Yes, yes, it must be Jess!
Surely that will have him bang to rights now....
Surely that will have him bang to rights now....
The Archers!
153 of 210
Originally Posted by LakieLady:
“Yes, yes, it must be Jess!
Surely that will have him bang to rights now....”
“Yes, yes, it must be Jess!
Surely that will have him bang to rights now....”
If the judge allows her evidence. She has made a statement.
Originally Posted by dippydancing:
“A fascinating subplot to see -though pretty unlikely- would be the eventual fall out of events between Ursula, Bruce and Rob.
At what point -if ever- would the parents understand their own role in Rob's attitudes and actions? But such glorious moments of sudden self-awareness are very unlikely and hugely indulgent, so I shall concoct them in my own mind instead...”
“A fascinating subplot to see -though pretty unlikely- would be the eventual fall out of events between Ursula, Bruce and Rob.
At what point -if ever- would the parents understand their own role in Rob's attitudes and actions? But such glorious moments of sudden self-awareness are very unlikely and hugely indulgent, so I shall concoct them in my own mind instead...”
I already have.
Brusque Bruce will regard his son as the scum that he is, and do the whole "Don't
darken my door again, you're dead to me" routine. He will insist that Arsula will have nothing more to do with Rob, and he will live out his days with no-one to bolster his ghastly ego.
My parallel universe has sprung, fully-formed...
Originally Posted by seejay63:
“You'll see flocks of pigs flying on the backs of unicorns before that happens!”
“You'll see flocks of pigs flying on the backs of unicorns before that happens!”
My imagination has Tim Burton-like levels of robustness.
The CPS guy is a rottweiler! Thought Helen might dissolve into tears when questioned by him but she kept it together pretty much.
Originally Posted by fredster:
“If the judge allows her evidence. She has made a statement.”
“If the judge allows her evidence. She has made a statement.”
If he doesn't, Helen would have excellent grounds for appeal if convicted. Judges don't like being appealed, and tend to avoid it if they can. I think he'll allow it.
ETA: Of course, the prosecution brief will try and say Jess's evidence is tainted because she's motivated by revenge for Rob leaving her for Helen.
Last edited by LakieLady : 07-09-2016 at 19:25
Originally Posted by Anne_Cameron:
“The CPS guy is a rottweiler! Thought Helen might dissolve into tears when questioned by him but she kept it together pretty much.”
“The CPS guy is a rottweiler! Thought Helen might dissolve into tears when questioned by him but she kept it together pretty much.”
He really does deserve to be struck off. What a nasty piece of work. I wouldn't put jury tampering past him either.
Originally Posted by LakieLady:
“I already have.
Brusque Bruce will regard his son as the scum that he is, and do the whole "Don't
darken my door again, you're dead to me" routine. He will insist that Arsula will have nothing more to do with Rob, and he will live out his days with no-one to bolster his ghastly ego.
My parallel universe has sprung, fully-formed...”
“I already have.
Brusque Bruce will regard his son as the scum that he is, and do the whole "Don't
darken my door again, you're dead to me" routine. He will insist that Arsula will have nothing more to do with Rob, and he will live out his days with no-one to bolster his ghastly ego.
My parallel universe has sprung, fully-formed...”
But my own avenging need for all people to understand their part in the drama would need a Christmas Carol-type ghost to appear to Brursula to show them their own role in creating Bruce Jr.
Originally Posted by Anne_Cameron:
“The CPS guy is a rottweiler! Thought Helen might dissolve into tears when questioned by him but she kept it together pretty much.”
“The CPS guy is a rottweiler! Thought Helen might dissolve into tears when questioned by him but she kept it together pretty much.”
As anyone who has done jury service will know this episode stank. Trials run quite slowly and thoughtfully, the judge would have stopped interrogation of this nature, if he didn't the defence would have demanded the case stopped and a retrial under another judge which would be very serious for the judge indeed. The writers were far too lazy to go to their nearest crown court and see how it is done, their research seems to have been watching Judge Judy or some other rubbish. I suspect it will end like Perry Mason of years ago when someone, probably Robs ex wife, will rush into the courtroom and tell all. Utter rubbish, the BBC should know considerably better.
Originally Posted by anthony david:
“As anyone who has done jury service will know this episode stank. Trials run quite slowly and thoughtfully, the judge would have stopped interrogation of this nature, if he didn't the defence would have demanded the case stopped and a retrial under another judge which would be very serious for the judge indeed. The writers were far too lazy to go to their nearest crown court and see how it is done, their research seems to have been watching Judge Judy or some other rubbish. I suspect it will end like Perry Mason of years ago when someone, probably Robs ex wife, will rush into the courtroom and tell all. Utter rubbish, the BBC should know considerably better.”
“As anyone who has done jury service will know this episode stank. Trials run quite slowly and thoughtfully, the judge would have stopped interrogation of this nature, if he didn't the defence would have demanded the case stopped and a retrial under another judge which would be very serious for the judge indeed. The writers were far too lazy to go to their nearest crown court and see how it is done, their research seems to have been watching Judge Judy or some other rubbish. I suspect it will end like Perry Mason of years ago when someone, probably Robs ex wife, will rush into the courtroom and tell all. Utter rubbish, the BBC should know considerably better.”
In fairness, if this was run as slowly as a real trial, we'd still be waiting for the outcome at Christmas!
Originally Posted by LakieLady:
“In fairness, if this was run as slowly as a real trial, we'd still be waiting for the outcome at Christmas!”
“In fairness, if this was run as slowly as a real trial, we'd still be waiting for the outcome at Christmas!”
True but the over sensationalism was out of order and could discourage people from seeking justice on other matters. It should be possible for a professional script writer to produce something that at least feels real. The standards on this episode were unacceptably low.
Ooh another good one tonight.
I don't mind the prosecutor. The news of the rape has rattled him and he is clearly coming apart at the seams. Were I on the jury I would regard his harrying of a clearly distressed person as pretty reprihensible and I would be disinclined to trust his position.
The Archers obviously seething and rightly so. Hopefully this will now permeate in Ambridge, and retribution can begin to be doled out to Rob
I don't mind the prosecutor. The news of the rape has rattled him and he is clearly coming apart at the seams. Were I on the jury I would regard his harrying of a clearly distressed person as pretty reprihensible and I would be disinclined to trust his position.
The Archers obviously seething and rightly so. Hopefully this will now permeate in Ambridge, and retribution can begin to be doled out to Rob
Originally Posted by sam_gee:
“I hope the moment Rob first spots Jess at the court is broadcast. He'll be fuming.”
“I hope the moment Rob first spots Jess at the court is broadcast. He'll be fuming.”
She might not appear, she had made a statement.
Originally Posted by anthony david:
“As anyone who has done jury service will know this episode stank. Trials run quite slowly and thoughtfully, the judge would have stopped interrogation of this nature, if he didn't the defence would have demanded the case stopped and a retrial under another judge which would be very serious for the judge indeed. The writers were far too lazy to go to their nearest crown court and see how it is done, their research seems to have been watching Judge Judy or some other rubbish. I suspect it will end like Perry Mason of years ago when someone, probably Robs ex wife, will rush into the courtroom and tell all. Utter rubbish, the BBC should know considerably better.”
“As anyone who has done jury service will know this episode stank. Trials run quite slowly and thoughtfully, the judge would have stopped interrogation of this nature, if he didn't the defence would have demanded the case stopped and a retrial under another judge which would be very serious for the judge indeed. The writers were far too lazy to go to their nearest crown court and see how it is done, their research seems to have been watching Judge Judy or some other rubbish. I suspect it will end like Perry Mason of years ago when someone, probably Robs ex wife, will rush into the courtroom and tell all. Utter rubbish, the BBC should know considerably better.”
I think the writers have messed up quite a lot with the whole sad affair.
Originally Posted by anthony david:
“As anyone who has done jury service will know this episode stank. Trials run quite slowly and thoughtfully, the judge would have stopped interrogation of this nature, if he didn't the defence would have demanded the case stopped and a retrial under another judge which would be very serious for the judge indeed. The writers were far too lazy to go to their nearest crown court and see how it is done, their research seems to have been watching Judge Judy or some other rubbish. I suspect it will end like Perry Mason of years ago when someone, probably Robs ex wife, will rush into the courtroom and tell all. Utter rubbish, the BBC should know considerably better.”
“As anyone who has done jury service will know this episode stank. Trials run quite slowly and thoughtfully, the judge would have stopped interrogation of this nature, if he didn't the defence would have demanded the case stopped and a retrial under another judge which would be very serious for the judge indeed. The writers were far too lazy to go to their nearest crown court and see how it is done, their research seems to have been watching Judge Judy or some other rubbish. I suspect it will end like Perry Mason of years ago when someone, probably Robs ex wife, will rush into the courtroom and tell all. Utter rubbish, the BBC should know considerably better.”
I too have done jury duty -twice- and much as I find courtroom dramas tiresome because of their constant over-dramatisation, if they kept it "real" I'd switch off, because the reality is deadly slow, protracted and completely detail-driven. Personally, I don't expect verisimilitude from films, books or plays- I just want emotional truth. If I want real life- I just look around me.
Originally Posted by anthony david:
“As anyone who has done jury service will know this episode stank. Trials run quite slowly and thoughtfully, the judge would have stopped interrogation of this nature, if he didn't the defence would have demanded the case stopped and a retrial under another judge which would be very serious for the judge indeed. The writers were far too lazy to go to their nearest crown court and see how it is done, their research seems to have been watching Judge Judy or some other rubbish. I suspect it will end like Perry Mason of years ago when someone, probably Robs ex wife, will rush into the courtroom and tell all. Utter rubbish, the BBC should know considerably better.”
“As anyone who has done jury service will know this episode stank. Trials run quite slowly and thoughtfully, the judge would have stopped interrogation of this nature, if he didn't the defence would have demanded the case stopped and a retrial under another judge which would be very serious for the judge indeed. The writers were far too lazy to go to their nearest crown court and see how it is done, their research seems to have been watching Judge Judy or some other rubbish. I suspect it will end like Perry Mason of years ago when someone, probably Robs ex wife, will rush into the courtroom and tell all. Utter rubbish, the BBC should know considerably better.”
While the Archers is better than most soaps in its depictions it is still a simulation of real life and its processes.
Lets take a more innocuous example eg when Bridge Farm was threatened over health and safety. My o/h occasionally works with local authority regarding workplace legislation and he said there was no way the issue could have been resolved in the way it was in the end. It would have been protracted with more evidence gathering, further assessments and inspections etc.
We would really be drowning in tedium if their representstion was that prosaic.
I'm happy it's a drama not a documentary!
Originally Posted by An Thropologist:
“Monthly meeting of the Cambrian Crocheters is it?”
“Monthly meeting of the Cambrian Crocheters is it?
”
No surely Welsh lad is at his local council planning meeting getting everything sorted for Archer Con 2017 at his place
Originally Posted by Wolfie_Smith:
“No surely Welsh lad is at his local council planning meeting getting everything sorted for Archer Con 2017 at his place”
“No surely Welsh lad is at his local council planning meeting getting everything sorted for Archer Con 2017 at his place
”
Ooh I do hope so! We have so much to discuss and plan...like the very slow and painful demise of Rob!
Originally Posted by Wolfie_Smith:
“No surely Welsh lad is at his local council planning meeting getting everything sorted for Archer Con 2017 at his place”
“No surely Welsh lad is at his local council planning meeting getting everything sorted for Archer Con 2017 at his place
”
Originally Posted by Safi74:
“Ooh I do hope so! We have so much to discuss and plan...like the very slow and painful demise of Rob!
”
“Ooh I do hope so! We have so much to discuss and plan...like the very slow and painful demise of Rob!
”
Of course! Just got the go ahead for temporary change of residential dwelling for 'assembly and leisure' use
.The outdoor cocktail bar will be a prominent feature!
Originally Posted by dippydancing:
“I too have done jury duty -twice- and much as I find courtroom dramas tiresome because of their constant over-dramatisation, if they kept it "real" I'd switch off, because the reality is deadly slow, protracted and completely detail-driven. Personally, I don't expect verisimilitude from films, books or plays- I just want emotional truth. If I want real life- I just look around me.”
“I too have done jury duty -twice- and much as I find courtroom dramas tiresome because of their constant over-dramatisation, if they kept it "real" I'd switch off, because the reality is deadly slow, protracted and completely detail-driven. Personally, I don't expect verisimilitude from films, books or plays- I just want emotional truth. If I want real life- I just look around me.”
*3 bewigged gowned judges leap into thread * Nobody expects verisimilitude". Our chief weapon is plausibility, plausibility and an appearance of truth. Our two weapons are...
I agree that there has to be artistic licence and a fair bit of fast foward or we would all fall asleep. I am not sure why they feel the need to crack off the entire case in a weeks worth of episodes though. I am sure we could tolerate it being spread out over 2 or 3 weeks given that we have put up with it taking 2 or 3 years to get us here. My only objection is that they appear to be peddling the idea that the aim of the prosecution is to stitch someone up. But then again had they discovered from their first interview with Kirsty on the night of the stabbing that Rob was a wrong-un the story would have died rather.
Originally Posted by An Thropologist:
“*3 bewigged gowned judges leap into thread * Nobody expects verisimilitude". Our chief weapon is plausibility, plausibility and an appearance of truth. Our two weapons are...
I agree that there has to be artistic licence and a fair bit of fast foward or we would all fall asleep. I am not sure why they feel the need to crack off the entire case in a weeks worth of episodes though. I am sure we could tolerate it being spread out over 2 or 3 weeks given that we have put up with it taking 2 or 3 years to get us here. My only objection is that they appear to be peddling the idea that the aim of the prosecution is to stitch someone up. But then again had they discovered from their first interview with Kirsty on the night of the stabbing that Rob was a wrong-un the story would have died rather.”
“*3 bewigged gowned judges leap into thread * Nobody expects verisimilitude". Our chief weapon is plausibility, plausibility and an appearance of truth. Our two weapons are...
I agree that there has to be artistic licence and a fair bit of fast foward or we would all fall asleep. I am not sure why they feel the need to crack off the entire case in a weeks worth of episodes though. I am sure we could tolerate it being spread out over 2 or 3 weeks given that we have put up with it taking 2 or 3 years to get us here. My only objection is that they appear to be peddling the idea that the aim of the prosecution is to stitch someone up. But then again had they discovered from their first interview with Kirsty on the night of the stabbing that Rob was a wrong-un the story would have died rather.
”
Actually, what I really want is emotional truth and Michael Palin to make a surprise courtroom appearance...
But yes- I too am surprised at the speed they're rattling through things story-wise/courtroom-wise. But I guess many trials are finished in a week (well the two cases I was on were) and since each episode is <15 mins long that's a lot of ground to cover in a short space of time, given that TA takes place in "real time".
Originally Posted by Welsh-lad:
“Of course! Just got the go ahead for temporary change of residential dwelling for 'assembly and leisure' use.
The outdoor cocktail bar will be a prominent feature!”
“Of course! Just got the go ahead for temporary change of residential dwelling for 'assembly and leisure' use
.The outdoor cocktail bar will be a prominent feature!
”
Excellent news! Will Tom Cruise be doing the cocktails?!
Originally Posted by Welsh-lad:
“Of course! Just got the go ahead for temporary change of residential dwelling for 'assembly and leisure' use.
The outdoor cocktail bar will be a prominent feature!”
“Of course! Just got the go ahead for temporary change of residential dwelling for 'assembly and leisure' use
.The outdoor cocktail bar will be a prominent feature!
”
I hope you've got a big enough place!
153 of 210
