Talk:Claude Frollo/@comment-26173537-20150306154240/@comment-6032121-20160202161052

"Weedle, Frollo didn't had remorse for murdering Quasi's mom. When the Archdeacon points out the spill of innocent blood at Notre Dame's doorstep, Frollo fatly says that he's guiltless. Only when the Archdeacon calls out that he can't his blame from God is that he's "coaxed" into action, fearing for his soul. You're missing the very point of Frollo's character which is religious extremism and hypocrisy." "fatly says that he's guiltless"… I'd say he was, to an extent. Of course, he's still being somewhat hypocrite by ignoring that he cause the woman's death, but he did not actively murder her, he accidentally knocked her to the ground while trying to get back what he believed was stolen loot and was revealed to actually be baby Quasimodo. But I can see how he would think to himself that it's not his fault; it's two different definitions of fault. On one hand, it was his "fault" logically speaking: he caused the chain of events that led to the woman's death. On the other hand, it wasn't morally "his fault": he did not plan on murdering her at any point. Don't go into discussions of "unintentional homicide" still being a crime: I know. But my point is that Frollo may genuinely feel he's innocent and not be outright lying when saying it's "not his fault".