Killing one person. Get your facts right.
Has Tracy Barlow shown any remorse over killing 3 people?
2 of 5
Originally Posted by sunny day:
“Why should she feel remorse for killing Charlie ? he was a vile man....he controlled Shelly and drown her to a breakdown....he was cheating on Tracey with Maria..he knew what she might do if she found out.....”
“Why should she feel remorse for killing Charlie ? he was a vile man....he controlled Shelly and drown her to a breakdown....he was cheating on Tracey with Maria..he knew what she might do if she found out.....”
That doesn't make it ok to kill him. Charlie was despicable and should have gone to jail for what he did to Shelley, but killing him solves nothing. Tracey just removed any chance for him to be brought to justice. Not that she even cared about that, she only killed him because he cheated on her. Cheating is vile but it doesn't give anyone the right to kill someone.
Originally Posted by srhgts:
“That doesn't make it ok to kill him. Charlie was despicable and should have gone to jail for what he did to Shelley, but killing him solves nothing. Tracey just removed any chance for him to be brought to justice. Not that she even cared about that, she only killed him because he cheated on her. Cheating is vile but it doesn't give anyone the right to kill someone.”
“That doesn't make it ok to kill him. Charlie was despicable and should have gone to jail for what he did to Shelley, but killing him solves nothing. Tracey just removed any chance for him to be brought to justice. Not that she even cared about that, she only killed him because he cheated on her. Cheating is vile but it doesn't give anyone the right to kill someone.”
Agreed. He didn't do anything to Tracy and as if she gave a crap about shelly.
She also pretended to be a victim of domestic abuse which shows how premeditated it was.
While Charlie was awful to shelly he did other decent stuff like being nice to roy and trying to drown David
Well she has taken clear amusement in the past that she has gotten off with murdering Charlie and has made some jokes about it.
I doubt causing the fire keeps her awake at night.
It's so stupid that they are trying to make her sympathetic but only a few weeks go was close to committing murder again. But it's okay, Robert wanting to get back with her makes up for it.
I doubt causing the fire keeps her awake at night.
It's so stupid that they are trying to make her sympathetic but only a few weeks go was close to committing murder again. But it's okay, Robert wanting to get back with her makes up for it.
Originally Posted by craig_25:
“Completely agree. Hated Charlie Stubbs and Shelleh was one of my all time faves so I had good reason! I don't think Tracy would feel remorse for Charlie, in the eye of someone like her he had it coming!”
“Completely agree. Hated Charlie Stubbs and Shelleh was one of my all time faves so I had good reason! I don't think Tracy would feel remorse for Charlie, in the eye of someone like her he had it coming!”
The same Tracy who drugged Roy, pretended she was pregnant to his child which led him to nearly take his own life? And whom she has been vile to since? Yeah, she is far better in comparison.
Charlie may have been vile, but what about other people Tracy has been cruel towards like Claire?
Originally Posted by callumfreeman:
“The same Tracy who drugged Roy, pretended she was pregnant to his child which led him to nearly take his own life? And whom she has been vile to since? Yeah, she is far better in comparison.
Charlie may have been vile, but what about other people Tracy has been cruel towards like Claire?”
“The same Tracy who drugged Roy, pretended she was pregnant to his child which led him to nearly take his own life? And whom she has been vile to since? Yeah, she is far better in comparison.
Charlie may have been vile, but what about other people Tracy has been cruel towards like Claire?”
Oh I don't attempt to make excuses for Tracy and her vileness but I do love that she is a total sociopath and is actually pretty unhinged if you get on the wrong side of her. Life is full of bitter, twisted and nasty folk like TracyLuv, I really do love her!
Originally Posted by Mr Men:
“Still manslaughter though?”
“Still manslaughter though?”
Not even manslaughter. In now way did she know that a fire was going to be the result of her actions. Accidental death
Originally Posted by jackol:
“Not even manslaughter. In now way did she know that a fire was going to be the result of her actions. Accidental death”
“Not even manslaughter. In now way did she know that a fire was going to be the result of her actions. Accidental death”
That is one of the definitions of manslaughter. If someone dies as a result of actions caused even without intent.
Originally Posted by sorcha_healy27:
“That is one of the definitions of manslaughter. If someone dies as a result of actions caused even without intent.”
“That is one of the definitions of manslaughter. If someone dies as a result of actions caused even without intent.”
No it isnt. Manslaughter is killing with the intent for murder but where a partial defence applies, Tracy would never be charged with manslaughter as there never was any intent to kill, or even involuntary manslaughter for the candle incident. For Involuntary manslaughte rIt would have to be proven that she she caused gross intent by placing the candle where she did. As we saw, no intent was ever meant. It would also have to be proven that her actions came about via an unlawful act. Her breaking into the flat was an unlawful act but the break in had absolutely nothing to do with the fire so it is accidental death
Originally Posted by jackol:
“No it isnt. Manslaughter is killing with the intent for murder but where a partial defence applies, Tracy would never be charged with manslaughter as there never was any intent to kill, or even involuntary manslaughter for the candle incident. For Involuntary manslaughte rIt would have to be proven that she she caused gross intent by placing the candle where she did. As we saw, no intent was ever meant. It would also have to be proven that her actions came about via an unlawful act. Her breaking into the flat was an unlawful act but the break in had absolutely nothing to do with the fire so it is accidental death”
“No it isnt. Manslaughter is killing with the intent for murder but where a partial defence applies, Tracy would never be charged with manslaughter as there never was any intent to kill, or even involuntary manslaughter for the candle incident. For Involuntary manslaughte rIt would have to be proven that she she caused gross intent by placing the candle where she did. As we saw, no intent was ever meant. It would also have to be proven that her actions came about via an unlawful act. Her breaking into the flat was an unlawful act but the break in had absolutely nothing to do with the fire so it is accidental death”
Thanks for explaining
Originally Posted by jackol:
“No it isnt. Manslaughter is killing with the intent for murder but where a partial defence applies, Tracy would never be charged with manslaughter as there never was any intent to kill, or even involuntary manslaughter for the candle incident. For Involuntary manslaughte rIt would have to be proven that she she caused gross intent by placing the candle where she did. As we saw, no intent was ever meant. It would also have to be proven that her actions came about via an unlawful act. Her breaking into the flat was an unlawful act but the break in had absolutely nothing to do with the fire so it is accidental death”
“No it isnt. Manslaughter is killing with the intent for murder but where a partial defence applies, Tracy would never be charged with manslaughter as there never was any intent to kill, or even involuntary manslaughter for the candle incident. For Involuntary manslaughte rIt would have to be proven that she she caused gross intent by placing the candle where she did. As we saw, no intent was ever meant. It would also have to be proven that her actions came about via an unlawful act. Her breaking into the flat was an unlawful act but the break in had absolutely nothing to do with the fire so it is accidental death”
Thanks for that info. Is there anything other than breaking in that she could be charged with?
Originally Posted by srhgts:
“That doesn't make it ok to kill him. Charlie was despicable and should have gone to jail for what he did to Shelley, but killing him solves nothing. Tracey just removed any chance for him to be brought to justice. Not that she even cared about that, she only killed him because he cheated on her. Cheating is vile but it doesn't give anyone the right to kill someone.”
“That doesn't make it ok to kill him. Charlie was despicable and should have gone to jail for what he did to Shelley, but killing him solves nothing. Tracey just removed any chance for him to be brought to justice. Not that she even cared about that, she only killed him because he cheated on her. Cheating is vile but it doesn't give anyone the right to kill someone.”
I agree Charlie ws a despicable character in many ways but go to jail for what he did to Shelley?? The only thing he really did to her was i suppose you would call it assault when he ripped out her earrings that time, but the rest of it was just Shelley having a complete breakdown!! She could have walked away from the relationship at any time but clung on toCharlie like a demented limpet!! It was one of Corrie's most unbelievable & distasteful storylines of the 00's to me & completely spoiled both characters imo!!
The other things Charlie could have gone to jail for that I can remember were stalking Maria, burgling her flat, trying to drown David & beating up Peter!!
None of these things, or cheating on Tracy with Maria, are any form of justification for Tracy's premeditated, meticulously planned murder of the guy!!
I completely agree that her murder of Charlie was heinous and unnecessary but I think it was done to show what Tracy was capable of given the motive.
Many of us wish David would kill Callum (and who would blame him?) and it wouldn't be too stretch of the imagination for him to do so, given his psychopathic outbursts in the past. But if he kid kill Callum, would we be ridding ourselves of a great character in the search for justice?
Many of us wish David would kill Callum (and who would blame him?) and it wouldn't be too stretch of the imagination for him to do so, given his psychopathic outbursts in the past. But if he kid kill Callum, would we be ridding ourselves of a great character in the search for justice?
Originally Posted by Mr Men:
“Still manslaughter though?”
“Still manslaughter though?”
Not really. It was an accident as she blew the candle out, or thought she had. and put it back on the table before rushing out, obviously not noticing it wasn't properly out and also under a lampshade.
Originally Posted by craig_25:
“Oh I don't attempt to make excuses for Tracy and her vileness but I do love that she is a total sociopath and is actually pretty unhinged if you get on the wrong side of her. Life is full of bitter, twisted and nasty folk like TracyLuv, I really do love her!”
“Oh I don't attempt to make excuses for Tracy and her vileness but I do love that she is a total sociopath and is actually pretty unhinged if you get on the wrong side of her. Life is full of bitter, twisted and nasty folk like TracyLuv, I really do love her!”
I just wish they knew what to do with her. Even though she didn't directly intend to kill Kal or Maddie, it is her careless actions that led to that fire. All because Carla supposedly was scheming against her (even though she didn't know about Tracy and Tony's schemes). Tracy was close to killing a second time until Amy flushed the toilet, and even witnessing the fire there was a glimmer of satisfaction that Carla may die.
Only a couple of weeks ago we had her scheming against Brian and humiliating him, so if I am now meant to feel heartbroken for the character Blackburn (and his cronies) have gotten it all wrong.
That's just my opinion. I have liked villains like Tony Gordon, John Stape and Rob Donovan but they got written out. Tracy has just gotten repetitive.
She started the fire and that fire killed two people.
She killed two people due to her actions regardless if it is accidental and not murder or directly.
Btw does she know she is to blame?
She killed two people due to her actions regardless if it is accidental and not murder or directly.
Btw does she know she is to blame?
Originally Posted by Mr Men:
“Charlie Stubbs
Kal Nazir
Maddie Heath
She really must have mental issues, I'm shocked she cares her mums dead.”
“Charlie Stubbs
Kal Nazir
Maddie Heath
She really must have mental issues, I'm shocked she cares her mums dead.”
If Ken knew that it was her that caused the fire in Carla's flat he would be a lot more upset and angry.
Originally Posted by valtimmy:
“If Ken knew that it was her that caused the fire in Carla's flat he would be a lot more upset and angry.”
“If Ken knew that it was her that caused the fire in Carla's flat he would be a lot more upset and angry.”
Doubt it. He knows she killed Charlie on purpose. He still let her back in.
Originally Posted by Mr Men:
“3 people she has killed regardless of law.”
“3 people she has killed regardless of law.”
I'm no lawyer but I'd hazard a guess that Kal and Maddie's deaths would classify as manslaughter as they unintentionally died as a result of Tracy's actions. Which means it's doubtful that it will force Tracy to show remorse when she didn't show any over a premeditated murder.
Originally Posted by Foxster Hotpot:
“I'm no lawyer but I'd hazard a guess that Kal and Maddie's deaths would classify as manslaughter as they unintentionally died as a result of Tracy's actions. Which means it's doubtful that it will force Tracy to show remorse when she didn't show any over a premeditated murder.”
“I'm no lawyer but I'd hazard a guess that Kal and Maddie's deaths would classify as manslaughter as they unintentionally died as a result of Tracy's actions. Which means it's doubtful that it will force Tracy to show remorse when she didn't show any over a premeditated murder.”
I really hate to even half side with Tracy on anything but surely Maddie's death can only be something like death by misadventure, given that she was totally aware of the fire but chose to disregard the officially cordoned off area & stupidly run into danger, however good she thought her reason was!! I personally attatch no blame at all to Tracy for that one but she should feel guilty as sin over Kal's death since he died rescuing her 'precious' daughter who she had, admittedly unknowingly placed in mortal danger as a direct result of whatever action she intended to take against Carla before she was disturbed!!
2 of 5
