A few questions are left

[Laurel]

Ok, this is my first time opening a topic discussion and I'm not yet familiar with goodreads, but I really needed to hear someone else's opnion on this.

SPOILER ALERT - DISCUSSION OF THE ENDING

1) WHY didn't they ask to hear her statement during the trial? This seemed so unrealistic to me. The prosecution would want to push her to the edge and get the truth out of her. And I believe they would succeed. I don't think she could lie (she never once said or indicated she was innocent, she just wanted to get out of the cell - or cage as she called it - and go back to the marsh). And it would help the defense too (well, assuming her lawyer thought she wasn't guilty and really wasn't in town at the time of the murder). Still, I can believe and agree maybe Tom thought her statement was useless against the town's prejudice. But not Eric. I felt it left a hole in the story for me and I couldn't get over it, the prosecution not asking to hear her side of the story. She was right there. Of course this served to deliver the "plot twist" and serve as a "surprise" effect at the end, when it's revealed she actually did kill him. Like when they didn't make it clear who kept the red beanie (sorry, I read it in portuguese so I'm not sure if this is the right word for it) on that little game of theirs, when they kept throwing it back and forth. I believe it was done to keep Tate as a suspect (even if just to the readers - and even if when the trial began it was clear he couldn't have done anything since he would never let her be inprisioned for 2 months wainting her trial without confessing, if he was actually the culprit).

2) And another thing was.. how did she know Chase would be there at the tower in that exact day and exact time? We know she had a short time lapse to do it all, so she would've killed him and left there, no time to doubt or wait or anything. And she woudn't have any other reason to go there and just accidentaly "bump into him" in a coincidental encounter. Much less when she was indeed in another town and left just to kill him (which means she premeditated it and knew he would be there). Was the tower that close she saw him every day? Did he always go there at the same time? Did she keep a lookout for him, studying his habit of going up on the tower, like she was hunting him?

[DMK]

By US law (the fifth amendment, specifically), a person cannot be compelled to testify at their own trial. Kya almost certainly refused, and there's nothing either lawyer could do about it.

As for the second, in her poem she says
"Luring him was as easy
As flashing valentines."
so I suspect she told him to meet her there that night.

[Mary]

DMK, good answers.

[Mary]

These are only my understanding of the situations from the book:

1. I did not know why they never asked for her statement in the trial. Maybe it was because they thought it to be unnecessary since they were prejudiced against her, enough to discriminate her to the bones, or maybe because they thought that Mr. Milton would already squeeze the truth out of her since he was to represent her in court. Or maybe because they thought that Kya was unable to stand for herself—maybe because they thought she was uneducated of the proceedings of the court or something, just maybe. I’m not sure either, since she was well-known of the marsh and even wrote a book about the creatures in there… so the question of her education, learnings and such should be ruled out, I guess. Well, in reality, I do not know the history of law or the trials in a court to know whether this occurrence has really happened in the past, if we’re to consider references for such action. I also thought that by the end of the trial, they’d ask her for any closing statement, if there was such a thing, and to be honest, I thought it would be a heart-clenching speech since all her life she was an outcast. Also, I’d assume that Kya had the red cap after the tossing and throwing game she had with Tate at that time since the sheriff saw that inside her shack when they went to investigate. For a minute there, I thought that Tate was the one responsible for the death of Chase mainly in the part where Ed came to inform him of his dad’s death—I thought that they were getting him for questioning about the murder.

2. I remembered Kya did some “planning” as you will, for what purpose this should be, I do not know, though I’d assume this planning of hers was connected to how she would bait Chase out to kill him. Also, I think she did observe Chase’s behavior similar as to how the female mantis would lure a mate and then later, eat it. Baiting Chase should be easy enough for Kya since we know he was still unsatisfied that the last encounter they had ended with him on the ground and his hands were on his aching balls. So he’d take any opportunity to corner Kya for “revenge’—for the last punch. For how exactly she killed Chase, I will never know, but I’d like to keep a wild imagination to that action of hers. She, after all, knew everything of the marsh and she was strikingly smart about it. We’d argue no one besides her and Tate knew the marsh by heart. There was no doubt Kya was responsible because Tate saw the shell necklace after she died, and perhaps that night, she tore it off of Chase as he fell from the tower. I had believed Mr. Milton’s defenses for Kya that she cannot disguise herself, getting on and off buses to murder someone, but what if she went there on a different route and means of transport? I don’t know. Overall, I think she has really planned everything thoroughly beforehand and she studied Chase as how she would with learning about the creatures in the marsh.

[Laurel]

DMK wrote: "By US law (the fifth amendment, specifically), a person cannot be compelled to testify at their own trial. Kya almost certainly refused, and there's nothing either lawyer could do about it.

As for..."

Those are very good points, thank you for sharing. I'm more familiar with civil cases and well, my country's law, so I forgot to consider she could have taken the fifth. Although I would still have liked to read the scene. She described the whole procedure except this very important (to me) part. Anyway, I'm really happy with your contribution, it made me more at ease with these questions that were eating me for days after I finished the book.

[Laurel]

Mary wrote: "These are only my understanding of the situations from the book:

1. I did not know why they never asked for her statement in the trial. Maybe it was because they thought it to be unnecessary since..."

1. Yes, I considered all of that as a justification for the defense (Kya's lawyer) not asking to hear her statement, specially the town's prejudice. I understand it wouldn't benefit her. But that's exactly the reason the prosecution should have taken advantage of that! They didn't have a strong case, afterall, relying on people who claimed to have seen her in the dark or relying on very weak allegations (that she desguised herself to take the bus back to her little town and kill him). He could have very easily taken the truth out of her (I believe) just because I don't think she could lie (even though she in fact had the guts to kill him). But someone else had a great contribution to this discussion and said she probably took the fifth and didn't want to talk. That would fill all the blanks - except I still would have liked to read her stating she wanted to take the fifth. The author went through the trouble of writing the entire trial and all the interrogations and closing arguments. I think leaving out this part was still a hole (to me, specifically, maybe not to other readers). And, again, I understand why she did it since I don't think many people suspected Kya was the one who did it and she wanted to keep it as a surprise. But with how richly detailed the trial was written, I expected this part to be included.

As for the red cap.. I don't know why but I thought Tate was the one who did it so I wanted to know who kept it in that scene, but I don't think it was made clear. Of course we know she was the one who took home the cap and it was later found with her things at the house, but in that moment I don't think she indicated who kept it. I might be wrong, though. I'll probably reread that part just to check. And I thought the police was going to question Tate about Chase's death too!! (when they were actually telling him about his father's death). I held my breath for a few second until I turned the page.

2. Yes, she was always fascinated about the female mantis and fireflies that lured the male and killed them while they were still copulating. I guess this was an indication and a sign afterall but I don't remember reading a part where she was studying him or even saw him at all after the rape attempt. After he beat her she understood why her mom left and she didn't want to live in fear but I never knew she was observing him. I have a hard time picturing images in my head - I admit I'm not the greatest at it even if the author excels at describing everything. But I always thought this tower was kind of far from the rest of the town and the marsh, so she would have to purposedly get very close (and risk being seen) to watch Chase. Of course this was all left out of the book and we don't know how it was done. We don't have a perspective of it so it all comes down to guessing and imagining how she did it. But yeah, it was made clear she was the one, at the end. She took the shell necklace as she always flinched at the mention of it. She didn't know Chase still wore it and didn't understand why.

I'm more satisfied now with the answers, thank you for your contribution too! I saw a lot of people were displeased with the final revelation and thought it didn't fit her character. I never thought Jumpin' was the one who killed Chase (some suspected him) but afterall.. I think it was great. She grew up in a violent enviroment because of her drunken father. Violence is what took everything from her and why everyone left. She didn't deserve to live the rest of her life in fear after having survived it as a child and against all odds.

In the end it wasn't the fact that she did kill him that bothered me since she did indicate it all along. I didn't think this ruined her character because she was just trying to survive like she had done her entire life.