Archers Addicts 4!!

Yes, where is Henwy? And is he now going to be allowed to sound more than about 3?

I truly feared guilty on the wounding charge, right to the last second. So many of the jury just wanted to get home. The second not guilty brought an unexpected tear to my cynical old eye!!
It all seems to good to be true - can Helen cope with 'freedom' .

Aaagh - now Rob has got her alone!!

Oooeer! What is Rob up to now?

Glad she was acquitted but I don't know how it happened, many of the jury didn't seem inclined to believe her, then suddenly she was acquitted. I only picked up the names of eight of them, the other three didn't say anything. Not really a very satisfactory episode. How does she get Henry home again?

Will she automatically get Henry back. Rob said he had to get back to him... What's that Rob going to do now? I don't think this is finished.

Where's merlot?

What a load of bollocks! The jury was full of caricatures, acting very badly; and the verdict made no sense at all after the talk in the jury room!

And as if they would let Helen be accosted by Rob!

A waste of an hour of my life!

Ugh - the bar steward has planted seeds of doubt in Helen's mind already - and reckons he'll never let go of 'his' sons ...

Stefan, Charlie, Shula, Quick!!

How long is the sentence for (marital) rape??
For flooding Ambridge!
For embezzlement?
For assaulting a saboteur?

Don't they check out the backgrounds of jury servers properly beforehand? Some of those were so unsuitable. Don't they require some level of intelligence or education? I'm not sure I believe they would have had that lot sitting on the jury for something that big.

So many people come to arguments with their own agenda and I thought this showed it so well. We did seem to get to not guilty quickly - it was a very fast hour.

Rob will try and haunt Helen but the safety of prison does seem to have helped her.

We knew there were only going to be eight talking parts rubysong - quite enough to give a flavour in my view. I think the family court is on Wednesday.

Wouldn't it be good if Rob was now charged with rape?

I agree Lucky. I was totally disgusted if that's the best they could do after 3 years of build up. The verdict made no sense at all and I fear the SWs are insulting our intelligence. Am a fan of many years but at the moment am so cross don't feel like tuning in again. Grrr

I thought it was loosely based on the scenario of the film Twelve Angry Men starring Henry Fonda.
Based on that I knew they'd change their minds. I love Aileen Atkins, a great actor.

The point that jurors bring their own prejudices into the jury room was reasonable to make - but so crudely done it was embarrassing.

They don't check anyone's background for juries, it's all random , so there is a chance of getting an unbalanced crew. From where I was listening they were fairly anti Helen apart from one or two, then there was a not guilty verdict. Not sure how that happened , apart from the second glass of wine.

I think our jury system might need an overhaul.

Or the team of scriptwriters!

Hooray for Helen!!!!
Questions. Can Rob be tried for rape?
Will Justin be happy to give him the job now?

Have been away so listened to the omnibus this morning and of course this evening too. The verdict surprised me given that most of thd jurors seemed to think she was guilty initially and The change of mind seemed rather too quick. I know a lot of people got fed up with the story line but i think it has done a lot to Highlight abuse comes in many different forms. Dont think we have heard the last of rob though .....mores the pity.

He was still trying to manipulate her! I agree about Aileen Atkins J52 but it would be a worry if you didn't have someone as dispassionate and clear thinking as her character on a jury.

Good result, however Rob has been crossed. Not a good prognosis. Get Henry back please, not just Jack.

This will all have been on the news so it would be surprising if Justin didn't hear about the details. It may take a while though as I doubt he would be following it particularly.

LG they only had an hour. I know what you mean but it was difficult in that time.

I think it went quickly at the end as the rest of the jury realised the foreman was biased as he could not punish his wife so wanted to punish Helen. Once that became apparent things seemed to change very quickly.

I'm just glad she is free but I doubt we have seen the last of Rob and he has Henry!

Right result, but now what ? Not sure I can cope with more stress but did love Aileen Aitkins reminded me of Majorie Antrobus.

Obviously jurors do bring their own prejudices to bear, but in my experience on jury for a serious case, there was much more reasonable discussion and careful dissection of the evidence than was portrayed here, plus awareness of responsibility that someone could go to prison on our verdict. Very inaccurate portrayal IMO and they over played it to get silly "twist" at the end of not guilty verdict. . The foreman was actually guilty of intimidation anyway. ?Rob2.

Hooray for the verdict but boo for the quick change. So obviously the SWs want us to think the jury's miraculous turnaround was a result of the foreman revealing himself to be just a big bigot but would they all have turned so quickly? Don't think so. They could have cut out some of 'the I don't know what I think' section to have enough time to explore the turnaround.
Rob..ominous.

I also felt quite choked when H was found not guilty. I think it shows how concerning random picking of jurors can be. A friend served on a jury and he said one guy said the accused was obviously guilty as soon as they walked into the room to deliberate. When asked why he said cos the guy was Asian.