Board Thread:COMPLETE BULLSHIT Forum/@comment-24477541-20140325164525/@comment-6383956-20140326222516

LadyX wrote:

Grahamburglar wrote: When did they say the she-wolf was in South America at one time? Literally, the only thing we know about the she-wolf (as far as I've seen) is that the South American hunters don't know where she is -- that doesn't tell us anything about where she was ever. It's implied. Why else would the South American hunters care about a specific female werewolf if she never caused them any sort of problem? To come all the way to Northern California from South America just to get a random she wolf who should be someone else's problem doesn't make any sense unless she's traveled there and caused some sort of mayhem. I think, to be completely brutally honest, that's a pretty big leap.

Firstly we know that hunters don't only go after werewolves that have caused them issues (no matter what the code says) -- the Argents came back to Beacon Hills looking for an Alpha that, as far as they knew, hadn't done anything except kill a deer and claw a symbol in its side. That's not exactly an attack on their family (and their family would have been totally safe if they'd opted not to go after it.)

Secondly, if this she-wolf had been in their turf, why ask Derek about her? Or Peter -- they seemed to think he knew even though he clearly hadn't been to South America since he was busy with his being in a coma. It made sense when we thought it was Cora (because, y'know, family), but now we know it isn't.... that doesn't make any sense at all. Why is Derek going to know more about a she-wolf that was in their territory than them? Why wouldn't they ask some of their local werewolves? Or track this she-wolf from when she was causing them so many problems? I don't think they'd have lost her (they'd be pretty terrible hunters if they did).