Or it will all be forgotten about
Printable View
Stu was probably innocent but I can't believe that he was denied a solicitor. Even 27 years ago, it was standard practice.
I thought Stu might have covered for his daughter but now I realise she would have been too young so I think he covered for his ex-wife who might have killed the waitress out of jealousy and Stu did not want his daughter to grow up with a mum in prison... Stu would have had a solicitor but he confessed so nothing any legal representative could have done to defend him.
Why does Stu not sit down in the cafe and write a letter to Yasmeen and explain that way what really happened? :hmm:
There is no guarantee she would read it.
Bit disappointed that Stu's story turned out to be a standard "I was fitted up, guv", hoping for something more complex than that.
Did I notice a glint of interest in P C Tinker's eye, will he somehow prove Stu's innocence?
Yes, but he could still have masterminded the so-called gunmen who supposedly forced Ryan into carrying out the robbery and, if the police accepted Ryan's story, he could still be arrested in prison and sent for trial.
Of course, in the wonderful world of Weatherfield justice all this will be conveniently forgotten.