Sorry for the lateness of this post. Violet Cheshire’s comment in panel 2 just completely contradicted all of her prior statements about Cherry and the note. I was too flummoxed to continue.

Well, that’s only a half-truth. In reality, I got distracted by other matters. But when I got back to this post, I saw that Violet really did make that statement. So, this wasn’t just a late-night hallucination, after all.

Now in panel 1, we see another bit of illogic:  Why should the note attempt to frame Cherry when it wasn’t even signed by Cherry in the first place? If the narration box is meant to be an editorial comment, it reads as if Rivera was being influenced by Violet’s statements! Violet’s passive-aggressive dialog is doing nothing to move the story along, except to extend this pointless issue of Cherry’s personality.

What’s the point here? Is Rivera really concerned about establishing the authorship of the note or more concerned with pushing a “reality TV” melodrama of manufactured confrontation?

I suppose this could be yet another marketing ploy from Cherry’s second-place antagonist, Honest Ernest. We haven’t heard from him for a while. Perhaps he and Violet had a falling out after the revelation of their affair. That could be a driving motive for this anonymous note. Or maybe the prelude for another Honest Ernest toxic chemical creation.