http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...plot-hole.html


Never saw anyone on here mention this last night.

But the sun and the eastenders "fans" on twitter may have a point

Should she defend self confessed murderer Bobby when she wouldn't defend Jay?

I think her refusal to represent Jay was a reflection on the stigma surrounding sex offenders. I'm not saying murder is ok and possession of child porn is not or vice versa, but there probably is an element of truth in lawyers perhaps not wanting to be known for defending a potential pedophile. If she's in private practice and not a public defender (or whatever it's called here), then she can pick and choose her clients as she pleases.

Edit: I also think her refusal of Jay's case might have had something to do with Phil's reaction to the charge. She's probably been paid over the years mostly by Phil so wouldn't want to run the risk of severing that partnership by taking on a case he didn't approve of. Just a thought.

There could be many arguments put on both sides of this debate but what it ultimately comes down to is that if she wasn't comfortable defending Jay then I suppose she has the right to refuse to defend him.

Just like pub landlords have the right to refuse somebody and taxi drivers have the right to refuse somebody etc.

If an individual makes somebody nervous who is expected to provide a service then best to refuse because they are not the right person to provide that service.

Wasn't Ritchie following the orders of Phil? I think she only said no because Phil told her not to. After all, Phil (and the rest of the Mitchell family) is Ritchie's most frequent client(s).

I shall add my 2p worth.

I think she was right in not defending Jay esp as he pleaded guilty. he was in a way guilty and as the first reply says, she can pick and choose.

But, I don't get why she would represent Bobby anyway hes not a mitchell and Phil didnt call her, surely she would refuse.

who wants to be the legal rep of a prolific killer who shows no remorse and how can she win the case after that confession.

I don't get why Bobster didnt have a duty sols

That may have been a factor but when the pictures were found on Jay's phone she then stated that she wouldn't go any further because she didn't want to defend a paedophile and Phil wasn't at the police station but Ritchie was there I think at Sharon's request

http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2152187

I did put something on another thread about this (post #8). I thought it was disgusting that she wouldn't defend Jay - even though she knew he hadn't deliberately done anything wrong - but she's happy to defend a kid that had anyway killed one person and brutally attached another. and she didn't drop Jay on phil's orders because he turned up to Jay's hearing to see what was happening. She decided alone not to represent Jay.

BIB Once again it was Sharon who made the call but this time Phil would have approved due to his involvement with the Max case

I'm not sure its really double standards as they are two different charges and types of case and what Ritchie personally feels comfortable defending is personal to her and so could realistically include murder charges but not pedophilia.

If she had previously refused a murder case or defended another character on a sexual assault or pedophile related case then I would accept the allegations of double standards and an EE plot hole.

She is representing Bobby because its in Phil's interests to do so. Phil bribed the jury. I assume we are meant to believe Richie knows this.

So it makes sense.

Bobby's confession to killing Lucy in the corridor was as much a surprise to Ritchie as the police. The copper said "another consultation I presume" to Ritchie.

Rats. No EE tonight.

I only read that thread when it had no replies, didnt look again

but Phil didnt know at that point, did Sharon mention to Phil that Ritchie had been the solicitor?

Sharon and Phil would have wanted Ritchie because they consider her a great lawyer and they want to avoid the Bobby stuff coming out to save their own necks.

Yes but who does she think she is employing Phil's solicitor without his permission

she can't make up her mind, one min she hates him and being anywhere near him and the next she thinks she is some kind of gangland boss protecting the family

Some short term memory loss going on here.

Richie had no problem defending Ben after he murdered Heather. She just didn't want to defend Jay because she didn't want to defend a sex offender which like it or not Jay is due to the content on his phone. She draws the line at defending sex offenders and fair play to her. Maybe something happened in her past which makes her have this stance.

I don't see a conflict.

Who she chooses to represent is her own decision. She has defended people accused of murder before. Maybe she has a rule to not defend sex offenders?

On another note I do hope that we are going to see Marcus Christie make a return at some point!

You are right of course.

but those pesky "twitter fans" and the sun rag picked up on something before this mighty forum (except for Miss M but no one ran with her thoughts )

Maybe everyone is reading too much into it and she's defending Bobby purely for selfish reasons. It's a case that will attract a huge amount of publicity and Bobby's identity will be concealed. Lots of opportunities for her to be quoted and make a name for herself. Jay had makes photos of a child on his phone - who want to be linked to child porn/paedophiles? He pleaded guilty too so there wasn't any defending to be done apart from the mitigating circumstances. I actually think Jay has been treated horribly but as ignorance is no defence he was guilty. He was daft not to go to trial to try and avoid being on the second offenders register for the rest of his life.

Philth does not own her, she can represent who she pleases providing they can afford her services, it's not that long ago that the Mitchells were struggling to pay her

Richie has to be careful after the backlash she had for the video for Elastic Heart.

PMSL!

Why did she say her name was Reginald the other night? That's a man's name!