Phil don't fall into this categoryQuote:
Originally Posted by Dazzle
Printable View
Phil don't fall into this categoryQuote:
Originally Posted by Dazzle
Were his fingerprints even on the phone and purse? I don't know if he took them out of the plastic bag. If they were, he's a friend of the family so could have picked them up at some point. While that's not likely, I don't think the police would seriously look at him for mugging Lucy anyway. He hasn't been a suspect for her murder either (I can't remember why though).Quote:
Originally Posted by tammyy2j
If Phil's prints were on them Marsden would have in :p unless he too was having an affair with Lucy like Max :sick:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dazzle
It is very sloppy writing for Jay's whole arrest and Lola's exit
I wouldn't mind if the writers would just explain their thought processes. :wall:Quote:
Originally Posted by tammyy2j
Agree about poor Lola. :angry:
Phil's fingerprints might be on them because he handed them in. Did he explain how he got them?
he found them down his couchQuote:
Originally Posted by parkerman
he found them down his couchQuote:
Originally Posted by parkerman
Ah, yes. that's right. Thank you for reminding me.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by lizann
Yes, that condundrum: how Phil was even allowed by Marsden to go. First he couldn't remember whether he found the items before or after the police searched his house, then he admitted one way or the other but I can't remember which. Either way would surely have been enough to have him for something. If he said before, then that's obstructing an investigation and whatever other associated charges. If he said after then surely it's obvious he was lying as the search team would surely have looked there.Quote:
Originally Posted by lizann
Ben's prints were on Lucy's purse and phone I think. Marsden was talking about his prints being on there (I think it was before the items came back from the lab) and Richie said that unless she could date the prints, she'd be in trouble. I think we're just supposed to assume that the prints eventually came back and that Ben was released on that basis.
I agree, Jay probably had a duty solicitor and if Phil offered to pay for Richie, he'd have told him to stick it since he had again used him for his own ends. I'm not sure what "no comment" achieves but there we go, I'd say it makes you look like you've got something to hide.
It was as if Marsden just let Ben off because she and Richie knew that she'd overstepped the line earlier. I agree with Dazzle, we should've seen it both because Marsden having to let Ben go would have been entertaining and because we'd have been given a (probably implausible) reason for his release. If I were Marsden, I'd have been making enquiries into when it was that Lucy got that phone - if it was after August 2012, then surely it would have been evidence against Ben as his prints couldn't have got there by innocent means prior to his going to prison. He'd have to have at least seen Lucy while in breach of his bail conditions, which she could have done him for.
Did anyone ever find out that Jay mugged Lucy in 2009? If so, then perhaps Jay's form for the specific offence counted against him.
I'm a bit hazy about this but wasn't the law changed some time in the 1990s so that a court could consider silence or "no comment" as, if not a presumption of guilt, at least no longer a presumption of innocence. Until then the law held that the prosecution had to prove its case and if the defendant remained silent or just answered no comment, the jury were not allowed to draw any inference from it, but this changed, so that the jury could draw its own conclusion from the defendant's refusal to answer. I seem to remember this because there was a big "human rights" outcry about this change of law at the time. Does anyone know more about this?
did phil hand in the phone and wallet to perhaps implicate jay as well as ben
No. He definitely did it as he was worried about Ben and felt it was the best thing to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by lizann
1. "You do not have to say anything unless you wish to do so, but what you say may be given in evidence."Quote:
Originally Posted by parkerman
This was the original caution given upon arrest and again prior to interview .
2.
You do not have to say anything. But if you do not mention now something which you later use in your defence, the court may decide that your failure to mention it now strengthens the case against you. A record will be made of anything you say and it may be given in evidence if you are brought to trial."
This was drawn up by, guess who, Michael Howard .in an attempt to stop the no comment, and sometimes the complete silent responses to questions. This was thought to be too much for the average bobby to remember and the next caution was introduced.
3.You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence."
So you are right Parkerman also there was a a human rights issue based upon the caution giving a right to silence but then being a threat if that right was used.
Yes, that was glossed over very quickly. If I remember correctly, there was a time jump of a couple of days after the cliffhanger of Phil handing over the phone and purse. Again, it's very annoying when interesting details happen off-screen! I think the writers under-estimate the attention span of their audience... :wall:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kim
At last, someone who agrees with me! I could kiss your right now Kim! http://www.picgifs.com/smileys/smile...ses-738604.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Kim
Regarding the "no comment" trick: of course it makes a suspect looks guilty as hell, but I think the point is that if you don't implicate yourself you're less likely to end up in court anyway. It's very easy to lose your cool and inadvertently say something incriminating under the pressure of hours of interrogation.
We saw Ben nearly flip under the strain of Marsden's questioning, but Ritchie kept him strong. That's what gave me the idea that Jay did cave under pressure without the support of someone as strong as her by his side.
There was certainly a time jump, but I believe it was between Marsden warning Phil that wasting police time was a serious offence and him appearing back at home. There could only have been a few hours skipped between Phil handing the stuff in and his next appearance, as I recall Marsden saying that there had to be something going on because Phil had turned up at the station without handcuffs.
Where is Chelesa suppose to be? I think Libby is gone from Oxford as in kicked out or has she finished her studies there?
I thought Claudette would know Phil as Vincent grew up near them
Max will need a tougher solicitor
She had finished her original course but started a Masters. She was also working at the college as a research assistant. If she has been kicked out then she'd presumably be unemployed also or hiding the fact that she was in a basic job somewhere else. For all we know she could have left the Masters course of her own accord - I can't see Denise taking the news well if Libby had dropped out and Libby would know that. At one point Libby wanted to go to a university closer to home or not at all and Denise was pressuring her for Oxford.Quote:
Originally Posted by tammyy2j
Presumably Chelsea is still in Spain. It was where Libby and Chelsea went when they left in 2010 after the truth about Lucas was exposed. Libby took a sabbatical so would have returned to Oxford in 2011, whereas Chelsea had no ties.
Max's lawyer was exactly the kind of inept duty solicitor I imagined for Jay. Maybe they both had the same one! http://www.picgifs.com/smileys/smile...ppy-514478.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by tammyy2j
It's kind of laughable that the aging Phil could batter the strapping Vincent and leave him looking terrorised, but I must admit that Phil looks pretty scary when he's all worked up. http://www.picgifs.com/smileys/smile...aid-990255.gif
so claudette will make phil pay what did he do to her?
is that it for libby no secret reveal
les wanted to wear claudette's dress but he cant fill them out like her :p she is quite a voluptuous lady
at least ronnie remembers dean raped linda
so claudette will make phil pay what did he do to her?
is that it for libby no secret reveal
les wanted to wear claudette's dress but he cant fill them out like her :p she is quite a voluptuous lady
at least ronnie remembers dean raped linda
She won't stand for anyone daring to touch her precious Vincent. :nono:Quote:
Originally Posted by lizann
It's obvious Claudette wears the trousers in that relationship. :D
DTC likes to keep us dangling. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by lizann
You know, I haven't given much credence to the overriding internet theory that Les is a secret cross-dresser until tonight, but it fits with that scene in Claudette's house when he started disrobing. If she knows his secret and he feels comfortable being his alter-ego in her presence, then he's going to want to spend significant time with her. Despite the teases, I'm certain they're not having an affair, and cross-dressing seems to be a perfect fit with what we currently know.Quote:
Originally Posted by lizann
Let's hope to goodness Ronnie deals with Dean. I can't see him coping with Roxy's rejection gracefully... :angry:Quote:
Originally Posted by lizann
I wonder did Phil or his father do something to Claudette's husband also Vincent's father, it sounded like it was Claudette's plan for Vincent to integrate himself with the Mitchells especially Phil
Is Buster working for Phil now?
That's right, she said something in the kitchen about a plan. I think she's angry about more than just Vincent's beating.Quote:
Originally Posted by tammyy2j
It seems they've reached some kind of understanding. I wonder if Vincent will rue the day he sacked Buster?Quote:
Originally Posted by tammyy2j
I thought Richard Blackwood's acting was a bit on the dodgy side last night. He's exceeded my expectations overall though (mind you, my expectations were pretty low :D).
claudette is intriguing me more, want her mitchell revenge to succeed
Good to see Winston enjoying a nice lunch in the Queen Vic.:thumbsup:
I don't mind Vincent with Kim and the adorable Pearl, their family dynamic works well, he needs to stop acting all macho and tough and keep well away for Ronnie
Does Roxy ever think of Amy :angry:
Ian is right, Jane and Ian need to stop being so close and helpful to Carol the sister of "the killer of daughter Lucy" how is no one asking why are they doing this :nono:
I wish Pam would finally confront Les
Indeed. I got the feeling tonight that Sharon thought there was something odd going on as she gave Jane a quizzical look when she went out after Carol. May be nothing of course.....Quote:
Originally Posted by tammyy2j
Yes I thought both Sharon and Donna were looking oddly at Ian and Jane for going over to CarolQuote:
Originally Posted by parkerman
Sharon already made a comment to Linda if it were Denny (when thinking Ben killed Lucy) she would call the police on him now let her say something similar to Ian and Jane
I think they make a nice family too. The chemistry between Vincent and Kim is very good. Shame it's obviously not going to last as he's going after Ronnie again (possibly on Claudette's orders?).Quote:
Originally Posted by tammyy2j
I'm fuming that the cameras we speculated might catch Dean out actually helped him catch Ronnie out! How I detest that smug ****! :angry:
(Embarrassingly, I wrote earlier today on the Roxy thread that I thought Ronnie really does love Charlie... :o)
donna really having a rant at carol over max for being a killer but don't mind dean the rapist hanging around
Is Phil's solicitor Ritchie not listed in the phonebook i.e. her office etc., Carol could get her contact information from that
There must be a reason Sharon's solicitor who is connected to Den is around again any chance she could be Sharon's real mother and also did she look at the Queen Vic like she was remembering something
buster and phil could be brothers is phil paying for shirley's flat he already coughed up lola's wages
I was thinking that. Why didn't Carol just google Ritchie? Even if she doesn't know her full name, Ritchie isn't a common name so I'm sure she'd be fairly easy to find. She just immediately gave up when Phil said no! :wall:Quote:
Originally Posted by tammyy2j
I wonder why the police called at her house? Paranoid Jane immediately assumed the worst of course. She and Ian are taking it in turns to crack up. http://www.picgifs.com/smileys/smile...ppy-514478.gif
There was definitely a significance to the lingering glance at the Vic. It seemed to me that she already knows who Sharon's dad is, and there must be a connection to the pub if that look was anything to go by.Quote:
Originally Posted by tammyy2j
My favourite theory is still that Pete was Sharon's dad making her and Ian siblings (remember one of the samples for the DNA test they did was corrupted but they bizarrely decided not to do another). As Pete was Den's best friend, that could explain Margaret's meaningful glance towards the Vic.
The overriding theory online (and probably the likeliest solution) is that Gavin (Kathy's husband) is Sharon's father. That would open up countless storyline possibilities given what we know about him from spoilers. Also, bringing him in with strong links with major characters already in place immediately makes him more interesting.
Since Claudette appears to be a bit of a villain, and Les is pretty dodgy himself, I'm wondering if their secret is something criminal?
well holy crap didn't expect that from cora and cindy now liam knows
Some brilliant twists and turns tonight.
I'm glad the blood in the car lot office hasn't been forgotten, and that Jane has a conscience. I think Ian does too but he's more terrified of losing his family. Will Liam's new-found knowledge come into play as Kim speculated on one of the spoiler threads?
Carol's attitude to Cora was callous. :angry:
I think now Ian and Jane will try to convince themselves that it was Max's blow to Lucy that killed her not Bobby's blow
I am hoping Jane will confess she killed Lucy
I am worried for Cindy and Liam now, that Bobby is dangerous
At least Peter got a mention tonight but I thought Peter told Ian and Jane that he told Lauren everything before they left together, I am sure Peter filled Lauren in on everything at Lucy's graveside and if they know Max is arrested they would not let him stay in prison
Seem to recall that according to the Pathologists report, the cause of Lucy's death was from a single blow to the head. This would probably help convince Jane and Ian of Max's guilt and Bobby's innocence. If Cindy's got any sense , she needs to be out of the Beale household a.s.a.p.
If Jane and Ian become convinced Max was responsible for Lucy's death after all, it's a good way for the writers to leave Max rotting in prison whilst not making the Beales completely unsympathetic.