Sorry I disagree - 2 wrongs don't make a right. And you did seem to be implying that anyone that suffered rape would react in the same way as Stacey and it just isn't true. Some would, more wouldn't and sadly I do know what I'm talking about having been the victim of violence myself and knowing several rape victims very well.
I thought the 'two wrongs don't make a right' thing might be brought up on here. I'm very sorry for your ordeal but I still think everyone acts differently to the bad things that happens to them. Obviously most people wouldn't kill their attacker but if you had a moment of madness you might consider it. Plus wasn't Stacey mentally ill at the time from bipolar? That could of contributed a lot to her killing Archie.
I thought the 'two wrongs don't make a right' thing might be brought up on here. I'm very sorry for your ordeal but I still think everyone acts differently to the bad things that happens to them. Obviously most people wouldn't kill their attacker but if you had a moment of madness you might consider it. Plus wasn't Stacey mentally ill at the time from bipolar? That could of contributed a lot to her killing Archie.
Santer categorically stated that Stacey was taking her medication, her bi+polar was under control and not a contributing factor to the killing. She was sane at the time - it was an act of anger and revenge.
I can understand those feelings, of course but I still don't think they excuse murder. And '2 wrongs don't make a right' comes up frequently because many people happen to believe it is true.
Of course they were exceptional circumstances but what if somebody hurt Stacey again (women do get raped more than once in their life sometimes) or Lily? Would she feel it is okay to kill again?
So, I can understand Alfie's feelings and the fact is, aside from Danny, as far as we are aware nobody in his family has killed anyone. And we don't know how he would have treated Michael if he'd known about his planning to kill Janine. I doubt he'd have protected him myself.
I thought the 'two wrongs don't make a right' thing might be brought up on here. I'm very sorry for your ordeal but I still think everyone acts differently to the bad things that happens to them. Obviously most people wouldn't kill their attacker but if you had a moment of madness you might consider it. Plus wasn't Stacey mentally ill at the time from bipolar? That could of contributed a lot to her killing Archie.
If she killed him in self-defence then fair enough. But she didn't, and while I don't think she's a cold-blooded killer, she is still a murderer. As I've said in other threads, I don't have an ounce of pity for Archie. She had a moment of madness for sure. Doesn't make her right for doing it by any means.
Of course I accept that everyone reacts differently - that is kind of my ooint. That being a victim of rape doesn't mean that you'd react the same as Stacey, or that you understand or forgive her actions. Also that anybody that doesn't approve (perhaps the wrong word but can't think of a better one) would change their mind if placed in that situation.
Alfie doesn't know that Michael was plotting to kill Janine. Kat only knows what she was told by Joey and Alice, which she probably hasn't shared with Alfie. Quite why Alfie seems to hold Michael on such a pedestal however is hard to comprehend. The guy slept with his wife, got her pregnant, stole money off of him, lied about it and tried to pin it on one of his in-laws. Not only pin it on, but also make it look like she was completely mad. He also treated his brothers and father appallingly. You never saw Ian getting over what the Wicks did to him like that.
I don't think it's the murder itself that Alfie has a problem with. How does Alfie know that Kat wouldn't have done the same had Harry turned up for Zoe's 18th? It's the repurcussions if she is caught. That's likely, he's recently made an enemy of the daughters of the bloke that Stacey killed.
Alfie doesn't know that Michael was plotting to kill Janine. Kat only knows what she was told by Joey and Alice, which she probably hasn't shared with Alfie. Quite why Alfie seems to hold Michael on such a pedestal however is hard to comprehend. The guy slept with his wife, got her pregnant, stole money off of him, lied about it and tried to pin it on one of his in-laws. Not only pin it on, but also make it look like she was completely mad. He also treated his brothers and father appallingly. You never saw Ian getting over what the Wicks did to him like that.
I don't think it's the murder itself that Alfie has a problem with. How does Alfie know that Kat wouldn't have done the same had Harry turned up for Zoe's 18th? It's the repurcussions if she is caught. That's likely, he's recently made an enemy of the daughters of the bloke that Stacey killed.
Yeah I don't think Alfie judges Stacey at all. He's a decent bloke really. He's just worried about him and Kat getting into trouble with the police.
I am actually shocked at the number of people on this forum who hold such contempt for the rule of law.
Stacey is a killer, regardless of whether the man she killed was a rapist, and she should be brought to justice.
No-one is showing contempt for the law, and it matters not what happens to 'Stacey'. She is a tv soap character and none of the events that take place are for real.
I think it's really odd the way some people go on about Stacey being a murderer. Archie was the villain in this SL, not Stacey. Archie deserved to be killed. Stacey is a character we're supposed to engaged in and root for. Her killing Archie was the hero taking down the villain. She's a murderer, yes. But not cold blooded at all. I suppose this forum will always have it's unique views.
That's the key word here, justice not revenge. If it emerges that she committed the murder due to her condition then she deserves help and a chance to rehabilitate. All people convicted of a crime deserve that, although I suppose you could argue that some crimes are so awful that perhaps you can't be rehabilitated but generally I'd say that the justice system should be there for that reason.
They addressed that in the reveal though, where it was confirmed she wasn't 'bipolar' at the time. It annoyed me immensely. as one of my favourite characters, surely it was more believable that she would have killed in self defence or having an episode. Instead they had her kill in a calm and collected manner (for shock value). There would be an argument to some degree of diminished responsibility and a lesser sentence, but still >10 years in jail for murder.
I always find it totally illogical that people justify a murder of a rapist. Rape is a horrible crime, but in the eyes of the law a murder is worse and a longer sentence. as such, those raped committing murder end up committing a crime far worse than their attacker. You simply can't justify ending a life and killing someone as retribution for the pain and agony of rape. That is why we have jails so that those rapists can be locked up away from harming other people.
No-one is showing contempt for the law, and it matters not what happens to 'Stacey'. She is a tv soap character and none of the events that take place are for real.
Exactly. Soaps are a place where we can root for serial killers and cheer at deaths. Stacey's no angel but she's a complex character we can engage in.
Yes, because him plotting for months on end to kill the mother of his child who didn't even do much and using an 'innocent' girl to help kill her [He would have killed her anyway if it wasn't for Alice and Janine] is so much worse than Stacey killing a sick rapist who raped her while she was at her most vulnerable and raped his own daughter when she was 14. Not to mention Stacey had barely planned hers.
I think it's really odd the way some people go on about Stacey being a murderer. Archie was the villain in this SL, not Stacey. Archie deserved to be killed. Stacey is a character we're supposed to engaged in and root for. Her killing Archie was the hero taking down the villain. She's a murderer, yes. But not cold blooded at all. I suppose this forum will always have it's unique views.
I think it messed up how people can claim Stacey ISN'T a murderer or even claim what she did was okay. It is NEVER okay to murder someone, EVER. Manslaughter due to self defence or an accident....but this was not the case. Otherwise, we can start claiming Ronnie's murder was okay was Carl was a bad person, Janine's murder was okay because Michael was a bad person....when do you draw the line or do we expect society to go around killing all the people they see as bad people, in whatever means they deem fit. No-one DESERVES to be killed, even the Archies, Carls and Michaels. As for deeming someone a HERO for murdering someone; that is messed up! I don't believe Stacey is cold-blooded, but that does not deter from the murder. Archie raped in anger, Stacey killed in anger....what is the difference? Or is the claim now that rape is worse than murder?
I would like to say...if Stacey confessed, went to court and received a short sentence due to the extenuating circumstances, I would not have an issue with her returning to the square and carrying on with her life. I think it is more than she has never been held accountable for her crime.
Yeah I don't think Alfie judges Stacey at all. He's a decent bloke really. He's just worried about him and Kat getting into trouble with the police.
He wasn't too worried about getting in trouble with the police when he hurled the QV bust through Phil's window, and he didn't show any concern that it could have landed on Lexi or Ami.
I think it's really odd the way some people go on about Stacey being a murderer. Archie was the villain in this SL, not Stacey. Archie deserved to be killed. Stacey is a character we're supposed to engaged in and root for. Her killing Archie was the hero taking down the villain. She's a murderer, yes. But not cold blooded at all. I suppose this forum will always have it's unique views.
I think it messed up how people can claim Stacey ISN'T a murderer or even claim what she did was okay. It is NEVER okay to murder someone, EVER. Manslaughter due to self defence or an accident....but this was not the case. Otherwise, we can start claiming Ronnie's murder was okay was Carl was a bad person, Janine's murder was okay because Michael was a bad person....when do you draw the line or do we expect society to go around killing all the people they see as bad people, in whatever means they deem fit. No-one DESERVES to be killed, even the Archies, Carls and Michaels. As for deeming someone a HERO for murdering someone; that is messed up! I don't believe Stacey is cold-blooded, but that does not deter from the murder. Archie raped in anger, Stacey killed in anger....what is the difference? Or is the claim now that rape is worse than murder?
I think that within prisons rape, especially rape of children, is seen as worse than murder.
Isn't it more that Alfie is a hypocrite by going on and on to Kat about no-more secrets and lies, putting family first etc - yet is obviously harbouring some secret from Australia!
Isn't it more that Alfie is a hypocrite by going on and on to Kat about no-more secrets and lies, putting family first etc - yet is obviously harbouring some secret from Australia!
And speaking of Alfie, why when he has something serious or profound to say, does he start mumbling in a low tone, whilst having a face like a slapped bottom?
Yes, because him plotting for months on end to kill the mother of his child who didn't even do much and using an 'innocent' girl to help kill her [He would have killed her anyway if it wasn't for Alice and Janine] is so much worse than Stacey killing a sick rapist who raped her while she was at her most vulnerable and raped his own daughter when she was 14. Not to mention Stacey had barely planned hers.
Stacey walked into The Vic and deliberately smashed the bust of Queen Victoria over Archie's head, it was planned and she knew he was alone. Of course I sympathise with Stacey after her rape ordeal, but as I've said many times you cannot take the law into your own hands, if we did what kind of society would we live in?
The main point of this thread is that Alfie is a hypocrite for standing by Michael, but he didn't know during those months that Michael was planning to Kill Janine did he?
As for "Archie deserves to be kill" - who the hell can decide who or doesn't deserve to be killed? I hated Archie. Just as I hated Derek and Carl. I can't say I was sad when they were killed off but that doesn't make it right in any universe, and it certainly doesn't mean that they DESERVED to get killed off.
I can understand why people want to defend why Stacey killed him, but I can never, EVER agree that x deserved to be killed off or that y had the right to take the law into their own hands (the death penalty isn't even law in the UK...being a vigilante isn't either!). But then I guess that's the other side of DS for you.
As for "Archie deserves to be kill" - who the hell can decide who or doesn't deserve to be killed? I hated Archie. Just as I hated Derek and Carl. I can't say I was sad when they were killed off but that doesn't make it right in any universe, and it certainly doesn't mean that they DESERVED to get killed off.
I can understand why people want to defend why Stacey killed him, but I can never, EVER agree that x deserved to be killed off or that y had the right to take the law into their own hands (the death penalty isn't even law in the UK...being a vigilante isn't either!)
The death penalty doesn't work as a deterrent, in Europe the death penalty is banned in all countries except Belarus, which is the only country in Europe that is not a signatory of the European Court of Human Rights. No wonder so many far-right loons want us to leave the ECHR.
No but the meaning of cold blooded can be debated.
This.
Doubtful it was cold blooded - that implies premeditation and Stacey is definitely not (from what most reasonable people would understand "cold-blooded" to be) a cold-blooded killer / murderer - but moreover a woman who lashed out in revenge and anger (and understandably, though perhaps not rightfully so after Archie raped her).
Doubtful it was cold blooded - that implies premeditation and Stacey is definitely not (from what most reasonable people would understand "cold-blooded" to be) a cold-blooded killer / murderer - but moreover a woman who lashed out in revenge and anger (and understandably, though perhaps not rightfully so after Archie raped her).
Do you consider Ronnie to be a cold-blooded murderer?
Do you consider Ronnie to be a cold-blooded murderer?
For one I don't think the two can be compared - they are not the same.
Each case has to be considered individually and on their own merits.
Disagreeing about Stacey being a cold-blooded murderer doesn't mean I think the same about Ronnie or that it follows that I think she is indeed a cold-bloodeed murderer.
Although Archie also attacked her and the viewer is being led down the path of seeing Ronnie fall apart in the light of her father's memory / abuse I think what happened between Ronnie and Carl was different to that of the events between Stacey and Archie.
I wouldn't say Ronnie killing Carl was an act of cold-blooded murder per se but would say there were more elements of premeditation involved leading up to it.
So the answer is NO I don't think Ronnie is a cold-blooded murderer but do think that Ronnie's actions were more calculated and premeditated than Stacey's were at the time.
And I am judging "cold-blooded" murder on the basis of someone attacking and killing a child for example, gunning someone down and leaving them to die or stabbing them with them having no chance of defending themselves. Extreme cases I know - but that's my personal interpretation of "cold-blooded" and what I would have imagined most reasonable and sane people's interpretations or views of cold-blooded were.
Comments
I thought the 'two wrongs don't make a right' thing might be brought up on here. I'm very sorry for your ordeal but I still think everyone acts differently to the bad things that happens to them. Obviously most people wouldn't kill their attacker but if you had a moment of madness you might consider it. Plus wasn't Stacey mentally ill at the time from bipolar? That could of contributed a lot to her killing Archie.
Santer categorically stated that Stacey was taking her medication, her bi+polar was under control and not a contributing factor to the killing. She was sane at the time - it was an act of anger and revenge.
I can understand those feelings, of course but I still don't think they excuse murder. And '2 wrongs don't make a right' comes up frequently because many people happen to believe it is true.
Of course they were exceptional circumstances but what if somebody hurt Stacey again (women do get raped more than once in their life sometimes) or Lily? Would she feel it is okay to kill again?
So, I can understand Alfie's feelings and the fact is, aside from Danny, as far as we are aware nobody in his family has killed anyone. And we don't know how he would have treated Michael if he'd known about his planning to kill Janine. I doubt he'd have protected him myself.
If she killed him in self-defence then fair enough. But she didn't, and while I don't think she's a cold-blooded killer, she is still a murderer. As I've said in other threads, I don't have an ounce of pity for Archie. She had a moment of madness for sure. Doesn't make her right for doing it by any means.
I don't think it's the murder itself that Alfie has a problem with. How does Alfie know that Kat wouldn't have done the same had Harry turned up for Zoe's 18th? It's the repurcussions if she is caught. That's likely, he's recently made an enemy of the daughters of the bloke that Stacey killed.
Yeah I don't think Alfie judges Stacey at all. He's a decent bloke really. He's just worried about him and Kat getting into trouble with the police.
No-one is showing contempt for the law, and it matters not what happens to 'Stacey'. She is a tv soap character and none of the events that take place are for real.
I always find it totally illogical that people justify a murder of a rapist. Rape is a horrible crime, but in the eyes of the law a murder is worse and a longer sentence. as such, those raped committing murder end up committing a crime far worse than their attacker. You simply can't justify ending a life and killing someone as retribution for the pain and agony of rape. That is why we have jails so that those rapists can be locked up away from harming other people.
He wasn't too worried about getting in trouble with the police when he hurled the QV bust through Phil's window, and he didn't show any concern that it could have landed on Lexi or Ami.
I think that within prisons rape, especially rape of children, is seen as worse than murder.
Lol...yes....:p
Stacey walked into The Vic and deliberately smashed the bust of Queen Victoria over Archie's head, it was planned and she knew he was alone. Of course I sympathise with Stacey after her rape ordeal, but as I've said many times you cannot take the law into your own hands, if we did what kind of society would we live in?
The main point of this thread is that Alfie is a hypocrite for standing by Michael, but he didn't know during those months that Michael was planning to Kill Janine did he?
As for "Archie deserves to be kill" - who the hell can decide who or doesn't deserve to be killed? I hated Archie. Just as I hated Derek and Carl. I can't say I was sad when they were killed off but that doesn't make it right in any universe, and it certainly doesn't mean that they DESERVED to get killed off.
I can understand why people want to defend why Stacey killed him, but I can never, EVER agree that x deserved to be killed off or that y had the right to take the law into their own hands (the death penalty isn't even law in the UK...being a vigilante isn't either!). But then I guess that's the other side of DS for you.
The death penalty doesn't work as a deterrent, in Europe the death penalty is banned in all countries except Belarus, which is the only country in Europe that is not a signatory of the European Court of Human Rights. No wonder so many far-right loons want us to leave the ECHR.
This.
Doubtful it was cold blooded - that implies premeditation and Stacey is definitely not (from what most reasonable people would understand "cold-blooded" to be) a cold-blooded killer / murderer - but moreover a woman who lashed out in revenge and anger (and understandably, though perhaps not rightfully so after Archie raped her).
Do you consider Ronnie to be a cold-blooded murderer?
For one I don't think the two can be compared - they are not the same.
Each case has to be considered individually and on their own merits.
Disagreeing about Stacey being a cold-blooded murderer doesn't mean I think the same about Ronnie or that it follows that I think she is indeed a cold-bloodeed murderer.
Although Archie also attacked her and the viewer is being led down the path of seeing Ronnie fall apart in the light of her father's memory / abuse I think what happened between Ronnie and Carl was different to that of the events between Stacey and Archie.
I wouldn't say Ronnie killing Carl was an act of cold-blooded murder per se but would say there were more elements of premeditation involved leading up to it.
So the answer is NO I don't think Ronnie is a cold-blooded murderer but do think that Ronnie's actions were more calculated and premeditated than Stacey's were at the time.
And I am judging "cold-blooded" murder on the basis of someone attacking and killing a child for example, gunning someone down and leaving them to die or stabbing them with them having no chance of defending themselves. Extreme cases I know - but that's my personal interpretation of "cold-blooded" and what I would have imagined most reasonable and sane people's interpretations or views of cold-blooded were.
Short answer - NO to Ronnie either hehe.