Rob - dead? No, no, he's, er, resting. He's just pining for the Canadian plains. As Helen is taken into custardy, discuss the Archers here.

[PseudoBadger]

24 hours for 1 thread!!

English Fern - cross post. And you put it so much better! Yes I was trying to say I can see why Helen stabbed him, given the provocation. And it's what Rob wantec of course.

Again, not based on any knowledge of the justice system, but..

The police know Helen stabbed Rob (I think?) so isn't the immediate next step to look for a motive. WHY would a heavily pregnant woman stab her husband in front of her child halfway through dinner?

There can't be any more reasons than either she had gone mad or it was self/ child defence? So this is what the police would be looking at next. Sadly for Helen, evidence points more at the former.

Which is also a bad SL for those with MH issues- never get your issues put on record, because they can come back to bite you late on.

Helen knows she has no proof of anything, her solicitor knows that too, their hands are tied, Helen will go to court

The only hope is if evidence of bugging/recording at BHC can be found

If he dies, the decision will be whether she intended to kill, or to injure. If yes, she's a murderer. If no, it's manslaughter.

I'm not sure what the defences to the old GBH are. I did go to law school but it was years ago

Off to google

"I would prefer to think Knob gave Helen the knife and then went to attack Henry and that she was acting to defend her child."

But even if she was, he was unarmed. He has, as far as the police know, no history of violence. She stabbed him 3/4 times. She's guilty.

I think that this SL follows the pattern of many a piece of fiction: it's relatively easy to set up an interesting/exciting scenario but difficult to fashion a satisfying conclusion.

But I'm fed up of the Night That Never Ends. Can we go back to real time, please, and hear less of the main characters and more of the ripples round the village.

"The police know Helen stabbed Rob (I think?) so isn't the immediate next step to look for a motive. WHY would a heavily pregnant woman stab her husband in front of her child halfway through dinner?"

I don't think the police need to find a motive, do they? The facts are crystal clear.. Isn't it up to the Court to consider possible motive and mitigating circumstances?

I agree Bertrand - she is guilty (unless of course the Ambridge legal fairy is around). I also wish they would go back to real time - too difficult for SOC to manage which is why he's going back to EE where they can throw in a one hour special from time to time.

I think it's very much the police's job to establish a motive. I'm would've thought that it was vital to the information they send to the CPS who decide whether to / what to prosecute for

No, they don't need a motive.

It would be a section 18 or 20 assault. Section 18 probably as the injuries are serious and she did intend to hurt him - not an intention to kill maybe but it certainly wasn't an accident.

The only defence available to her is self defence. Then you have to look at what is reasonable force. Whether the force was reasonable will simply depend on the opinion of the court. I don't think the abuse will come into play at this point (could be wrong)? It'll simply be a matter of whether she was justified in acting how she did to protect her and Henry.

This is all if he survives

Motives are to identify suspects - they don't need to identify any suspects because they know who did it, and she's not denying it

Sorry, maybe you mean Helens intent? Her intent is certainly relevant if she needs a certain intent to fulfil the requirements of the crime, so an intent to kill for a murder charge, or the relevant intent for a change of attempted murder rather than GBH.

Then the CPS needs to establish whether she intended to kill or seriously injure, and that will then be when certain defences come into play - so she may have intended to seriously injure, but if she intended this because she was acting in self defence, that will be the basis of her defence

charge

Sorry for the ramble, trying to google and post on the same tablet....

"I think it's very much the police's job to establish a motive. I'm would've thought that it was vital to the information they send to the CPS who decide whether to / what to prosecute for"

I'm pretty sure that's wrong. She did it, no question. It's either murder if he dies or whatever the other one is- GBH? Malicious wounding? If he doesn't. Motive doesn't come into it at this point.

The police don't have to find a motive in order to secure a conviction, particularly in a case like this where the accused isn't denying what she's done. However, it is inevitable that motive would be explored if Helen pleads not guilty, so the prosecution would be unwise to ignore it.

I want to hear from Johnny. Imagine how he is feeling right now! He left the security of his mum's place to come and live with these people: his aunt is homicidal, his uncle Rob is an abuser, his grandmother can't detect a bad 'un even in plain sight, his uncle Tom suspected but didn't alert anyone, his granddad nearly got killed by a bull, ...
If I was Johnny, who is a nervous soul at the best of times, I would be thinking of going back oop north. And if I was Sharon, I'd be in the car now on my way to collect him.

If he doesn't die:

Possibility 1 - section 20 assault. Wounds or inflicts GBH WHERE YHR DEFENDANT FORESAW SOME HARM OCCURING

Possibility 2 - s18 assault. Wounding WITH THE INTENT TO SERIOUSLY INJURE.

She stabbed him. Any reasonable person would see that stabbing is going to cause major harm.

Attempted murder - must have a clear intent to kill. Too hard to prove in this case.

It has to be s18 assault.

Helens only defense would be self defense. S18 sentence is max life imprisonment.

I too wondered about the mobile. What are the odds on Ursula staying in BHC to keep the place up to her standards. And then possibly nursing Rob at home. Will Helen be allowed bail?

Bail will depend on what she's charged with

What are the odds on Ursula staying in BHC to keep the place up to her standards. And then possibly nursing Rob at home.

Hopefully Usha will terminate his lease asap (if it is in his name), there must be some break clause about maliciously getting yourself stabbed in the rented property

If he survives, he will surely go back to the paraental home to convalesce. BHC is rented and there's nothing, eg job, friends, to keep him in Ambridge now.

Thank you for explaining the legalities. Although I'm still a little unclear!

I really hate this sl

And I really hate when they stretch time over a week. Especially with unnecessary episodes like yesterday's.

Would the dr just ask about the rd marks and not document them?

Whilst the police do not need to prove a motive - do they not need to gather enough evidence to support a prosecution? I can't imagine the cps would be appt to prosecute someone claiming self defence of there is no record of bruises to the perpetrator?

Since when have the SW taken any notice of what is true to life? I'm sure they will invent their own special laws and clauses to deal with Helen.

It's such a bloody shame she couldn't simply have fled the house.