Because it's interesting to see what the people who don't know the future are saying, where they think things are going, etc.

I hope not, as I took pains to make sure I didn't include any sort of spoiler.

I agree. Tyrion was clearly just going to go along with the rest of the show-trial, but something snapped when Shae betrayed him.

Tyrion's words are being twisted completely out of the context in which he said most of them. He called Joffrey a halfwit after he tried to murder a bunch of people for throwing a cowpie at him. He talked about kings dying like flies after Joffrey said he was going to emotionally torment Sansa some more, and called…

Anyone at that wedding would have plausible motive. Joffrey was a murderous monster.

You're ignoring what I'm typing. THE SHOW NEVER PORTRAYS OR EVEN REFERS TO HIM TAKING PYCELLE'S POISONS. Ever. Not even once. Pycelle says he does, but never presents one shred of evidence to that fact. What the book says, does not matter. I'm arguing about what the show portrays, not the book. The show…

In his position, in an archaic, unjust, medieval court system - not a modern court, which is what this entire discussion is about.

I work in the criminal justice system. Handing the guy a cup with poison wine in it (after he was UNEXPECTEDLY named Joffrey's cup bearer) would not even be close enough for a 1st degree murder conviction. Especially when no less than 3-5 people would potentially also have access to the same cup - not unless more…

Convictions aren't determined by who has the "least worst motive".

- Pycelle presents no evidence that Tyrion has his poisons, nor does the show ever protray him taking them.
- "He said, she said" is precisely why hearsay is extremely weak on it's own, in securing a conviction. The witnesses claim one thing, Tyrion claims another. No truth emerges.
- Tyrion served the wine, but did…

No they wouldn't, because Tyrion would be allowed to cross-examine them, and reveal the actual context in which every single one of those statements was made (and debunk the pure fabrications, in the case of Cersei and Shae).

When Pycelle said his poison stores had been raided, and he said the accused was responsible, my first response was just "uh, is anyone going to ask him precisely how he possibly KNOWS that? Are we just accepting this as fact? Did Pycelle do an investigation of his own?"

The witnesses recounting what Tyrion had said in the past, really made me go "oh damn, yeah, in retrospect he probably shouldn't have said that" several times. Especially what he said to Cersei, back when she had Ros thrown in the dungeon.

They made no bones about the fact that the show was going to tie into the movie, so I have no problem with that.

The show becomes miles better from the week Cap 2 comes out, until the present. Maybe a week or two before, simply because they start to tie things up for the events of the movie.

Make sure there's lots of pins with red string running between them, though.

The fact that Oliver's decision to kill Slade in the past, is clearly going to be depicted in the finale, is the only thing still making me think that Oliver chooses to cure him in the present (and not kill him).

At least in that case you could see Waller saying "Deadshot is scum, and deserves to die, so why wouldn't I put the GPS transmitter in him?"

Someone has to save this city. It's mobbed up the eyeballs.

Laurel's secret power is that she knows everyone better than they know themselves. SHE KNOWS THEM IN THEIR BONES.