Options

Storylines that have unanswered questions

13»

Comments

  • Options
    summer_stesummer_ste Posts: 5,524
    Forum Member
    IIRC I think the storyline was just to show that Carla and Paul were capable of being quite dodgy without actually making them pure evil.
  • Options
    KornerKabinKornerKabin Posts: 20,308
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Thanks for the reminder, I was going through my teenage phase then so corrie was just in the background....I think one day a Carla Stalker/Revenge story could maybe happen in the future...Maybe they could kidnap Liam jr as revenge (at least that would involve more characters)

    That would be interesting, but who would be the stalker? Katya's family?

    I'd quite like to see Wiki make a return as she had the potential to be a very interesting and very 'current' character for the show.
    summer_ste wrote: »
    IIRC I think the storyline was just to show that Carla and Paul were capable of being quite dodgy without actually making them pure evil.

    Yes, I can see that. I think that it was more for the character of Paul than Carla as I think that the writers wanted to take him in quite a dodgy direction but the actor decided to leave so they made him even dodgier!
  • Options
    pumpkinlattes33pumpkinlattes33 Posts: 8,326
    Forum Member
    To be honest, I'm glad that the Ronnie/Carl's family storyline was "abandoned" - It was bloody boring.
  • Options
    kazi1976kazi1976 Posts: 286
    Forum Member
    Did anyone ever find out that Cindy Jr stole Phil's £10k which Dexter was blamed for?
  • Options
    NefersitraNefersitra Posts: 2,408
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    kazi1976 wrote: »
    Did anyone ever find out that Cindy Jr stole Phil's £10k which Dexter was blamed for?

    I think Peter did and they made her give back what she had left because she'd spent some?

    I wasn't really paying attention to the storyline, but I seem to recall Jay, Peter, Abi and Lola were supposed to be helping Dexter find the money for a few weeks then Peter and Cindy had a row and then the money was paid back
  • Options
    NefersitraNefersitra Posts: 2,408
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    samcains90 wrote: »
    If you have the DNA from both brothers. In Emmerdale John Barton is dead. And James did not collect his DNA to do the mail order test.

    If the lab is told a child may belong to one of two brothers and they have a sample from the child and one brother, they should do an enhanced test (looking for more points of similarity between child and suspected father).

    I don't watch Emmerdale, so I have no idea what the lab was told. For a paternity test you need to submit the child's DNA sample and the possible father's at least. If James didn't make them aware that Adam was either his son or his brother's yes there could be a "false" result.

    From a strictly scientific point of view, the whole test seems to be unreliable anyway as Adam's DNA came from a sock taken from the shared laundry pile? While it is possible to get DNA from clothes, there is a great risk of cross contamination - other family members (including James's known sons right?) would also have DNA on their clothes which could transfer. It's even possible that James's own DNA might have transferred to the sock, skewing the results towards him.

    He'd have been better off taking Adam's toothbrush or as Kevin in Corrie did with baby Jack, getting a saliva sample somehow (Kevin used the baby's dummy).
Sign In or Register to comment.