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?

Cecile (great name, though it brings back bad memories of having to study the book), what I meant was not that they said anything useful (they didn't), but that it was necessary to have some noise to cover up the fact that they couldn't have recorded the Henry actor saying much more, so by talking over him they could spin out his evidence.

I hated the surgeon bit most of all, he came across as so biased.

Knob's evidence and cross- examination was 15 minutes of edited highlights - I take it that what we heard were the highlights. Anna didn't grill him about why he had his stick, whether he planned to send Henwee to boarding school, why he was tracking Helen's phone, why there was custard if the row blew up over the tuna bake etc etc - I don't think it is at all reasonable to assume that it happened, but we just didn't hear it because there wasn't time. I think what we heard was the best Anna could manage. I can't see her giving a cracking closing speech because we didn't see Knob on the ropes, we just saw him crying. Likewise with Henwee's evidence - what we heard was the gist of his evidence. He didn't say anything about not telling lies and nobody liking a noisy boy or Knob binning his rabbit. On that basis I wouldn't be at all surprised if Helen doesn't go to prison in the first instance - like so many wrongfully convicted soap heroes and heroines store her - only to be finally released aft public petitions and question in parliament when new evidence comes to light. This will also give the newly-cast nanny time to make a few more appearances and for Knob to start his job with Justin

My bet is that Helen is found guilty of the lesser charge, but given a suspended sentence in light of the evidence-that-will-come-to-light.

That way, Rob has a strong chance (in soapworld) of keeping custody of Henry/both boys, along with the nanny/romantic interest victim. And that's another couple of years of drama.

But it wasn't 15 minutes! Before we got to Knob we had all the stuff about Tony waving at Helen, the judge's opening address, and the prosecutors' opening speech. It would be pretty generous to say it took 5 minutes. So it's not surprising that we've missed out large chunks, allocating that length of time doesn't even allow a reasonable selection of highlights. It's really frustrating, but I bet it's because SOC wants to save the drama for Sunday.

The brevity of Rob and Henry's pieces suggest that there must be a lot more witnesses... How many are there? Or that Helen is going to have a long time on the stand.

I'd quite like the action to return to Ambridge for a bit this week, where life goes on and Susan doubtless would have plenty to say.

Half-listened to the repeat - Henry wasn't merely not allowed downstairs, he was meant to stay in bed till morning. Not surprising he started bedwetting then, even apart from anything else.

The trailer afterwards was for a series of 'letters from the inside' ... is this coincidental?

Pat, Harrison, Neil and Ian and possibly Helen herself - though Anna may choose not to call her if she thinks she won't give a convincing performance (and let's be honest she hasn't given much sign of that so far) - I can't imagine she'd be brilliant under cross-examination. We'll also need time for a couple of closing speeches and a summing up by the judge.

Pat is a prosecution witness isn't she?

Just so all abused women know there is no escape

Are the prosecution also calling Ursula? She gave the original statement about Helen threatening to kill Rob. So apart from enabling Pat to wail for the last 5 months why is Pat needed?

Pat is a witness to Helen saying she'd kill Knob - so is Ursula now I come to think of it, weren't they all having tea together at the time or have I remembered that wrong?

It is vaguely interesting, but I don't think think it soap-world that Hellin has much of a cat's chance in hell of getting out free. There is too much egg in this cake already oops I meant custard and I'm not sure listening is good for my mental health.

R4 I never said Anna was taking the best line. I think she gets a statement when the defence opens, so after the prosecution rests.

She gets to make a statement at the end of the trial after the prosecution sums up its case and before the judge addresses the jury.

Lillian I agree, and I like your analysis :) and Fisk thank you for the name compliment - I was compared to her once - possibly not in a flattering way - and I thought the film was great, I particularly enjoy the score.
Anyway, back to the Archers - I think if Anna had picked up on the stick, or anything else crucial, we would have heard it. Although we seem to have stopped having the usual "hidden microphone" technique which made me feel like I was getting snapshots of the lives of neighbours, and switched to "the most dramatic trial ever on the Archers!!!!!" Which is sad.

Also (so sorry to be posting so frequently) it does make you feel like there is no way out. All Helen's friends and family have managed to get back behind her and magically work out what has happened, despite what she was like while under Rob's thumb. And she has the listeners, the scriptwriters and the gods of plot on her side, as well as a barrister willing to devote her life for free to act as her solicitor. That is not what it is like normally, surely.

Sorry again! Really last post now, but I have just checked and the criminal procedure rules changed in April to allow an opening statement for the defence straight after the prosecution one. So we just didn't hear it. She still gets one at the end.
Cecile out. Thanks for reading.

Cecile, I enjoy your posts so please don't apologise. I wonder if the SW know about the change of rules?

I do think listeners are still being played with, so we don't hear all the crucial evidence, which may then be used in Helen's evidence, discussions or the closing statements. It would be unsatisfactory, but typical SOC.

I respectfully disagree Gumpendorf. SOC's style is more to conveniently forget what he has written and never refer to it again (the culvert, Tom's dealing with Knob in Canada, Tom and Ursula's no-show at the dinner party to name but three instances) rather than inventing things at the last minute (unless of course you are thinking of people undergoing complete changes of character to suit the plot). I think we have heard what he considers to be the most important points - all those other points which might have formed part of the trial have been conveniently set aside as they don't suit his purpose (which I now believe is to drag this story out to an appeal so there can be a custody hearing in the meantime).

You may be right, Lillian. He is a constant disappointment and I am ever hopeful

In a way the prosecution shouldn't need to call Pat as a witness if all that she's giving evidence about is Helen's threat to kill Knob, given that Helen doesn't deny that she said it.

I'm hoping that Arsula is going to cock things up in the witness box, I can just see her coming over as very spiteful - the fact that she insisted on Knob recounting in his statement for the custody case the Toad in the Hole incident shows that she doesn't really see things in proportion. If Anna's clever she could lead her into disclosing that Knob doesn't use his stick. Then Knob and Bruce will blame her and with any luck Knob in particular will show more of his true character.

Meanwhile SOC is lapping up all the media attention, the 'good work that is being done to promote this issue' no wonder he hasn't left yet, can't have someone else getting the glory.
I am hating this week and the thought of it going on for years, appeal, wrangling over custody, new romance, blah blah. Hate it.

Something the interviewer could have asked Henry, which would have revealed a lot, is 'And what does your dad do when you leave your bed in the night?'. I had various questions about process but I'll need to reread the last 2 pages to remind me.

Certainly the stick is relevant if they are considering how affected Knob is by his injuries, but then they HAVE had Mr Surgeon saying he could have died from the injuries. Months ago we were wondering if the arm wound was self-inflicted. It would be almost impossible to prove, and is more likely a defence injury, I know.

Jessie, your son is gorgeous. i hope you are getting lots of rest. I have a David (as first name) too. In fact i have just worked out all 4 have Archers names as first and middle. One even has the name of a seldom speaking sausage maker in the middle. TA was not on our minds when we named our sons, really it wasn't.

TA was not on our minds either and yet all four of us here have TA names. Having said that, my name, my daughter's and my son's are all extremely common British names, and my husband's, while less common, is very well-known and also only in TA as an animal's name.

Gaspode Scruff? Spearmint?