Archers addicts 3!

Where did you read that Gracesgran?
My fear about the new baby is based on what those in authority know to date. Rob has PR, Pat and Tony's emergency application to have Henry removed from him and placed with them was unsuccessful. To have moved him, the court would have had to find that Henry was at risk with Rob.We all know he is but so far, Helen is the only known risk.

I agree with the lawyer once the facts are known, helen should be awarded custody of both her children. Fingers crossed she starts talking

As I said further up the thread, surely the best thing for Pat and Tony to do with the shop would be to lease it to Fallon and Emma. That way they keep an outlet for their produce.

Fallon and Emma would be duty bound to acknowledge Rob's employment IF he can produce evidence of being an employee and not just a hanger on. If he can, then they are in their rights to make him redundant as his job will no longer exist. His redundancy would be peanuts but if they get advice they might find there isn't anything due to him.

P&T need to remove themselves from the firing line and not respond to any emotional blackmail regarding Henry's upkeep. Rob insists Henry is his son so he must support him without any help from grandparents.

Sorry merlotgran I missed that. It does sound like a plan - if Emma and Fallon would take it on. I have a horrible feeling he wouldn't have to produce evidence as there is such a thing as a verbal contract. Would it hinge, do you think, on whether they continued to pay Helen only or whether they paid him in his own right? Sounds like money for the lawyers whatever, doesn't it.

I do hope the mention this to Anna and the was he/wasn't he because he said Helen couldn't cope bit.

Although Helen charged with stabbing Rob Iam I think she would keep the baby at least for the 18 months - if she was in prison - unless they thought/saw she was a danger to him. That seems to be the way the system works. I will try and find the bit I read - but I have had several sleeps since then

If Henry's having tantrums because he can't get his own way it shows he's taking no notice of the 'obedience' rule.

Go for it, Hezza! Give 'em hell!!

Gracesgran, yes many mothers keep their babies with them in prison. My anxiety links to Helen's current inability/reluctance to talk about her life with rob, the emotional abuse of her and Henry, the gas lighting and the facts around the stabbing. There needs to be a pre birth assessment by social workers that includes talking to Helen. No doubt rob will try to convince them not only is she a risk to him she's a danger to Henry and the baby. The assessment should have started because the baby can arrive any time and no doubt rob will demand it's placed with him and the baby's brother, with support from Ursula.

How on earth would Ursula cope with an invalid son, a stroppy five year old and a newborn?

She has to talk soon Iam if only to keep the story going. Slightly less cynically she is beginning to catch memories. I would think the first reaction would have been to close down (safer) but the mention of Henry brings her back up each time so I am sure she will start to sort her memories out a bit more and tell Anna - but I agree, it needs to be quickly now!

merlogran, good question but Henry would either be full time school or some kind of summer play scheme and it sounds as though they could afford to pay for help in the house, including a nanny.

maybe they'd take Henry and the baby back to wherever Bruce and Ursula live.

How is Bruce managing without Ursula?

Iam I thought it was on the dumteedum forum but can't spot it with a quick glance through.

They don't seem to post all that often on there so it is looking a bit out of date now.

Have been away for a week and have tried to wean myself off 'The Archers' as I found the Henry storyline too upsetting. It's no good. I thought that I'd just have a peek at the forum and now I am straight to catch up.

This is like Jaws - just when you think its safe to go back in the water…….

Pat - you were tricked into it and need to shape up, stop behaving like a normal person, helping the police.

So ... if we are ever, ever asked to talk to the police we say "no comment". We do no try and explain or put the other side. All the bad people know this; it's the good ones that don't. Who would want to help the police after hearing that. I know they have there job to do but it does seem a bit underhand.

I feel sick again

So, who does Helen have on her side now?

Tony and Tom? Anyone else?

Maybe Pat should now focus on, 'How to cock up the prosecution?'

Love Miranda

Yes, the scene with Justin, Miranda and Lillian was great fun wasn't it. Just what we all need, some light relief to make us laugh.

Gracesgran - you order the No Comment T shirts and I'll get a charabanc ready for the hearing next week.

Pat can be questioned by Anna in the trial but I suppose she cannot be prepared. [sigh]

Trying to pull something good out of it ... when Helen asks why her mother isn't their they may be able to tell her what she hoped to tell the police and that may help Helen see what was going on.

Could (I know I am clutching at straws) the fact that she said she was going to kill Rob and drove off at speed show the pressure he was putting her under?

Great idea Iam!

Talk on the FB page of us listening to this for the next 20 years because the police are out to prosecute rather than investigate - so there will then be investigations of the investigation. I'm not sure about that. Sadly I think being so underhand is probably normal once they have decided who is the criminal. Also a reminder that Pat had a breakdown when John died so may not be as strong as we think but often seen to think she knows best.

With all her anti-establishment history imo she would have known more about this - and Tony suggested it was not a good idea. I think the SWs need to show why this is in character - perhaps that is going to come in a few days time.

So how does this work now?

Pat won't be prepared as a defence witness but she'll be cross examined by Ana so surely Ana will get to the truth that way?

Same with Kirsty?

The prosecution barrister will know they don't want to give evidence against Helen so his/her questioning will surely be brief?

What a mess.

Mmm. Do you think the Prosecutor will ask Pat if she wants to be a prosecution witness so that the jury are aware she doesn't? They tend to ask the questions they want the answers to don't they? Anna can follow up so that when he (don't know why it should be a he but it makes it easier) doesn't let her explain Anna will still be able to ask why she thinks Rob did the "caring" things that cut Helen off from her family and friends. Same with Kirsty. Anna can also ask them about Helen's character before Rob. Running her own business, bringing up her child with good support system, making her own cheese, etc.

I suppose there will have to be expert witnesses - that should be interesting.

The defence and The prosecution have to share any evidence the rely on. We don't have Perry mason pulling legal rabbits out of hats. Poor pat she really needs to think on as we advise int'north.

This goes back a bit (to Kirsty giving her statement) but does apply: It is from the Criminal Law Blog, April 2016, by Sandra Paul

In reality witnesses do not “belong” to the prosecution or the defence. The witness’s sole role is to assist the court in coming to a decision about the facts of a case. They may be “called” by one side or the other but in giving their evidence they promise to tell “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth”.

She also says:
A robust defence solicitor will:
*Not have the prosecution witness in a conference with the family (that’s the only point on which I agree with the barrister Anna)
*Let the prosecution know that they intend to speak to the witness
*Advise the witness that they have a choice about speaking to the defence
*Advise the witness to seek independent legal advice about whether they are willing to assist the defence
*Invite the witness to make a further statement or take an account of the information they may be able to provide

Anything less will leave Helen’s defence significantly disadvantaged.

So not agreeing with all that Anna is doing.

Miranda: "she's a bit past it isn't she? At least we won't have the same trouble as last time".
LOL
(Want to bet?)