As doors slam shut in Rob's face and behind SOC, a new door opens for the next Archers editor. Are we expecting some New Tricks, or just Archenders?

[PseudoBadger]

Welcome one and all. No spoilers please!

It would be great if Arseula could discover weed and feminism or something. I'd like to see her in a group all looking at their own vaginas in a mirror, and telling Bruce to make his own lunch.

No one seemed to think it would be a problem to cut Henry off completely from his mother so I guess the same logic applies here

Great episode. Shed more tears. It would be great if Helen moved into the house Peggy was going to give them just to rub Robs nose in it.

I don't see why he is allowed to see Jack if he has been considered dangerous to Henry.

Because Jack has a right to a relationship with his father. The court has to act in the best interests of the child. In this case that means balancing a risk of harm to Jack against the benefit of having a relationship with his biological father. In Henry's case, the benefit to the child of sustaining a relationship with his biological father aren't there- and are outweighed by the risk of harm (probably greater in Henry's case than Jack's anyway).

It's quite a commitment for Pat, isn't it? Time wise.
Hope Helen pulls her weight around the farm and shop.

Welcome, maggiso! The more the merrier on this thread.

LyndanotLinda has it for me:

It's like SOC is putting all the happy endings in a big rush. It's a bit like eating too many sweets. Nice but a bit sickly.

Not complaining, but it's a long, long way from real life.

Helen has never really been able to work at the shop since it opened at Bridge Farm, it will be interesting to see how that pans out. Will she go back to work with Jack napping in a travel cot in a storeroom? She must have had her own car from before she was with Rob, has she got her car keys back? Whose car is Rob using? I assume he had a company car when he was employed at Berrow Farm & then just took Helen's. So many complications we'll never know about.

I know how boring it is when people talk about their dreams, but last night I had a dream that an episode was broadcast in which Ursula tricked Helen into giving a Rob a glass of water which she (Ursula) had already put poison into, so Rob died on public and it looked like Helen's fault. The funny thing is that in the dream I immediately shouted at the radio "No, Sean O'Connor! We are not going to have a murder trial! Stop trying to make people like you!"

Has Rob formally "left" his employment with the Archers? Is he still getting sick pay? How is he paying the rent - his parents must be helping him.

On another note Pip being so stroppy with her parents was painful to listen to.

Well, giving a small baby to a violent rapist on a regular basis so he can 'build a relationship' would be enough to make me clear off to another continent, quite frankly. That's quite incredible. I think Rob has no rights at all morally given the evidence and if the law says differently then it's very out of touch and even negligent.

Why has Rob not been arrested?

Where is he getting his money from? If technically still employed, why hasn't he been removed from the farm payroll on the basis that he is not at work and his SSP period has expired?

Are they not evicting him from the cottage? I would have done that immediately, no obligation to let to him whatsoever.

Sooooo many loose ends. Irritating.

I think pip needs reminding that she only has the job and accommodation she has because of her parents and if she doesn't want them meddling she should pack her bags

The fairbros only got the land because pip got sweaty knickers so I see nothing wrong with David kicking them off now!

Right there with you, BoffinMum. Also, forgot to say, really loved Pat to Ursula last night. Also thought the judge was brilliant!

Yes, turning the finance and accommodation tap off would do more to sort him out than anything else I can think of. Not to mention open contempt from the cricket team

Did I imagine the CA saying Rob was thinking about his new job before last night's episode. I either missed that bit or imagined it altogether.

Pat would surely be on here for advice on how to do the legals on the finance etc.

Does anyone else think Rob might commit suicide? He lives for his reputation which is now in ruins and said to Ursula he can't see how he can move on.

Yes, the CA trailed it as Rob thinking about his new job, and what we heard was him telling Ursula that he hasn't yet signed the contract, and clearly showing some concern that Justin might change his mind.

Well, giving a small baby to a violent rapist on a regular basis so he can 'build a relationship' would be enough to make me clear off to another continent, quite frankly. That's quite incredible. I think Rob has no rights at all morally given the evidence and if the law says differently then it's very out of touch and even negligent.

Rob hasn't been found guilty of rape. Rob also has no rights. The law says Jack has rights- to a relationship with his father. The law presumes that a relationship with a biological parent is in the child's best interests and courts are reluctant to conclude that it is in their best interests to have no contact with a parent at all: contact is supervised, so risk to Jack is low.

I've woken up with the thought that we have now moved, for definite, from Shakespeare to Dickens. Rob won't be able to tolerate supervised access for long so he'll disappear and/or Helen will have him successfully jailed for coercion and control. He'll reappear in the church graveyard in a few years like Abel Magwitch. 😁

Why has Rob not been arrested?

Because Helen hasn't made a complaint to the police.

Overly invested here re Henry's access to Rob.
My parents 'disappeared' my first small furry real life pet. Told me it had died which I found out was a lie. Is this EA? (Untold similar incidents in a comfortable and 'priviledged' home). Would I have been even more harmed if I never saw parents again?
Please SOC write me a Happy Ever After

I don't see why he is allowed to see Jack if he has been considered dangerous to Henry.

Because access will be supervised, therefore no risk.

Are they not evicting him from the cottage? I would have done that immediately, no obligation to let to him whatsoever.

Depends who you mean by "they". If it's Pat and Tony, they don't own the cottage, Usha does.

Off at a tangent, found this article interesting, and vaguely relevant: granta.com/he-had-his-reasons/