I'm honestly curious. If you did the Dark Brotherhood quest where Muiri asks you for an optional reward to kill Nilsene, did you carry it out? The character I was playing when I did the quest chose not to kill her - why kill only the second problem in the equation when doing away with the first was just as sufficient? Muiri's Contract against Alain Dufont seemed like somewhat justified vengeance. He tried to use her friends' grief to rob them blind, which got her run out of the city and hated by them. Yes, what they did was irrational. But...they were already suffering from the death of the other girl in the family. And then Muiri brings this smooth-talking guy in who ends up robbing them blind? When you're clouded by grief and dealing with your own dark emotions as well as the emotions of everyone else you live with, you act irrationally. So, I didn't kill Nilsene on this playthrough because that family suffered enough. Muiri didn't even think about the fact that she's too easily led on. They ran her out of the family, but I didn't understand why Muiri would want to just murder someone who had been her friend for years, unless there's something fluffed up about her, too. She could've chosen to understand their grief and distrust, but she didn't, and went to an extreme level to get back at them. They didn't sent hitmen after her - just told her to stfu and gtfo. But, that's why I didn't opt for the murder of that poor girl. That, and Muiri acts like an ungrateful bint anyway if you don't kill her, which makes me think she's actually on the same level of selfish as Alain.