I'm curious what the evidence is against charles. Unless he's a wolf, he's already painted a big target on his back and will more then likely be killed by them tonight. If we kill him before that (assuming he is a loyalist), then all we've done is allowed the wolves to get a free target on someone else.
If there's truly evidence against his guilt then I can understand, but so far I'm seeing action based on his post. Is there truly evidence showing his guilt, or is this just a bandwagon?
If there's truly evidence against his guilt then I can understand, but so far I'm seeing action based on his post. Is there truly evidence showing his guilt, or is this just a bandwagon?