I'm a celebrity -get me in The Archers! The jury's out in Ambridge.

[PseudoBadger]

New thread for the celebrity packed hour long special tonight! Welcome to regulars and newbies alike

NO SPOILERS please there's a thread for that here

Added by MNHQ: NB there will be spoilers on this thread for those who are yet to listen to the one hour special.

The Ha Archers did a daily blog post on the trial - not as clever as AO's villagers' opinions, but an interesting record, & some witty observations too.

(It's usually just a weekly round-up)

The only evidence for rape is Helen and Jess's word - would that be enough for prosecution? I'd have thought that a coercive control charge would be more likely to succeed as there are plenty of other witnesses (I'm sure Jess could produce some and maybe the elusive Miles might have something to say).

Giddygiddygoat I think I love you. What does Helen have to do to rescind the PR order?

It's just occurred to me that all the stuff about the culvert and Shula/punching episode and the other stuff I've forgotten about already (again/Adam etc) are all going to be stored for down the line. Like, years down the line. If they're thinking they have 20-30 years with Rob, that means they will keep him just this side of unbelievable for years to come. And then there will be an even bigger denouement with him in the future when it will all come tumbling down and all these episodes will be rehashed (and another Psuedo thread will contain dozens of people asking for reminders about what all that stuff regarding JackGideon/the culvert/Rob and Shula etc etc was all about.

Which leaves open the prospect of (1) people (Susan?!) defending him in the immediate future (2) Rob actually going to work for Justin (hard nosed businessman, I can just see him spouting something about how experienced estate managers are hard to come by and he wasn't actually convicted of anything blah blah) (3) some other poor unsuspecting woman falling under his spell.

It just all seems horribly plausible. Lord help us.

Oooh, GiddyGoat, thanks for that, great stuff, excellent delurk! ColdTea, so did I - I was wondering if it was sort of psychosomatic, now I know SO'C's gone, I feel free to enjoy it in the hope that TA will gently go back to the everyday story of countryfolk (with the odd murder, rape and affair thrown in from time to time to make it a reflection of normal rural life ). Then I read FabFiveFreddie's analysis and am wondering whether it really is safe to come out from behind the sofa..
I wonder if this stronger sounding Helen might have the guts to make a complaint to the police, in order for her to be able to get sole custody of both the boys - I mean, Jack is the product of rape, why would she want him to have a relationship of any sort with a man who could behave like that?
Also wonder if her anorexia is definitely back, NotdeadyetBOING, sounded like it to me.

Last night best episode for ages. A bit of village reaction would be good now.

Giddy that was excellent!

Also Helen was found Not Guilty because of reasonable doubt. The jury didn't believe that it was self-defence, just that it could have been.

In the family court, Rob has shown no evidence of abuse towards Henry and he is happy there. There is nothing to suggest that he shouldn't have access to Jack either.

The same with the job. Even in Ambridge, someone saying something in court to get them off an attempted murder charge is not the same as being charged yourself.

Helen, get thee to PC Burns.

They've got elements of storylines for decades. Rob is never going to totally go away. Theres this round of the fight for the kids (there will be more), theres hopefully the CC case which will take quite a while to prepare and come to trial I'd have thought (oh! Won't Henry be a prosecution witness for that, along with all the Bridge Farm Archers and half the village, so Rob won't be allowed contact same as Helen? Excellent!) Assume he goes down for that but not the rapes, sentence max 5 years and you can bet he will be a model prisoner who has 'reformed'. Back 'to be near his sons' ....

Or what about the alternative.... That Rob manages to get back under Helen's skin and she takes him back....

Wanna - I don't think that will happen in the short term, but I nearly added that to my prediction. A 'chastened' Rob returning, all Good Daddy and apparently respectful of Helen, oh yes.

Sadly my alter ego remains besotted. She isn't on MN ( why not Helen, why not??) and hasn't done the freedom course.

It would be statistically unlikely that she goes and lives a happy life now eventually finding a stray fairbrethren to be a bit of a man child but generally treat her well. Statistically abused women continue to seek out relationships with abusers, even the original one.... or a " dennis" further down the line.

No, she has never had any luck with men. She will get together with Anna

I see Rob as being the next Hayley in years to come. Swoops in every now again, is utterly vile, then swoops out again.

I hope you mean Hazel!

Great to know all those options exist, Giddy. Unfortunately history shows that there is almost no chance that any of them will be taken up.

Was that a typo? Hayley is lovely. Do you mean Hazel.

Ah now, Hazel and Knob would be a perfect match!

Giddygoat thanks for great info. Makes me sound like a legal expert in chats with friends about TA (deludedemoticon)

a) Isnt Rob STILL on Bridge Farm payroll?

b) I don't think Helen should apply for palimony. I would feel tainted accepting money from my rapsit

Dammit - of course I mean Hazel!

fab episode yesterday..go Pat...i have started to feel a tad sorry for Ursula, the line about Pat thinking she was the only granny...i know ursula is a witch but Jack is her only grandson and she cannot see him. That must be quite sad for her, and I agree that the implication is that Ursula has been through everything Helen has, in a time when it was all deemed acceptable behaviour by men, and either she understands and is resentful and jealous helen has 'got away' from Rob or she genuinely doesn't understand that Rob/Bruce's behaviour is wrong.
maybe i need to stop thinking about the archers too much :)

Ursula may be a victim of Brush and Rob but she is no innocent - she is as scheming and manipulative as Rob (in fact, isn't she where he learned it from?)

I hope Rob went off the Bridge Farm payroll some time ago. When he got the new job, Pat and Tone didn't say anything like "Good, we can stop paying him" or "When can we expect him to give notice" which sort of suggests that that wasn't relevant any more.

Great de-lurk Giddygoat - you should apply for the post of legal story editor (since the agricultural story editor seems to be redundant these days). Unfortunately, as Argymargy points out, history shows none of these things will happen. Instead Jack will probably be left unattended for a second and Knob will snatch him - which is effectively how he got his hands on Henry when he refused to take him back to Bridge Farm after Pat and Tony had v reasonably allowed a visit. I also believe he will hang on to his job with Justin so he can hang around Ambridge like a bad smell - all highly unlikely, but we have to suspend disbelief in the interests of the plot. I'm just hoping the Ambridge health fairy will still be around to magic away all Henry's psychological problems when it's all over.

The health fairy will of course be doing a slipshod job on Rob, utterly failing when the walking stick needs to come into play.