He's not a pheasant poacher, he's a pheasant poacher's grandson. Join us for trials, tribulations and tipsy tractor trips in Ambridge.

[PseudoBadger]

Will this thread see the end of The Trial? And SOC?

Are people up for listening for an hour on Sunday though?? I'm not sure if I can concentrate commit for that long.

I'm getting closer and closer to just ordering a CPE textbook off amazon and reading up on this stuff, honestly.
PS looby I loved "penith". Mental age of eight here I'm afraid

Oh, Lord. It's all going to be revealed in the trial, isn't it, when Henry will give a "shocking" account of what happened.

bore especially as she had already seen a psychiatrist before the stabbing.

Do we know that she hasn't. A lot must have gone on that we don't know about - maybe that will also be mentioned in the trial.

Surely Anna will be able to get more out of Kirsty even based on her prosecution testimony.

"Helen called you from the murder scene on the phone you have her. Why did you give her a phone"

Ahem, let's hope Anna doesn't refer to it as a murder scene!

Have just had podcast and thread catch up so might have missed some bits on here... do we know who Rob's barrister is? Is there any possibility it's Max? There seems to be no other reason to have introduced her at this stage in the game other than TASWAMA and SOCs beloved 'aren't I clever wrong footing the audience they'll NEVER see this coming' delusions.

Rob doesn't have a barrister- the Crown does. Rob is a witness, and they don't get representation.

Sorry - yes I meant the prosecution barrister...it's been a long day already. Question still stands though - is there a possibility that in yet another ridiculous and unnecessary plot twist Anna is going to have to go up against Max in court.

Dad3 sorry . I'd slipped into Perry Mason mode.

RocknRollNerd, I hope I can say without incurring Olivia's wrath that the BBC's carpet bombing pre-trial publicity includes the prosecution barrister's name and it's Julian something. I don't think Max is a barrister, is she? I don't recall any job being specified.

You've all been on fine form today! I especially like the idea of Shula being walled up and Bruce and Ursula playing pass the denture.

I'll take the fall Gasp0de if she comes after you .

The conversation with Anna gave the impression she was some kind of lawyer type but didn't specify barrister hence my pondering if Anna would end up somehow pitted against her in court...but hopefully not, I think that would be a step too far (although I keep saying that with every wretched turn this story takes!)

Bruce
Ursula

I don't know if any of you heard The Film Show on R4 this afternoon but I thought Freddie could join the choir that featured on it.

So Kaz is Helen's mirror - is that right? Her voice of reason/reality.

Why doesn't Jenny tell Justin about the culvert??? I am shouting at the iplayer.

Did you hear the piece on Front Row about dramatic trials? The conclusion was they either:
are legally realistic but boring, or
are dramatically exciting but deeply flawed on the legal front

We have been warned.

The sad thing is that doesn't have to be true. I love a good court case - obviously played out in real time there are periods of tedium, but edited highlights - which is what TA is going for - can be thrilling. It is a naturally theatrical medium.

It's also something ideally suited to being depicted on the radio since it is not particularly visual - unlike the flood say or the night of the stabbing where it was very difficult to work out what was going on (in fact we still don't really know what happened and I'm hoping this might become clear during the trial when events will have to be described in words for the benefit of the jury).

I think it can actually be advantageous to the defence if a witness favourable to them is called for the prosecution. You can't ask leading questions of your own witness, but you can when you cross examine the other side's witnesses. For instance, if Kirsty were a defence witness, Anna wouldn't be able to say "Mr Titchenor tried to keep his wife away from you, didn't he?", and would just have to ask something about what his conduct was like and hope Kirsty would pick up the cue. But she can ask her precisely that question in cross-examination.

Whether SOC is aware of all that or will pay any attention to it is of course another matter.

I've delurked to post this.

https://newpencilcase.com/2016/09/01/the-archers-all-rise/

I'm pretty sure you've probably covered everything though.

Tom do you think Olivia wrote that ? the clue was the gin

I think we have covered everything, we even mentioned Maxine Peake before the big non-event that Max was Maxine

Welcome Tomrabbit

Read it. Yes, we've covered all that - and even have named cheeses waiting for her social enterprise to start up. One for the more discerning, charity ball crowd and one for the family budget.

I'm glad to see that you have no stated intention to re-lurk immediately.

Is it me? Am I driving people away?

No, Gruach, not in any way shape or form. Um, are people leaving/being driven away??!!

Gruach, do you make unconvincing excuses as to why you can't go to the pub with other posters? Because if you want to drive someone away, that's the proper Ambridge method. That, or snubbing their sandwiches.