Archers Addicts 4!!

I still can't understand why Anna would not have not had a psychiatric report for Helen.

Can't see why else there should be a deluge. "Go".Rob " Go." Something will happen to save Helen soon.

I'm still confused that Anna seems to be representing Helen in the criminal as well as family proceedings. The criminal proceedings have to conclude before the family court. I agree Gracesgran , an expert report for the criminal trial and experts assessment of both parents if the family court

Oo er, is Joe on the way out??

What's happened to Clarrie?

What about hypnotherapy for Helen, why is she so stubborn? The brainwashing is so effective. She needs to save herself. Come on Jess, not the time for pride.

Not looking good for poor old Joe.

I don't think she is being stubborn LullyDully; it is more complex than that. I think she is afraid to look at what has happened and she also feels she deserves punishment. They would have to be careful about hypnotherapy because she could shut down again imo if she didn't like what she uncovered, but a psychiatrist would understand when to go slowly and when she needed to face the past. The brain washing is so effective it will continue well after the trial. Hopefully Jess can get things going. If she is prepared to talk Anna may be able to suggest that Helen needs to be brave and face the facts too. It may help her sense of worth if she sees more people - Ian, Neil, Jess - supporting her. However, in the courtroom it wouldn't take much for the prosecution to shatter that. I think it will all get to the point where it is hanging by a thread and the jury could go either way [scream]

Whatever Emma is going to uncover, if that is about Henry that may help too. She will find it easier to protect him than herself.

I didn't really mean stubborn so much as brain washed and blocked. I am learning so much about this and finding the notion of coercive control so dangerous and powerful. It also.worries me that Rob is so self motivated that he will not give her an inch or think for a moment he could have been wrong. I had hoped Anna was the super lawyer we were.promised. Perhaps she will get there, for ALL our sales..

Sakes

I wonder what her has planned to spoil the Tenby trip? Can't believe he will let them enjoy a week on the beach relaxing and chatting freely.Surely not.

I am sure you are right LD, about Rob not giving an inch; he will/can only see things from he point of view. This may be his downfall though. I am picturing a few episodes which swing from the prosecution showing Helen as a person with a lot of problems who threatened to kill Rob and who could have lost control and attacked a good and loving husband to Anna showing Rob as coercive, controlling and manipulative. The jury could be balanced but then, hopefully, someone will say something which causes Rob to show how he sees women and Helen in particular with a bit of 'my son' thrown in ... but who knows what the SWs will do. Although I think they may do this for the drama I would rather they proved the case

his not he. I did check it too!!!

Perhaps we. can hold on to the propaganda slant. If Helen looses what hope does it give real women in her situation.?

Whatever message it gives out to women who are suffering domestic abuse, Helen stabbed her husband so unless she starts co-operating she has no chance of going free.

She didn't have to stay for that last fateful supper so now the SWs have racked up the drama with Stabgate, they're going to have to handle Helen's fate very carefully or it will be a travesty.

merlot 'she' is a character so she had no choice about whether she stayed or not. The SWs wrote her as someone who did not understand completely how 'Rob' would behave. She has not known anyone who would behave like that and she wouldn't herself so she didn't anticipate it. It is easy to see the outcome knowing what we know but that is just not how people in this situation see it. If she was someone who could have behaved as you would Rob would have left well alone. That s what I hope the SWs will show; that his unseen behaviour is utterly impropriate and, I agree, the SWs have a responsibility to show this but they also need to explain how difficult it is to show.

Graces, was that post personally addressed to merlot, or more of a general observation?

Just wondering........

Quote of the Week: Susan shows immense self-awareness

Gracesjan, but no-one has ever told her (or us?) what the law says about protecting a child from harm from an abuser...that any action is wholly justified and treated in law as such?
Now, that was the situation which caused Helen to lunge at rob. To prevent him from getting to Henry.
(Point of law explained to us on r.4 after the attack when it was still not sure if Wob was alive or dead).
Bloody rubbish 'carefully researched' scenario all round, I reckon,

Sorry, meant to write gracesnan

I think she has a case for self defence Alishka as Rob put the knife in her hand and told her to kill herself as that was the only way she would leave and she had every reason to believe him but, like all trials it will be whether the jury believes the picture the prosecution puts forward - headstrong, mentally unstable, previously threatening to kill Rob, unable to care for her children or to be trusted with them, who has been cared for by a loving husband or the truth as we know it.

Personally I do think the way the research has been used to show how the main characters would behave, even when it was to their own detriment, rings true even though I wish it was not so but that is just my opinion as your view is yours.

Lully - I reckon Rob will be right there in Tenby, complete with cricket ball!

The archers fans (addicts) are split on this, as shown on this thread. Some believe the script writers have got it all wrong, others see the unfolding story line as all too believable.

Most people who have either first hand experience of coercive control/emotional/physical/sexual abuse in long term relationship, or have worked closely with the victims and perpetrators find the storyline believable. I've posted similar statements on this thread previously and usually been told I'm lecturing/boring/patronising people. Apologies if that's how this post makes you feel, but its my opinion.
I do wish though that the story line was accurate in the way barristers, solicitors are portrayed.

I agree with you Iam64. If subjected to this type of abuse over a sustained period it becomes akin to brainwashing which is what the storyline accurately depicts IMO, but I just wish as you have said, that they would get some of the details on the legal side right, as victims of such abuse may just be looking to TA for guidance.
Now Jess has been introduced I think they will rack up the tension, will she won't she testify, until the very last minute, and when she eventually agrees The Big Bad Wolf aka Rob, will threaten her and the defence will get it all on tape. Sorted!

Can't Jess be subpoenaed to testify?

Well! That should mean the air is cleared between Adam and Ian