• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Soaps
Why is Phil so keen for Max to stay in prison?
<<
<
1 of 2
>>
>
Callum_Brown
24-05-2016
Sorry but I'm in need of some clarification for understanding Phil's motivations in this storyline - mainly why he was at first happy to turn in Ben and then why he bribed the jury to find Max guilty. There was a period of a few months last year when I didn't watch so am struggling to piece all of this together.

Ben's fingerprints were found on Lucy's phone but why was this enough of a motivation for Phil to make sure Ben was found guilty? Why was he not defending his son? After that when it turned out Max was the prime suspect why was Phil then so keen to see him found guilty? Keen enough to actually bribe the jury? Not just out of favour to Ian?

Apologies for cluttering up the board but feel as if I need some clarification on this and I know that people here will help me out!
soap-lea
24-05-2016
Max blamed Phil for Emma's death. Phil ended up in Prison and Ben was in charge of the family businesses.

Max scammed The Arches from Ben. He did so because he blamed Phil for Emma's death.

When Phil came out he sought his revenge on Max. Phil and Max now hate each other so it was convenient for Phil to have him kept in prison
los.kav
24-05-2016
Why *did* Max blame Phil for Emma's death though?
AcerBen
24-05-2016
The bit I don't get is why the Mitchells would be so worried about it coming out that he bribed the foreman of the jury - why would it?
soap-lea
24-05-2016
Originally Posted by los.kav:
“Why *did* Max blame Phil for Emma's death though?”

Nick Cotton cut the brakes on the car to get back at Phil, then when the car crashed and Ronnie was injured he framed Phil, his mother got involved and backed it up I think
soap-lea
24-05-2016
Originally Posted by AcerBen:
“The bit I don't get is why the Mitchells would be so worried about it coming out that he bribed the foreman of the jury - why would it?”

he didnt really do it for the beales he did it for his own pleasure. like he said to Ben, the police thought they had there man. It was convenient

edit sorry I didnt read your post properly.

I guess Sharon is just panicking and trying to protect Phil.

but if the police look into the trial details re Max they might query how he was found guilty or someone might fess up if a re- trial is ordered who knows
jamauk1
24-05-2016
Originally Posted by AcerBen:
“The bit I don't get is why the Mitchells would be so worried about it coming out that he bribed the foreman of the jury - why would it?”

They would both be stupid to admit that, so I can't see how anything would come of that storyline. There wouldn't be any evidence on this as Phil probably paid him off in cash from his self replenishing wall safe, rather than doing a bank transfer with the reference 'Max Branning Bribe Money'.
little-monster
24-05-2016
Because Phil's sexual desires for Max will resurface if he see's him around the square.
soap-lea
24-05-2016
Originally Posted by little-monster:
“Because Phil's sexual desires for Max will resurface if he see's him around the square.”

Not everyone turns out to be gay you know
jamauk1
24-05-2016
Originally Posted by little-monster:
“Because Phil's sexual desires for Max will resurface if he see's him around the square.”

He wants to get to the Gluteus MAXimus!
vald
24-05-2016
Originally Posted by jamauk1:
“They would both be stupid to admit that, so I can't see how anything would come of that storyline. There wouldn't be any evidence on this as Phil probably paid him off in cash from his self replenishing wall safe, rather than doing a bank transfer with the reference 'Max Branning Bribe Money'.”

If the guy got arrested for something else he could throw them that tit bit to get a lighter sentence. Or someone on Max's side could overhear a conversation.
Callum_Brown
24-05-2016
What happened in the very beginning for him to be so uncharacteristically happy to blame it on Ben?
MissMonkeyMoo
24-05-2016
To be honest, I don't really get it either. Initially, he was happy for max to take the blame as it took the focus off Ben. But once he knew it was bobby, I can't remember why he still wanted max to go down. Did he say he did it for sharon? I think sharon wanted to help Ian protect bobby so Phil bribed the foreman of the jury to make sure max would go down and no more questions would be asked.

The thing is there is no proof that he bribed the foreman - even with max's innocence coming to light there's no reason for the police to think the jury was tampered with, and less reason to assume Phil was involved. Phil, Sharon, Ian and Jane were the only ones that knew and none of them are going to go to the police with that info! and Phil got his revenge on Max by taking everything he owned so I don't get why he is so keen for him to stay in jail either.
soap-lea
24-05-2016
Originally Posted by Callum_Brown:
“What happened in the very beginning for him to be so uncharacteristically happy to blame it on Ben?”

I think that ben was arrested. Ian and phil had a heart to heart then Phil took the phone and wallet to the police.

Phil didnt know about Bobby when that happened. I dont think anyway, cant remember, so i might not have the above in the right order
soap-lea
24-05-2016
Originally Posted by MissMonkeyMoo:
“To be honest, I don't really get it either. Initially, he was happy for max to take the blame as it took the focus off Ben. But once he knew it was bobby, I can't remember why he still wanted max to go down. Did he say he did it for sharon? I think sharon wanted to help Ian protect bobby so Phil bribed the foreman of the jury to make sure max would go down and no more questions would be asked.

The thing is there is no proof that he bribed the foreman - even with max's innocence coming to light there's no reason for the police to think the jury was tampered with, and less reason to assume Phil was involved. Phil, Sharon, Ian and Jane were the only ones that knew and none of them are going to go to the police with that info! and Phil got his revenge on Max by taking everything he owned so I don't get why he is so keen for him to stay in jail either.”

Phil was supposed to bribe the foreman to bring back a not guilty plea on max, that is what sharon asked him to do, but he did the opposite.
0...0
24-05-2016
Once Buster arrived there were just too many bald men in the Square. Terry thingamy who was Bianca's bf is currently being held captive in Guatemala.

As Highlander said "There can be only one!"
Menime123
24-05-2016
Max stole his business. You don't get one up on the Mitchells, no matter what they've done to you. It has to be said, Max isn't necessarily blameless in the whole Lucy story - granted he didn't kill her, but he isn't squeaky clean either.
MissMonkeyMoo
24-05-2016
Originally Posted by soap-lea:
“Phil was supposed to bribe the foreman to bring back a not guilty plea on max, that is what sharon asked him to do, but he did the opposite.”

Yes that's right, but when she found out what he'd done I'm sure he tried to justify it in some way. Will have to see if I can find the clip
SULLA
25-05-2016
Philth is filth
Keyser_Soze1
25-05-2016
Why?

Because the man is lowlife scum - it's as simple as that.

And strangely anyone who gets involved with him becomes scum as well - just look at Sharon - scum in doormat form.
-Batman-
25-05-2016
Originally Posted by Menime123:
“Max stole his business. You don't get one up on the Mitchells, no matter what they've done to you. It has to be said, Max isn't necessarily blameless in the whole Lucy story - granted he didn't kill her, but he isn't squeaky clean either.”

Well all he has done is shag a fit teenage fitty doesn't deserves to be banged up
Keyser_Soze1
25-05-2016
Originally Posted by Menime123:
“Max stole his business. You don't get one up on the Mitchells, no matter what they've done to you. It has to be said, Max isn't necessarily blameless in the whole Lucy story - granted he didn't kill her, but he isn't squeaky clean either.”

Which is why their and in particular King Weeble's storylines are so very dull and predictable.

If Godzilla, King Kong and Superman teamed up to face him TPTB would still have their little bald God come out on top.
Callum_Brown
25-05-2016
Why the hell would he risk a 5-year jail sentence for bribing the jury (to make the verdict not guilty) just to appease Jane's conscience as a favour? Did he have another motive to make sure Max didn't go down? But then doesn't that go against what he's wanted all along?

So very confused. I like the storyline in general but the pursuit for twist after twist ultimately makes it rather convoluted and character intentions very sketchy.
little-monster
25-05-2016
Originally Posted by jamauk1:
“He wants to get to the Gluteus MAXimus!”

Of course
Who wouldn't?
soap-lea
25-05-2016
Originally Posted by MissMonkeyMoo:
“Yes that's right, but when she found out what he'd done I'm sure he tried to justify it in some way. Will have to see if I can find the clip ”

Originally Posted by Callum_Brown:
“Why the hell would he risk a 5-year jail sentence for bribing the jury (to make the verdict not guilty) just to appease Jane's conscience as a favour? Did he have another motive to make sure Max didn't go down? But then doesn't that go against what he's wanted all along?

So very confused. I like the storyline in general but the pursuit for twist after twist ultimately makes it rather convoluted and character intentions very sketchy.”

see post 17!

Phil's motive was he keeps his frenemy locked up, Max screwed him over so he got revenge then went a step further.

Sharon wanted Max to get off so an innocent man didnt go to prison, Phil paid the foreman to find max Guilty
<<
<
1 of 2
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map