, "Fredo and his men". I think thats what happened. Fredo's stupidity left him dead in the end of all.

I also believe Fredo opened the drapes......but there is really no definitive answer as to who killed the killers? This part of the movie just does not make sense....if Fredo killed them, this is a side of Fredo not seen in any of the other (prior and subsequent) scenes. If his men killed them, then Michael and Tom know who is the traitor....and if they were killed by a third killer, how does he get away? Since Fredo is part of the plot, he would not stash him (knowing that he killed the killers) and that murderer's silence could be used against Fredo....

If Fredo didn't open the drapes, what exactly was his role in the plot? You say you don't believe that he would do that, but any other role you want to assign him, like letting the assassins onto the grounds, or promising to help them escape, gets him in even deeper. You have to believe that with hundreds of guests roaming the grounds that day, many of whom I would assume were relative strangers, the house would have been pretty well guarded, as was pointed out here in another thread by, I believe, Turnbull. I have a few problems with that scenario:

"They approach Fredo after the hit..." You're implying here that Fredo's men knew Fredo was involved. How would they know that?

"He orders his men to kill them without leaving a trace" So Fredo's men locate the assassins before any of the other dozens of men who are also looking, aren't seen locating the assassins by anyone else, kill the assassins without being seen by anyone else, and then dump them in a ditch without being seen by anyone else.

Not likely, IMO.

The complete assassination plot is never fully fleshed out in the film. Obviously, to kill two assassins would have required at least one (If Fredo helped) and possibly two other "plotters", who are never identified, nor is their role.

It's just a big black plot hole as far as I'm concerned.

You may also want to read THIS THREAD for a recent dicussions that adavnces the theory that Rocco participated.

Wow! This is a good discussion and it is helping me understand. I have read the novel several times and seen the movie countless times, and again, this message board is really helpful for me, a Corleone.

Thanks so much

And I look forward to continuing these lines of discussion.

Also, I do not believe that Rocco had anything to do with the assasination attempt. It is not really his character, and in the novel, his promotion with Clemenza and killing Paulie, was his devotion and loyalty to the Corleone family.

Although he was killed by the police when he killed Hyman Roth, I feel that he was incurably sick (why not? he was older than Paulie in the novel, but not as old as his peer Clemenza) and offered his life for the vengeance of Michael.

Any thoughts?

If Fredo didn't realize it was going to be a hit (which I believe he didn't)...then what possible reason would he have for opening the drapes to give assasins a clear shot at Michael's bedroom???

Stupid and gullible as he was, even Fredo would've had second thoughts as to a request like that.

If we're going to ponder who opened the drapes, then we also have to ask how Kay could possibly get undressed and into bed without ever realizing they were open. Or, we would have to assume someone snuck in and opened them while she dozed off...neither is too believable.

So the answer is that there is really NO answer as to who or how the drapes got opened. They just got that way, and it's just another 'black hole' in the movie. Because it was something the writer/director probably did not anticipate people asking.

Apple

If you buy into the kidnapping theory, it was to let the kidnappers know when he was unguarded in his bedroom.

I don't.

Apple

So Fredo tells Ola "You guys lied to me"

What did they tell Fredo was gonna happen, and what do you think Fredo's role was?

I don't think Fredo might have opened the drapes and i think Michael knew that because if Fredo was just completely stupid and really thought it was a hit then Michael would have probably kept him alive, but Michael still had him wacked, I think Rocco killed the Tahoe assassins and that is why he went on the suicide mission.

So what was Fredo's role in the plot?

And how did Rocco, single-handedly, both find and slit the throats or garotte two guys without being seen?

Personally, I just don't see how Fredo could've opened the drapes, and not know it would be a hit. What did he think? They wanted photos of Kay in her underwear? And I do believe that he did NOT set up his brother for murder. That is evident in his late night conversation with Johnny Ola.

I don't have a clue who did actually open the drapes, but I have problems believing it was Fredo, mostly because I do want to think of him as stupid, weak and sweet.

SB, logically Fredo had to know that he was setting up a hit when he opened the drapes. But people who get emotional about vengeance aren't always logical. When he said, "You guys lied to me," it opens at least the possibility that the "lie" was that they were going to do something other than kill Michael after Fredo opened the drapes.
Logically, Carlo had no reason to think that he could have beat up Connie the second time to lure Sonny out of the Compound, and not be blamed for Sonny's assassination. But he was hell-bent for vengeance, and logic had nothing to do with his decision. The same could be said of Paulie Gatto: did he really think he could call in sick on the day the Don was to be assassinated and get away with it?

Well, there's the kidnapping theory from the unused script.

And again, what was his role, if not that of drapes-man?

Again...there's really no definitive answer to that because Fredo's exact 'role' is simply not addressed in the movie. All we hear him telling Michael later on is that he was promised 'something in it for him' if he 'helped with negotiations'. He did not specify how he was asked to help, what he did, or who (other than Ola) he spoke to.

We realize he did SOMETHING to enable the assasination attempt on Michael - but if you put into perspective Fredo's character I just cannot picture the guy physically entering his brother's bedroom and opening the drapes not realizing there was going to be a hit.

So if you believe both his statements to Ola that he was lied to...and to Michael that he didn't know it was going to be a hit...then it cannot be possible that Fredo opened the drapes. Even a kidnapping plot that plaw brought up Friday - I don't think Fredo would've gone along with anything he thought would bring physical harm to his brother. In his innocent stupidity whatever he did or whomever he had contact with...he thought he was helping with negotiations, as he said. Make no mistake though, it was STILL a betrayal because he knew he was doing something behind Michael's back that was related to business.

But unused (aka useless) scripts aside...there is nowhere in the film that we are told what he did. It's all up to speculation or even better who CARES what he did, whatever it was allowed the film to go on ....

Apple

id have to watch part 2 again to maybe pick up on something but what i notice is people doubting fredo did it because of the fact he was "innocent and sweet"...just because you SEE him that way doesnt always mean hes that way and as for saying he didnt know it was gonna be a hit...IMO thats just his way of coverin his ass so he wouldnt get whacked but as michael saidi n the first film "you think that would fool a corleone" and remember that fredo did get pissed at michael in the first one for the casino deal and michael told him not to take sides against the family again so if you use that and follow chronologically then i say fredo knew what he was doing it was his way of getting back at michael but a failed hit and the obvious person will always try to cover their ass

Maybe when Johnny Ola was down for the party he and Fredo snuck away? Maybe Johnny said I need a few minutes in Michael's bedroom and Fredo was lame enough to cover? No that doesn't make sense because Kay would have seen the drapes open when she undressed and took her jewelry off-
hmmm... someone must have come into the room while she dozed off but who would have known? I may go with Apple on this one and say FCC just didn't think anyone would ask questions? The drapes had to have been closed AFTER kay was already in bed!

see fredo is the only one who would be able to get in there due to family relations and when kay dosed off if fredo went into the room i doubt anyone would say anything bein the family relations

I might agree with that except for the much earlier scene when he gets the nightime phone call from Ola in which he is visibly upset with what has taken place. He realized and tells Ola that he was lied to; this further indicates that he had no idea a hit was to take place.

As we see in just about every scene he's in in BOTH Godfather films, Fredo is not 'a Corleone' in terms of the Family Business sense that any of his brother's (including Tom) are. He is easily duped not only by Ola/Roth in Part II...but also in The Godfather we see how trusting & gullible he is not only when Paulie calls in sick, but later in Vegas when he tries to side with his 'pal', Moe Green.

Also...Vito's brief statement that "Fredo was...Fredo was..." in his last conversation with Michael tells all that's needed about Fredo's abilities.

Even in their 'banana daquiri' conversation Fredo admits to Michael that their mama teased him about not being her son, being raised by gypsies. All over the place, time & time again we are given hints that Fredo is just a misfit within the Corleone Family. So Michael's statement that "you think that would fool a corleone" just doesn't justify the (incorrect) theory that Fredo knew and aided in any assasination plot.

True, he got 'pissed' at Michael and was quickly put in his place first by Tom who reminded him that The Don was semi-retired and it was now Michael who was running the family...and then Michael who warned him not to take sides with anyone against the family again. Ever. Also, at this stage many (including Fredo) were vastly underestimating Michael's role as Head of the Family.

It is no newsflash that Fredo worked with Ola & Roth out of years of frustration and jealousy toward Michael - he lets all that out in the boathouse scene! But not to the degree that he would knowingly aid in a plot to kill his brother. I just don't see him capable of going that far (and the call with Ola proves it).

Best,
Apple

Not necessarily ... information provided by Fredo (though again we're never told what that is) might allow Roth's men to infiltrate the home and then the bedroom (or even rig something up from outside the bedroom) to open the drapes.

Which you correctly state would have to have been done while Kay 'dozed' off because she would not have gotten into bed with those drapes opened.

Apple

what i ment by the "think that would fool a corleone" line was the meer fact that fredo said that he didnt know so michael would know something we dont also as you said with the call where you said fredo was visibly upset...as i had said thats how you see him...isnt there a slight..small but slight chance that FFC showed him that way so that maybe people would think he wasnt able to carry out the hit and if its true he was upset about it could that also be because he was upset at michael that he had the hit helped with the hit not thinking more of an act of revenge that was "jsut business" before realizing what he almost did

I don't think so.

Oh, and scarfacetm...could you try using punctuation sometimes it might make your streamofconsciousness posts a little easier to handle.

Apple

its 10 am and i havent been to bed yet so im not thinkin fully. but as to the fredo thing thats just my opinion and everyones entitled to theirs. i just think it makes some sence. now i see your point and you point out alot of facts to contradict that it was fredo BUT what if those where tossed in by FFC to throw off people thinking that it was fredo, as i said earlier making him seem innocent.

dont get me wrong im not sayin your wrong, but not saying your right either because quite frankly nobody knows whos right or whos wrong, for all we know we both could be right on certain aspects of the issue. there isnt enough evidence on my part to say it was him true, but there isnt enough rock solid evidence to say it wasnt him. as with most good crime stories the most obvious explanation may not be the right one.

And what purpose would FFC have in doing that?

Look...as stated there is really NO definitive answer as to the role Fredo played in his betrayal to Michael. Also, there is no explanation given in GFII as to who/how/when those drapes were opened. So any theory anybody comes up with is worthy of discussion and I'll agree, nobody can be truly considered 'wrong'.

But to validate the discussion (and make it more interesting)...all 'theories' should be weighed along with corresponding circumstances & statements in the film(s).

Apple

PL and TB - I understand what you're saying. Of course Paulie and Carlo had to know. And you would assume Fredo would as well. My problem with that is that both Paulie and Carlo were hard men. Paulie was a button and Carlo was capable of beating his pregnant wife, which is obviously as low as you can get. They both had that capacity for ruthlessness that I believe Fredo was missing. Although I could see Fredo, in his quest to make a name for himself, trying to insert himself into some back-door negotiating, I can't picture him cold-bloodedly setting up his brother and his wife (with the open drapes, there was an excellent chance that Kay would be shot as well) to be murdered. I just can't picture him deciding to make Anthony and Mary orphans.

SB, everything you said is true. It is hard to imagine Fredo consciously setting up his brother for a hit. But, as the Don said (in the novel): "Revenge is a dish best eaten cold." Few people hell-bent on revenge wait for the dish to cool off. Others hear what they want to hear, as long as they think they'll get their end. Roth and Ola may have "misled" Fredo in some way, but he was ready to be misled.
IMO, a key to Fredo's attitude comes in the boathouse scene. The anger, rage, frustration and resentment against Michael really boiled over in that scene. Viewing that scene again, it's not so easy to think of him as "sweet," "good-hearted," "harmless."

so by that rational turnbull your stating that part of what i said of him being seen as innocent playing a major role in him being the drape guy is true

TB, I agree that Fredo was extremely angry, but I still can't picture him tip-toeing around Michael's bedroom. Even if you could imagine him angry enough to set up Michael in some way, I can't ever picture him putting Kay or the children in harm's way, which is what he would have done by opening those drapes.

I think that most of his anger, incidentally, is with Vito. He is angry at being passed over, which is anger at Vito. Although Michael and Tom embarrassed him at the Vegas meeting, his anger seems to be at Vito for not even considering him "don-worthy". Michael, although younger, became his father figure, and the anger got redirected. Also, Fredo adored his father (brought out more in the book than in the movie, although his reaction to Vito's shooting is unbelievably touching), so he probably couldn't be consciously angry at his father.

Uh, it's a little hard for me to figure out exactly what you mean from the above, scarfacetm...BUT:
Roth would have been interested in Fredo not because he looks "innocent" or "sweet" but because he was close to Michael and had info Roth valued. Roth would know that Michael would figure out, sooner rather than later, that Fredo was the traitor, but by then it wouldn't matter. In fact, if the machine gun attack on Tahoe had succeeded, it would have been all over. At that point, Roth would have won, and it wouldn't have mattered to him whether Fredo's role was found out or not.
Fredo's "sweet" and "innocent" appearance is meant to appeal to us, the audience. It enhances the drama to find out (to our enduring horror, as attest all the posts on this subject), that Michael's very own brother was a traitor. It makes his betrayal so much more significant to us than, say, Carlo's or Paulie's.

thats what i was saying earlier that we see him as sweet and innocent BUT that doesnt mean anything that we dont see. fredo is the only one that could get close to michael due to him being his brother. kay knew fredo so she wouldnt think twice about seeing him there. as for him saying he didnt know, he may not of knew fully the extent of the hit but that doesnt mean he didnt know there was a hit because as far as i see it he knew and michael would find out if he had lived that could explain whye he was upset when he told ola that he lied to him. also the fact that fredo appears to be an idiot to us makes us assume that he isnt capable of organizing the hit.

First of all...just because someone is your brother-in-law doesn't make it necessarily fine & dandy that he's walking around in your personal residence, near your bedroom. Also, Kay would be accustomed to the fact that because of the business her husband is in, there might be bodyguards and other such employees in strategic areas the home...ESPECIALLY during a party the size of Anthony's Communion, where most of the family and guests (including Fredo) would be outside most of the time. So it would actually make more sense that, with Fredo's unwitting help one of Roth's men could get into the home and await the right time (whenever that was) to open those drapes.

Second...what do you mean about Fredo not knowing 'fully the extend of the hit'????????

If you're directed to open the drapes to your brother's bedroom so that there can be a clear shot at him and as someone's stated the very real possibility of his wife getting killed/injured as well...then to what 'extent' do you think the hit's going to be?? Are you suggesting that he thought they would simply shoot to injure not to kill? And how would that help with 'the negotiations'???

Just asking. Like I say...if you're going to have a theory, fine. If you can continue to back the theory so it can still hold water...then that's even better.

Apple

True...but let's keep in mind that in addition to 'sweet & innocent', Fredo is also presented as 'weak & stupid'...not only by Michael's description but various instances throughout both films. Even in The Godfather Fredo makes one blunder after another. While it's true we find it shocking that it's Fredo who turns out to be the traitor...instances throughout the films show that he is just weak and stupid enough to be appealing to Roth as a dupe.

And yes, we do see in the final boathouse scene that Fredo was not so sweet and innocent that he wasn't capable of finally reeling off at his kid brother for whom he was stepped over.

But that still doesn't make valid the assumption that he realized there would be a hit and opened the drapes to make it so.

Apple

you cant say he had no clue what was being planned he may of not knew every detail but im sure he knew enough

As to Michael being killed?

Nope...I don't think he had the slightest clue and so far, nothing anybody's presented on this Board has made it worth even considering.

Obviously he knew SOMETHING was bein planned, since he helped out in some way that was never explained. But a hit on Michael...no, I don't think he realized it would go that far. He was lied to, kept for the most part in the dark, used, duped.

Apple

what i ment by extent of the hit was more of he figured they would go just for michael which may have been the case i dont think he ment to put kay in the way and why wouldnt they want to kill kay either. as to him knowing something, yes he had to know something even someone who aint bright like him would know something otherwise he wouldnt of helped them and with the michael hit he knew something was against michael but the real question in this case is what did he know

And again I don't think even Fredo in all his stupidity and jealousy would knowingly go along with and assist in a hit on his brother. But let's just say he did...if opening the drapes to their BEDROOM, how could he NOT assume that Kay might be in danger as well?


Please define what you mean by 'know something'! You mean know of the hit? If that is what you mean...tell me what makes you so sure when he swears later to Mike he DIDN'T know of the hit, and before that complains to Ola that he was lied to?

Well, of COURSE he knew 'something' was going on against Michael, and of course he 'helped' in it. That is why he was approached by Ola in the first place...that is what makes him a TRAITOR !! What is never made clear (and never will be) is exactly what Fredo was told and in what way he was asked to help.

But 'know' that it was a hit? Open the drapes to make it so?

Personally...I don't think so.

Apple

he wouldnt know kay would be in danger because how is he supposed to know when the hit would happen or when she would be in there.

as far as knowing something... im sure he knew of the hit but i dont think he knew everything of the hit. he may have known they were gonna do a hit on michael but i dont think he knew how they were gonna do it or what exactly they would do

And how is he supposed to know when the hit would happen or when HE would be in there?

It's their BEDROOM. Kay would be at risk for being in as much danger as Michael even if she weren't the intended victim.


Which again leads to the questions how are you 'sure' he knew, when it's never directly indicated in the film...and what do you mean by 'extent' of the hit.

A hit is a hit. The intention is to have someone killed. You can't go much further than that. Where's the 'extent'? You going to bring up Kay again? See above.

If he didn't know 'how' or 'what exactly', then why would he be opening the drapes to their bedroom?

I don't think Fredo knew it was gonna be a hit.

Apple

a hit is a hit yes true but there are many ways it could of been carried out. for all fredo knew they wanted the drapes open to spy on him for a bit to know his moves.

fredo aint the brightest bulb in the package so whilst he may have known kay would be in danger like you say, i doubt hed comprehend it right away

Spying on someone is not 'a hit'.

Interesting theory though, much more believable that Fredo thought Mike was going to be 'spied on'...and one which obliterates your earlier claim that you're 'sure' Fredo knew it was going to be 'a hit'.


I think he would. Right away. IF he opened the drapes knowing there would be gunshots fired into her bedroom.

But again, I don't think he either opened the drapes OR knew it was going to be a hit.

Apple

I agree, Turnbull.

The idea is to not let your enemies know what you are thinking....

In this, Fredo seems innocent to make it appear that he is. Remember in the novel, after Santino is killed, and Tom calls Carlos....he reassures him that noone thinks that he killed his brother in law. Most importantly, Carlos admits that his beating of his pregnant wife was not an effort to draw out Sonny. He wanted it to appear of his terrible relations with his wife to make the hit successful.

I am saying all this to say, that Fredo is not innocent in all of this. Maybe he did not think it was going to be a hit, but certainly, he was one of the plotters.

As far as who killed the hitmen, is a matter of much speculation that can never truly be answered. (MP should have developed this line of action in the screenplay!)

Regarding Fredo and the drapes.....

I think we have to give more weight to the evidence of what we are actually shown in the film, rather than what we can speculate about.

We know Fredo was involved in the plot

We know someone opened the drapes.

Someone = Fredo

Fredo is the only plotter identified, and the only action he can be identified with is the drapes-opening. I think we can all agree that you can't identify Fredo with the murder of the hitmen.

Any other elements in the assassination plot (how the hitmen got on the grounds, who killed them, how the killer got away) are pure speculation, and to associate Fredo with any of them is equally speculative.

Doesn't necessarily work. Yes, we know Fredo was involved and we know someone opened the drapes. However it is obvious that several people other than Fredo had to have been involved even though we do not see them. So while it can be *speculated* that because we're sure of his involvement Fredo MAY have opened the drapes, there's no absolute evidence provided by the film that he was.

No, he isn't. The dead hitmen can be identified as 'plotters' (or at least involved in the 'plot'), since they obviously did not belong on the grounds and were there to carry out the murder of Don Corleone. That is why Michael would've preferred them to be captured alive...they could've provided information.

If 2 armed men were somehow able to infiltrate the Tahoe compound undetected until after the hit attempt, then it can be assumed that others would've been able to do the same...and possibly open the bedroom drapes.

Except for the facts that Fredo was involved, the drapes were opened, shots were fired into Michael & Kay's bedroom, and 2 unidentified hitmen were found with their throats cut...ALL other elements are open to speculation.

Apple

Frankly, the idea of Johnny Ola sneaking into Michael and Kay's room is preposterous. "This is your room? How crazy is that?! I was looking for the toilet."

What about the possibility that little Anthony, whilst delivering the drawing, opened the drapes in order to better take in the delightful scene of a delightful day?

There's a big presumption that Cosa Nostra hitmen need the drapes open to whack a guy. Snipers need open drapes. Thugs spraying a room with machine guns can get by on a silhouette.

How the drapes got opened hardly matters, IMO.

Most sensible statement made in this thread yet !!!

Apple