Discussion:
horrible thought
(too old to reply)
Vicky
2018-03-02 09:06:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
How sorry for Will might Emma be? What form might comforting him take?
He will resent Ed and Emma still being a couple, and always has. Might
she have secretly been dog in a manger over him when he found Nic and
now while being helpful with the children etc gradually move back to
him?

I don't think Will ever forgave Ed for Emma leaving him and her for
going and not appreciating him as the better husband. I wonder if that
is partly why he was so nasty in Brian's defence, in the pub with Nic
and when Emma tried to make it up with Nic. Might he see her moving
back to him as coming to her senses?


--

Vicky
Btms
2018-03-02 09:40:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Vicky <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> How sorry for Will might Emma be? What form might comforting him take?
> He will resent Ed and Emma still being a couple, and always has. Might
> she have secretly been dog in a manger over him when he found Nic and
> now while being helpful with the children etc gradually move back to
> him?
>
> I don't think Will ever forgave Ed for Emma leaving him and her for
> going and not appreciating him as the better husband. I wonder if that
> is partly why he was so nasty in Brian's defence, in the pub with Nic
> and when Emma tried to make it up with Nic. Might he see her moving
> back to him as coming to her senses?
>
>

Its more than that. Emma claimed their baby was Ed’s and knew it wasn’t.
Preferring Ed is one thing but she went beyond that. I think the murder of
Ed by Will was the plot the beetle could not get past the higher powers.
This may, in part, have led to her resignation. That and wanting to live in
S.Africa with her girlfriend.

--
BTMS - Equine Advisor Extraordinaire.
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2018-03-02 13:27:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message
<2038652915.541676046.375023.poppy-***@news.eternal-september.
org>, Btms <***@thetames.me.uk> writes:
>Vicky <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>> How sorry for Will might Emma be? What form might comforting him take?
>> He will resent Ed and Emma still being a couple, and always has. Might
>> she have secretly been dog in a manger over him when he found Nic and
>> now while being helpful with the children etc gradually move back to
>> him?
>>
>> I don't think Will ever forgave Ed for Emma leaving him and her for
>> going and not appreciating him as the better husband. I wonder if that
>> is partly why he was so nasty in Brian's defence, in the pub with Nic
>> and when Emma tried to make it up with Nic. Might he see her moving
>> back to him as coming to her senses?
>>
I do get Nic and Emma confused - not the actual characters, but I do the
names. (At least that's now a problem gone.)
>>
>
>Its more than that. Emma claimed their baby was Ed’s and knew it wasn’t.

Did she really know? I thought she didn't until the DNA results.

>Preferring Ed is one thing but she went beyond that. I think the murder of
>Ed by Will was the plot the beetle could not get past the higher powers.

Fascinating thought!

>This may, in part, have led to her resignation. That and wanting to live in
>S.Africa with her girlfriend.
>
(I didn't know that last, though there's no reason I should have.) I
wonder if she still listens!
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Very funny, Scotty. Now beam down my clothes
Serena Blanchflower
2018-03-02 14:14:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 02/03/2018 13:27, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> In message
> <2038652915.541676046.375023.poppy-***@news.eternal-september.
> org>, Btms <***@thetames.me.uk> writes:
>> Vicky <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> How sorry for Will might Emma be? What form might comforting him take?
>>> He will resent Ed and Emma still being a couple, and always has. Might
>>> she have secretly been dog in a manger over him when he found Nic and
>>> now while being helpful with the children etc gradually move back to
>>> him?
>>>
>>> I don't think Will ever forgave Ed for Emma leaving him and her for
>>> going and not appreciating him as the better husband. I wonder if that
>>> is partly why he was so nasty in Brian's defence, in the pub with Nic
>>> and when Emma tried to make it up with Nic.  Might he see her moving
>>> back to him as coming to her senses?
>>>
> I do get Nic and Emma confused - not the actual characters, but I do the
> names. (At least that's now a problem gone.)
>>>
>>
>> Its more than that.  Emma claimed their baby was Ed’s and knew it wasn’t.
>
> Did she really know? I thought she didn't until the DNA results.

I don't think it was ever clear what the SWs thought Emma knew. From
what we were told about her dates though, it sounded as if she must have
had her period after sleeping with Ed. This would have made it
extremely unlikely that the baby was his.


>
>> Preferring Ed is one thing but she went beyond that.  I think the
>> murder of
>> Ed by Will was the plot the beetle could not get past the higher powers.
>
> Fascinating thought!

I think the version I heard was that one of the brothers (I forget
which) would have been killed and his brother was to be wrongly accused
of the murder.




--
Best wishes, Serena
You are never too old to set another goal or to dream a new dream. (C.S.
Lewis)
Btms
2018-03-02 15:31:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Serena Blanchflower <***@blanchflower.me.uk> wrote:
> On 02/03/2018 13:27, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> In message
>> <2038652915.541676046.375023.poppy-***@news.eternal-september.
>>> , Btms <***@thetames.me.uk> writes:
>>> Vicky <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> How sorry for Will might Emma be? What form might comforting him take?
>>>> He will resent Ed and Emma still being a couple, and always has. Might
>>>> she have secretly been dog in a manger over him when he found Nic and
>>>> now while being helpful with the children etc gradually move back to
>>>> him?
>>>>
>>>> I don't think Will ever forgave Ed for Emma leaving him and her for
>>>> going and not appreciating him as the better husband. I wonder if that
>>>> is partly why he was so nasty in Brian's defence, in the pub with Nic
>>>> and when Emma tried to make it up with Nic.  Might he see her moving
>>>> back to him as coming to her senses?
>>>>
>> I do get Nic and Emma confused - not the actual characters, but I do the
>> names. (At least that's now a problem gone.)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Its more than that.  Emma claimed their baby was Ed’s and knew it wasn’t.
>>
>> Did she really know? I thought she didn't until the DNA results.
>
> I don't think it was ever clear what the SWs thought Emma knew. From
> what we were told about her dates though, it sounded as if she must have
> had her period after sleeping with Ed. This would have made it
> extremely unlikely that the baby was his.
>
>
>>
>>> Preferring Ed is one thing but she went beyond that.  I think the
>>> murder of
>>> Ed by Will was the plot the beetle could not get past the higher powers.
>>
>> Fascinating thought!
>
> I think the version I heard was that one of the brothers (I forget
> which) would have been killed and his brother was to be wrongly accused
> of the murder.
>
>
>
>

Could have been. I just heard a reference to a fratricide story.

--
BTMS - Equine Advisor Extraordinaire.
kosmo
2018-03-03 05:57:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 13:27:25 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6JPG-***@255soft.uk> wrote:
> Did she really know? I thought she didn't until the DNA results.

If she was bright enough to count she did, but she wanted it to be
Ed's - the dates did not work.

--
kosmo
Vicky
2018-03-03 09:11:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 03 Mar 2018 11:27:38 +0530, kosmo <***@whitnet.uk> wrote:

>On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 13:27:25 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
><G6JPG-***@255soft.uk> wrote:
>> Did she really know? I thought she didn't until the DNA results.
>
>If she was bright enough to count she did, but she wanted it to be
>Ed's - the dates did not work.

I believe she last gave Ed's input a chance at the hen night. Not sure
how long before the wedding that was but dates are not set in stone.
In both cases the Drs were wrong about my due dates. Women's cycles
can vary considerably, either as usual or because of events.


--

Vicky
Btms
2018-03-03 09:27:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Vicky <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Mar 2018 11:27:38 +0530, kosmo <***@whitnet.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 13:27:25 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
>> <G6JPG-***@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>> Did she really know? I thought she didn't until the DNA results.
>>
>> If she was bright enough to count she did, but she wanted it to be
>> Ed's - the dates did not work.
>
> I believe she last gave Ed's input a chance at the hen night. Not sure
> how long before the wedding that was but dates are not set in stone.
> In both cases the Drs were wrong about my due dates. Women's cycles
> can vary considerably, either as usual or because of events.
>
>

Yebut iirc Emmur’s delusion was way out of any date scope and clearly so to
listeners. We can decide it was an aberration, or her determination to
write a reality according to her own agenda.

--
BTMS - Equine Advisor Extraordinaire.
Vicky
2018-03-03 09:53:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 09:27:26 -0000 (UTC), Btms <***@thetames.me.uk>
wrote:

>Vicky <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 03 Mar 2018 11:27:38 +0530, kosmo <***@whitnet.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 13:27:25 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
>>> <G6JPG-***@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>>> Did she really know? I thought she didn't until the DNA results.
>>>
>>> If she was bright enough to count she did, but she wanted it to be
>>> Ed's - the dates did not work.
>>
>> I believe she last gave Ed's input a chance at the hen night. Not sure
>> how long before the wedding that was but dates are not set in stone.
>> In both cases the Drs were wrong about my due dates. Women's cycles
>> can vary considerably, either as usual or because of events.
>>
>>
>
>Yebut iirc Emmur’s delusion was way out of any date scope and clearly so to
>listeners. We can decide it was an aberration, or her determination to
>write a reality according to her own agenda.

I don't remember it like that. I didn't get the impression she was
sure of dates and trying to change the result.

Also I have been searching for the history of when Will was rescued by
Ed and Aanother but can't find it. Did I imagine it? And it was not
Will who rescued Ed, according to the BBC information, but that is all
I have. I'd love a little while with the much-missed record cards.

--

Vicky
Btms
2018-03-03 10:10:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Vicky <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 09:27:26 -0000 (UTC), Btms <***@thetames.me.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> Vicky <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 03 Mar 2018 11:27:38 +0530, kosmo <***@whitnet.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 13:27:25 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
>>>> <G6JPG-***@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>>>> Did she really know? I thought she didn't until the DNA results.
>>>>
>>>> If she was bright enough to count she did, but she wanted it to be
>>>> Ed's - the dates did not work.
>>>
>>> I believe she last gave Ed's input a chance at the hen night. Not sure
>>> how long before the wedding that was but dates are not set in stone.
>>> In both cases the Drs were wrong about my due dates. Women's cycles
>>> can vary considerably, either as usual or because of events.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yebut iirc Emmur’s delusion was way out of any date scope and clearly so to
>> listeners. We can decide it was an aberration, or her determination to
>> write a reality according to her own agenda.
>
> I don't remember it like that. I didn't get the impression she was
> sure of dates and trying to change the result.
>
> Also I have been searching for the history of when Will was rescued by
> Ed and Aanother but can't find it. Did I imagine it? And it was not
> Will who rescued Ed, according to the BBC information, but that is all
> I have. I'd love a little while with the much-missed record cards.
>

She was emphatic that the baby was Ed’s. If she wasn’t sure of the dates
why would she have been emphatic, other than to suit her agenda. The
cards were gone long ago.

--
BTMS - Equine Advisor Extraordinaire.
kosmo
2018-03-03 11:44:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 03 Mar 2018 09:53:38 +0000, Vicky <***@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I don't remember it like that. I didn't get the impression she was
> sure of dates and trying to change the result.

My view is that she was deceiving herself but wanted to end her
marriage.


> Also I have been searching for the history of when Will was rescued
by
> Ed and Aanother but can't find it. Did I imagine it? And it was not
> Will who rescued Ed, according to the BBC information, but that is
all
> I have. I'd love a little while with the much-missed record cards.

I do not recall when Will was rescued. Ed was in Norfolk on the
beach when rescued by Will.

--
kosmo
Sid Nuncius
2018-03-03 18:11:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 03/03/2018 11:44, kosmo wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Mar 2018 09:53:38 +0000, Vicky <***@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Also I have been searching for the history of when Will was rescued
> by
>> Ed and Aanother but can't find it. Did I imagine it? And it was not
>> Will who rescued Ed, according to the BBC information, but that is
> all
>> I have.   I'd love a little while with the much-missed record cards.
>
> I do not recall when Will was rescued.  Ed was in Norfolk on the beach
> when rescued by Will.


No, Vicky is right. Will disappeared after a bad patch culminating in a
fight between Will and Ed; it was Ed who thought of the Norfolk beach,
found him and, rather touchingly, persuaded him to come back. This was
some time after Ed's druggy period.

(I had remembered this, but I also managed to find it in The Archers
Archives in Google Books:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=8Wc9mweOriYC&pg=PA208 )

--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
kosmo
2018-03-04 04:25:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 18:11:03 +0000, Sid Nuncius
<***@tesco.net> wrote:
> No, Vicky is right. Will disappeared after a bad patch culminating
in a
> fight between Will and Ed; it was Ed who thought of the Norfolk
beach,
> found him and, rather touchingly, persuaded him to come back. This
was
> some time after Ed's druggy period.




> (I had remembered this, but I also managed to find it in The
Archers
> Archives in Google Books:
> https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=8Wc9mweOriYC&pg=PA208 )

Sid

Many thanks for the correction, my memory is very much worse these
days.

Why was Will depressed at the time - was this after Emmur left him?

--
kosmo
Sid Nuncius
2018-03-04 18:25:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 04/03/2018 04:25, kosmo wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 18:11:03 +0000, Sid Nuncius
> <***@tesco.net> wrote:
>> No, Vicky is right.  Will disappeared after a bad patch culminating
> in a
>> fight between Will and Ed; it was Ed who thought of the Norfolk
> beach,
>> found him and, rather touchingly, persuaded him to come back.  This
> was
>> some time after Ed's druggy period.

>> (I had remembered this, but I also managed to find it in The
> Archers
>> Archives in Google Books:
>> https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=8Wc9mweOriYC&pg=PA208 )

> Many thanks for the correction, my memory is very much worse these days.
>
> Why was Will depressed at the time - was this after Emmur left him?

Memory? Tell me about it. Wofe often does... :o)

Yes, IIRC it was after a sequence of tough events including losing Emma
to Ed.


--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2018-03-03 13:11:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message <***@4ax.com>, Vicky
<***@gmail.com> writes:
>On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 09:27:26 -0000 (UTC), Btms <***@thetames.me.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>Vicky <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 03 Mar 2018 11:27:38 +0530, kosmo <***@whitnet.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 13:27:25 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
>>>> <G6JPG-***@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>>>> Did she really know? I thought she didn't until the DNA results.
>>>>
>>>> If she was bright enough to count she did, but she wanted it to be
>>>> Ed's - the dates did not work.
>>>
>>> I believe she last gave Ed's input a chance at the hen night. Not sure
>>> how long before the wedding that was but dates are not set in stone.
>>> In both cases the Drs were wrong about my due dates. Women's cycles
>>> can vary considerably, either as usual or because of events.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Yebut iirc Emmur’s delusion was way out of any date scope and clearly so to
>>listeners. We can decide it was an aberration, or her determination to
>>write a reality according to her own agenda.
>
>I don't remember it like that. I didn't get the impression she was
>sure of dates and trying to change the result.

Yes, that's my memory too: that it was genuinely a matter of not
knowing, and if anything the result being something of a surprise.
>
>Also I have been searching for the history of when Will was rescued by
>Ed and Aanother but can't find it. Did I imagine it? And it was not
>Will who rescued Ed, according to the BBC information, but that is all
>I have. I'd love a little while with the much-missed record cards.
>
I wonder if they were actively destroyed, or still exist in a cupboard
somewhere? I could believe either scenario.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

A biochemist walks into a student bar and says to the barman: "I'd like a pint
of adenosine triphosphate, please." "Certainly," says the barman, "that'll be
ATP." (Quoted in) The Independent, 2013-7-13
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2018-03-03 13:08:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message <***@4ax.com>, Vicky
<***@gmail.com> writes:
>On Sat, 03 Mar 2018 11:27:38 +0530, kosmo <***@whitnet.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 13:27:25 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
>><G6JPG-***@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>> Did she really know? I thought she didn't until the DNA results.
>>
>>If she was bright enough to count she did, but she wanted it to be
>>Ed's - the dates did not work.
>
>I believe she last gave Ed's input a chance at the hen night. Not sure
>how long before the wedding that was but dates are not set in stone.
>In both cases the Drs were wrong about my due dates. Women's cycles
>can vary considerably, either as usual or because of events.
>
Women's cycles do vary: they tend to be made without the crossbar.
>
IGMC ...
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

A biochemist walks into a student bar and says to the barman: "I'd like a pint
of adenosine triphosphate, please." "Certainly," says the barman, "that'll be
ATP." (Quoted in) The Independent, 2013-7-13
Mike
2018-03-03 13:23:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
J. P. Gilliver (John) <G6JPG-***@255soft.uk> wrote:
> In message <***@4ax.com>, Vicky
> <***@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Sat, 03 Mar 2018 11:27:38 +0530, kosmo <***@whitnet.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 13:27:25 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
>>> <G6JPG-***@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>>> Did she really know? I thought she didn't until the DNA results.
>>>
>>> If she was bright enough to count she did, but she wanted it to be
>>> Ed's - the dates did not work.
>>
>> I believe she last gave Ed's input a chance at the hen night. Not sure
>> how long before the wedding that was but dates are not set in stone.
>> In both cases the Drs were wrong about my due dates. Women's cycles
>> can vary considerably, either as usual or because of events.
>>
> Women's cycles do vary: they tend to be made without the crossbar.
>>
> IGMC ...

Isabel?

--
Toodle Pip
LFS
2018-03-03 14:04:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 03/03/2018 13:23, Mike wrote:
> J. P. Gilliver (John) <G6JPG-***@255soft.uk> wrote:
>> In message <***@4ax.com>, Vicky
>> <***@gmail.com> writes:
>>> On Sat, 03 Mar 2018 11:27:38 +0530, kosmo <***@whitnet.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 13:27:25 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
>>>> <G6JPG-***@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>>>> Did she really know? I thought she didn't until the DNA results.
>>>>
>>>> If she was bright enough to count she did, but she wanted it to be
>>>> Ed's - the dates did not work.
>>>
>>> I believe she last gave Ed's input a chance at the hen night. Not sure
>>> how long before the wedding that was but dates are not set in stone.
>>> In both cases the Drs were wrong about my due dates. Women's cycles
>>> can vary considerably, either as usual or because of events.
>>>
>> Women's cycles do vary: they tend to be made without the crossbar.
>>>
>> IGMC ...
>
> Isabel?
>

An unnecessary comment.

--
Laura (emulate St George for email)
carolet
2018-03-03 19:16:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 03/03/2018 05:57, kosmo wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 13:27:25 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
> <G6JPG-***@255soft.uk> wrote:
>> Did she really know? I thought she didn't until the DNA results.
>
> If she was bright enough to count she did, but she wanted it to be Ed's
> - the dates did not work.
>

Most if the following is gleaned from Lowfield. Yes, I know that there
is more here than is strictly necessary.


4th July 2004: Ed and Emma go for a long drive. Ed tells her that she
comes alive when she is with him but Emma resists his advances in favour
of getting Will's tea.

8th July 2004: Emma's Hen night, during which Fallon insists that Emma
has got to snog someone, her last time for fun before being trapped.
Emma does not see it that way and Hayley agrees - marriage is great,
with the right man she can face anything. Later on, Ed is tending cattle
at Grange Farm when Emma appears. She doesn't really know why she has
come, but Ed does, and he declares his love in more than one way.

9th July 2004: Emma has second thoughts and tells Ed that last night
must be forgotten; it wasn't meant to be. Ed thinks that Will should be
told. Emma says no, she still intends to marry Will.

16th July 2004: Will asks Emma if she's been avoiding him. She says
she's been busy with wedding planning.

18th July 2004: Emma is looking for Ed at the fete. He hasn't been
answering her calls. She tells him she wants to be friends. He tells her
he never wants to see her again

22nd July 2004: Ed tells all to Oliver. He says that he is convinced
that Emma still loves him. Oliver tells Caroline and says that he will
try to get him some work in Hungary, so that he can get away.

28th July 2004: Ed announces that he is off to Hungary and will not be
best man.

1st August 2004: Emma wants to see Ed before he goes. He declares his
love again, but is disappinted by her response. He says he's going to
Hungary because he can't bear to see her make the safe choice and marry
Will. Clarrie and Eddie take Ed to the airport.

9th August 2004: Emma tells Kirsty that she is pregnant and she thinks
it is Ed's.

13th August 2004: Emma tells Kirsty that she will not keep her
appointment for an abortion tomorrow. Will need never find out that it
is Ed's baby.

26th August 2004: Brian tells Will that he's passed his probation and
offers him and Emma Greg's cottage.

27th August 2004: Will and Emma's wedding day. Emma has been distant
with Will over recent weeks and he doesn't know why. He won't go in to
the church without talking to Emma first. He says he doesn't want marry
her if he isn't sure she loves him the way he loves her. This is when
she tells him that she is pregnant.

26th September 2005: Will and Emma return from honeymoon and let people
know that she is pregnant with a "honeymoon baby".

28th September 2005: Kenton is complains that Emma will be leaving Jaxx
to have the baby but she says it will only be a little time off next April.

2nd November 2005: Will announces that Emma will be a full-time mum once
the baby is born, but doesn’t seem to have discussed this with Emma, who
has decided to go back to work full-time.

7th November 2005: Emma feels the baby's first kikck. Ed turns up with a
beautiful American girlfriend called Beth. Ed is struck speechless at
the news of the baby.

14th November 2005: Ed rushes out of the house, leaving Beth to sleep
in, and calls on Emma. He tells her how great his life is now, so she
does the same, and invites Ed and Beth to dinner. When she tells Will
later, he blows up and says he won't have Ed in the house, but she
convinces him to relent. Later on Clarrie mentions that the baby is due
in April and Ed goes quiet.

19th November 2005: Ed and Beth dine with Will and Emma. It doesn't go well.

21st November 2005: Ed is beginning to put two and two together about
the possible timing of the baby.

30th November 2005: Ed takes Beth poaching. She dares him to go home via
Will's cottage, where they disturb the dog, which bring Will out. He
threatens to call the police.

17th January 2005: George Barford is found dead.

1st February 2005: Ed and Jazzer meet Emma on the green. She goes to the
Bull with them. She enjoys herself so much that she fogets that she is
supposed to be meeting Will to go to an ante-natal appoinment.

7th March 2005: Emma is due to start her maternity leave, but Kenton
hasn't found replacement. He suggests Beth, who was working at Jaxx
while he went to New Zealand, leaving Emma in charge. Beth had not
pulled her weight then, and had not given Emma any cause to forgive her
for being Ed's girlfriend.

8th March 2005: Kenton offers Beth the job but she declines, having
decided that she wants to go back to the States.

11th March 2005: Ed tells Beth that he has a buyer for his car. He can
use the money to buy a ticket to go to The States with her. She makes it
very clear that it's over between them and Ed is devastated. He happend
to meet Emma, who tries to comfort him.

14th March 2005: Beth leaves

23rd March 2005: Ed calls on Emma. She has invited him a couple of
times, but is surprised. He pours out his woes about Beth. After a while
he feels that he has whinged enough, but Emma is pleased to have had a
diversion from the baby. Ed thinks that she will be a great Mum, and
Will is a lucky man.

29th March 2005: Emma finds the point-to-point a bit much and tells Will
that she is going home, not mentioning that she has asked Ed to go with
her. He helps her put a mobile up for the baby. Ed calls on Emma several
more times over the next few days.

7th April 2005: Ed takes some things round to Emma. While he is there
Emma goes into labour. She can't get hold of Will, so Ed takes her to
hospital. Emma won't let him go. Eventually Will arrives and tells him
to go. George is born soon after.

27th June 2005: Ed offers to teach Emma to drive.

27th July 2005: Emma confides in Ed how bored she is with her life.

1st August 2005: Emma tells Ed that she can't risk any more driving
lessons with Ed, after they are nearly caught.

9th August 2005: Emma's 21st birthday. A group go clubbing to celebrate.
Emma declines to dance with Will as she is tired, but does dance with Ed.

12th August 2005: Will proposes that they have another baby. Emma says
it is too soon.

14th September 2005: Ed decides to go to Australia for a year.

19th September 2005: Emma is distraught because George won't stop
crying. Will suggests getting a baby sitter and going out for a drink.
It is a disaster. He only talks about work. She declares that she needs
to get a life and do something. Emma rounds on him when he says that it
will get better.

21st September 2005: Emma learns about Ed's trip to Australia.

22nd September 2005: Emma finds Ed and asks why he didn't tell her he
was going. He can't go, what about her and George? Her life is a mess
and she wants to go with him. She loves him and she knows he loves her.
Ed wants to know why she didn't say this before. It's too late. What
about Will. He couldn't take George from his father. This is when she
tells Ed that he is the father.

23d September 2005: Ed visits Emma. He can't take it in. They look at
George and Emma points out how much he is like Ed. Ed is convinced and
declares that he is not letting them go.





My calculations are as follows:

If Ed was the father, George would have been conceived on the 8th July.
Emma knew that she was pregnant by the 9th August. She could certainly
have suspected that she was pregnant by then, but would she have known?
These days I think that is possible, but I'm not sure whether pregnancy
tests were good enough in 2004. If not, then George was conceived before
the night of her hen party.

It was stated at least a couple of times that the baby was due in April.
Could that be because they were trying to convinve people that it was a
honeymoon baby? Was it really due in March? We know that George was born
on the 7th April, but he could have been late.

Pregnancies are calculated as 40 weeks from the start of the last
period. Conception is about 2 weeks after that. 38 weeks from the 8th
July is the 17th March. That should mean that George was either three
weeks late, or he was conceived after the hen party, making it even more
unlikely that Emma would know that she was pregnant by the 9th August.

I suspect that there was some miscalculation on the part of the script
writers/editors, and that they really did intend Emma not to be sure who
the father was.



--


CaroleT
Sally Thompson
2018-03-03 20:01:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
carolet <***@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On 03/03/2018 05:57, kosmo wrote:
>> On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 13:27:25 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
>> <G6JPG-***@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>> Did she really know? I thought she didn't until the DNA results.
>>
>> If she was bright enough to count she did, but she wanted it to be Ed's
>> - the dates did not work.
>>
>
> Most if the following is gleaned from Lowfield. Yes, I know that there
> is more here than is strictly necessary.

<big snip for brevity>

> I suspect that there was some miscalculation on the part of the script
> writers/editors, and that they really did intend Emma not to be sure who
> the father was.

Wow. Fascinating stuff. Thanks for digging all that out.

I was listening avidly at that time; I remember the hen night and the
doubts on the wedding day when Emma told Will she was pregnant. I had
forgotten till reading this about Ed and Hungary.

The one thing that I have zero memory of, even reading this, is Ed’s
American girlfriend Beth.



--
Sally in Shropshire, UK
Chris McMillan
2018-03-04 17:17:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Sally Thompson <***@gmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> carolet <***@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On 03/03/2018 05:57, kosmo wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 13:27:25 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
>>> <G6JPG-***@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>>> Did she really know? I thought she didn't until the DNA results.
>>>
>>> If she was bright enough to count she did, but she wanted it to be Ed's
>>> - the dates did not work.
>>>
>>
>> Most if the following is gleaned from Lowfield. Yes, I know that there
>> is more here than is strictly necessary.
>
> <big snip for brevity>
>
>> I suspect that there was some miscalculation on the part of the script
>> writers/editors, and that they really did intend Emma not to be sure who
>> the father was.
>
> Wow. Fascinating stuff. Thanks for digging all that out.
>
> I was listening avidly at that time; I remember the hen night and the
> doubts on the wedding day when Emma told Will she was pregnant. I had
> forgotten till reading this about Ed and Hungary.
>
> The one thing that I have zero memory of, even reading this, is Ed’s
> American girlfriend Beth.
>
>
>

Likewise on the US trip and Beth

Sincerely Chris
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2018-03-03 20:57:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message <p7esag$bim$***@dont-email.me>, carolet
<***@btinternet.com> writes:
[]
>Most if the following is gleaned from Lowfield. Yes, I know that there
>is more here than is strictly necessary.
>
Thanks: a mammoth effort!
[]
>My calculations are as follows:
>
>If Ed was the father, George would have been conceived on the 8th July.
>Emma knew that she was pregnant by the 9th August. She could certainly
>have suspected that she was pregnant by then, but would she have known?
>These days I think that is possible, but I'm not sure whether pregnancy
>tests were good enough in 2004. If not, then George was conceived
>before the night of her hen party.
[]
>I suspect that there was some miscalculation on the part of the script
>writers/editors, and that they really did intend Emma not to be sure
>who the father was.
>
I certainly _remember_ it as being uncertain, and the eventual result
actually a slight surprise: so either she'd been with Will before
marriage (certainly not uncommon), or George _was_ a "honeymoon baby".
>
>
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

There's only so much you can do... with gravel.
- Charlie Dimmock, RT 2016/7/9-15
Serena Blanchflower
2018-03-03 21:12:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 03/03/2018 20:57, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> I certainly _remember_ it as being uncertain, and the eventual result
> actually a slight surprise: so either she'd been with Will before
> marriage (certainly not uncommon), or George _was_ a "honeymoon baby".

She and Will were certainly sleeping together before the marriage -
that's why he happily assumed that the baby was his, when Emma told him
she was pregnant. Two or three weeks after her night with Ed, Will took
Emma to some kind of country fair and it was made clear that she spent
the following night with him. I assume that was the night when George
was conceived.

--
Best wishes, Serena
Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light (Groucho Marx)
Btms
2018-03-03 21:51:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Serena Blanchflower <***@blanchflower.me.uk> wrote:
> On 03/03/2018 20:57, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> I certainly _remember_ it as being uncertain, and the eventual result
>> actually a slight surprise: so either she'd been with Will before
>> marriage (certainly not uncommon), or George _was_ a "honeymoon baby".
>
> She and Will were certainly sleeping together before the marriage -
> that's why he happily assumed that the baby was his, when Emma told him
> she was pregnant. Two or three weeks after her night with Ed, Will took
> Emma to some kind of country fair and it was made clear that she spent
> the following night with him. I assume that was the night when George
> was conceived.
>

Whatever the history, Emma had no foundation for claiming George was Ed’s
baby other than an outside chance and wishful thinking.

--
BTMS - Equine Advisor Extraordinaire.
Vicky
2018-03-03 22:00:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 21:51:20 -0000 (UTC), Btms <***@thetames.me.uk>
wrote:

>Serena Blanchflower <***@blanchflower.me.uk> wrote:
>> On 03/03/2018 20:57, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>> I certainly _remember_ it as being uncertain, and the eventual result
>>> actually a slight surprise: so either she'd been with Will before
>>> marriage (certainly not uncommon), or George _was_ a "honeymoon baby".
>>
>> She and Will were certainly sleeping together before the marriage -
>> that's why he happily assumed that the baby was his, when Emma told him
>> she was pregnant. Two or three weeks after her night with Ed, Will took
>> Emma to some kind of country fair and it was made clear that she spent
>> the following night with him. I assume that was the night when George
>> was conceived.
>>
>
>Whatever the history, Emma had no foundation for claiming George was Ed’s
>baby other than an outside chance and wishful thinking.

Surely if there were 2 weeks between her spending a night with Ed and
with Will there is a reasonable chance, depending on her cycle.

--

Vicky
Serena Blanchflower
2018-03-03 22:40:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 03/03/2018 22:00, Vicky wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 21:51:20 -0000 (UTC), Btms <***@thetames.me.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> Serena Blanchflower <***@blanchflower.me.uk> wrote:
>>> On 03/03/2018 20:57, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>>> I certainly _remember_ it as being uncertain, and the eventual result
>>>> actually a slight surprise: so either she'd been with Will before
>>>> marriage (certainly not uncommon), or George _was_ a "honeymoon baby".
>>>
>>> She and Will were certainly sleeping together before the marriage -
>>> that's why he happily assumed that the baby was his, when Emma told him
>>> she was pregnant. Two or three weeks after her night with Ed, Will took
>>> Emma to some kind of country fair and it was made clear that she spent
>>> the following night with him. I assume that was the night when George
>>> was conceived.
>>>
>>
>> Whatever the history, Emma had no foundation for claiming George was Ed’s
>> baby other than an outside chance and wishful thinking.
>
> Surely if there were 2 weeks between her spending a night with Ed and
> with Will there is a reasonable chance, depending on her cycle.
>


If I recall correctly (far from certain) it had sounded as if she must
have had her period between the two events. At some point, probably
when she confided in Kirsty, she was fairly explicit about how many
weeks pregnant she was.

--
Best wishes, Serena
Customer: Waiter! Waiter! This egg's bad.
Waiter: Don't blame me. I only lay the tables.
BrritSki
2018-03-04 08:42:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 03/03/2018 23:40, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
> On 03/03/2018 22:00, Vicky wrote:
>> On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 21:51:20 -0000 (UTC), Btms <***@thetames.me.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Serena Blanchflower <***@blanchflower.me.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 03/03/2018 20:57, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>>>> I certainly _remember_ it as being uncertain, and the eventual result
>>>>> actually a slight surprise: so either she'd been with Will before
>>>>> marriage (certainly not uncommon), or George _was_ a "honeymoon baby".
>>>>
>>>> She and Will were certainly sleeping together before the marriage -
>>>> that's why he happily assumed that the baby was his, when Emma told him
>>>> she was pregnant.  Two or three weeks after her night with Ed, Will
>>>> took
>>>> Emma to some kind of country fair and it was made clear that she spent
>>>> the following night with him.  I assume that was the night when George
>>>> was conceived.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Whatever the history, Emma had no foundation for claiming George was
>>> Ed’s
>>> baby other than an outside chance and wishful thinking.
>>
>> Surely if there were 2 weeks between her spending a night with Ed and
>> with Will there is a reasonable chance, depending on her cycle.
>>
>
>
> If I recall correctly (far from certain) it had sounded as if she must
> have had her period between the two events.   At some point, probably
> when she confided in Kirsty, she was fairly explicit about how many
> weeks pregnant she was.
>
There ought to be far more mention of menstrual cycles on TA.

Chris: FFS Alice, why are you being such an effing bitch.

Alice: I've got my period you bastard, I hate you twat.

Chris: Me or yours ?

<FX: thrown frying pan>
Sid Nuncius
2018-03-04 10:39:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 04/03/2018 08:42, BrritSki wrote:
> On 03/03/2018 23:40, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
>> On 03/03/2018 22:00, Vicky wrote:
>>> On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 21:51:20 -0000 (UTC), Btms <***@thetames.me.uk>
>>> wrote:

>>>> Whatever the history, Emma had no foundation for claiming George was
>>>> Ed’s
>>>> baby other than an outside chance and wishful thinking.
>>>
>>> Surely if there were 2 weeks between her spending a night with Ed and
>>> with Will there is a reasonable chance, depending on her cycle.
>>
>> If I recall correctly (far from certain) it had sounded as if she must
>> have had her period between the two events.   At some point, probably
>> when she confided in Kirsty, she was fairly explicit about how many
>> weeks pregnant she was.
>>
> There ought to be far more mention of menstrual cycles on TA.
>
> Chris: FFS Alice, why are you being such an effing bitch.
>
> Alice: I've got my period you bastard, I hate you twat.
>
> Chris: Me or yours ?
>
> <FX: thrown frying pan>

Erme...steady on, Britters, old bean.

It may just be me and my Political Correctness Gone Mad, but that one
feels a little way over the line to me.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
BrritSki
2018-03-04 10:45:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 04/03/2018 11:39, Sid Nuncius wrote:
> On 04/03/2018 08:42, BrritSki wrote:
>> On 03/03/2018 23:40, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
>>> On 03/03/2018 22:00, Vicky wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 21:51:20 -0000 (UTC), Btms <***@thetames.me.uk>
>>>> wrote:
>
>>>>> Whatever the history, Emma had no foundation for claiming George
>>>>> was Ed’s
>>>>> baby other than an outside chance and wishful thinking.
>>>>
>>>> Surely if there were 2 weeks between her spending a night with Ed and
>>>> with Will there is a reasonable chance, depending on her cycle.
>>>
>>> If I recall correctly (far from certain) it had sounded as if she
>>> must have had her period between the two events.   At some point,
>>> probably when she confided in Kirsty, she was fairly explicit about
>>> how many weeks pregnant she was.
>>>
>> There ought to be far more mention of menstrual cycles on TA.
>>
>> Chris: FFS Alice, why are you being such an effing bitch.
>>
>> Alice: I've got my period you bastard, I hate you twat.
>>
>> Chris: Me or yours ?
>>
>> <FX: thrown frying pan>
>
> Erme...steady on, Britters, old bean.
>
> It may just be me and my Political Correctness Gone Mad, but that one
> feels a little way over the line to me.

Possibly. Sorry for any offence caused, been watching too much similarly
explicit standup with BrratSki. And dearth of BTNs obvs.
SODAM
2018-03-03 23:19:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
> On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 21:51:20 -0000 (UTC), Btms <***@thetames.me.uk>
> wrote:

>Whatever the history, Emma had no >foundation for claiming George was Ed’s
>baby other than an outside chance and >wishful thinking.

I think there was an element of wishful thinking in Emma’s claims about
George’s sire but she thought that she could make people believe her -and
almost make it true- by brazening it out. I don’t think she bargained on
Will insisting on DNA tests. All she accomplished was to show herself up as
the liar and cheat that she was.

--
SODAM
Btms
2018-03-04 07:45:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
SODAM <***@talktalk.net> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 3 Mar 2018 21:51:20 -0000 (UTC), Btms <***@thetames.me.uk>
>> wrote:
>
>> Whatever the history, Emma had no >foundation for claiming George was Ed’s
>> baby other than an outside chance and >wishful thinking.
>
> I think there was an element of wishful thinking in Emma’s claims about
> George’s sire but she thought that she could make people believe her -and
> almost make it true- by brazening it out. I don’t think she bargained on
> Will insisting on DNA tests. All she accomplished was to show herself up as
> the liar and cheat that she was.
>

Well sed. Quite.



--
BTMS - Equine Advisor Extraordinaire.
carolet
2018-03-04 15:18:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 03/03/2018 21:12, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
> On 03/03/2018 20:57, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> I certainly _remember_ it as being uncertain, and the eventual result
>> actually a slight surprise: so either she'd been with Will before
>> marriage (certainly not uncommon), or George _was_ a "honeymoon baby".
>
> She and Will were certainly sleeping together before the marriage -
> that's why he happily assumed that the baby was his, when Emma told him
> she was pregnant.  Two or three weeks after her night with Ed, Will took
> Emma to some kind of country fair and it was made clear that she spent
> the following night with him.  I assume that was the night when George
> was conceived.
>

As I was hunting through yesterday, I did find something about a game
fair and William reminiscing about the one at which they really got
together for the first time. I didn't look back any further than the hen
night though, and didn't find it. I've just looked a bit further back
and not found any mention of it, certainly not at a time when it might
account for George. Here are few more things that I have noted, though:





27th April 2003: After Emma has been seeing both Ed and Will for some
time. Will searches for Ed. He finds him and an angry accusatory
conversation regarding Emma follows. Ed claims innocence, claiming that
going out with Emma the other night was just because they are mates.
Will can take no more and punches Ed, seemingly knocking him to the
ground clutching his already broken ribs. Sid breaks the brothers up and
Will leaves, warning Ed to leave his girlfriend alone!

7th May 2003: William calls round and pours out his heart to Emma. She
has always been the one for him; he loves her and can't bear the way
things are at present. He needs to know how she feels. Emma needs time,
but he has to know. She mustn't keep him waiting too long.

8th May 2003: Emma tells William how much she loves him, she feels safe
with him, they are definitely an item. Emma tells Ed that she can't see
him again. She won't listen to Ed's pleas for her to change her mind
because he loves her too.

9th may 2003: Ed leaves a message for Emma. It's all right - she's made
her choice. He accepts that it's over but Emma must always remember that
he loves her. He'll always love her. Always.

7th August 2003: Emma's birthday. William has arranged a strawberry and
champagne picnic followed by a balloon ride. The day ends with the best
meal Emma has ever had. William then produces a ring and pops the question.

29th August 2003: Will and Emma's engagement party.

8th December 2003: Emma is offered £12,000 compensation for her injuries
in the car accident with Ed back in September 2001.

3rd February 2004: Elizabeth tells Emma that the wedding reception can
be at Lower Loxley, as long as it is on a Friday and they do their own
catering.

7th May 2004: Greg is found dead.

6th June 2004: Emma moves in with Will, rather than live in the caravan.
She has been spending most of her time there anyway. (This is when the
Carter family are living in a caravan while building their new house.)
Neil and Susan aren't happy and try to persuade her back, it looks like
they must succeed, because:

22nd June 2004: Emma moves in with Will, after Christ spills a drink on
her birth certificate.


Whichever date Emma did move in with Will, and how long she stayed
there, there was clearly opportunity for conception before the wedding.


--


CaroleT
vk
2018-03-04 16:16:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 04/03/2018 16:14, John Ashby wrote:
> On 04/03/18 15:18, carolet wrote:
>
>> 22nd June 2004: Emma moves in with Will, after Christ spills a drink
>> on her birth certificate.
>>
>
> She was sure it was only water in the glass, but suddenly there was
> merlot all over the certificate.
>

LOL
John Ashby
2018-03-04 16:14:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 04/03/18 15:18, carolet wrote:

> 22nd June 2004: Emma moves in with Will, after Christ spills a drink on
> her birth certificate.
>

She was sure it was only water in the glass, but suddenly there was
merlot all over the certificate.

john
Rosalind Mitchell
2018-03-04 17:11:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
carolet <***@btinternet.com> writes:

> 22nd June 2004: Emma moves in with Will, after Christ spills a drink
> on her birth certificate.

Ah, a divine intervention! A warning, maybe.

Rotaa
Serena Blanchflower
2018-03-05 20:21:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 04/03/2018 15:18, carolet wrote:
> On 03/03/2018 21:12, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
>> On 03/03/2018 20:57, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>> I certainly _remember_ it as being uncertain, and the eventual result
>>> actually a slight surprise: so either she'd been with Will before
>>> marriage (certainly not uncommon), or George _was_ a "honeymoon baby".
>>
>> She and Will were certainly sleeping together before the marriage -
>> that's why he happily assumed that the baby was his, when Emma told
>> him she was pregnant.  Two or three weeks after her night with Ed,
>> Will took Emma to some kind of country fair and it was made clear that
>> she spent the following night with him.  I assume that was the night
>> when George was conceived.
>>
>
> As I was hunting through yesterday, I did find something about a game
> fair and William reminiscing about the one at which they really got
> together for the first time. I didn't look back any further than the hen
> night though, and didn't find it. I've just looked a bit further back
> and not found any mention of it, certainly not at a time when it might
> account for George. Here are few more things that I have noted, though:
>

The visit to the Game Fair which I remembered was on 23rd July 2004
(<http://www.lowfield.co.uk/archers/daily.phtml?20040723>). As I
remember it, Emma had been being very snippy with William for the
previous week or three and I think had been staying with her parents
again, for at least some of the time. She very much enjoyed Matt's
flattery and being invited to lunch in the members' tent and was clearly
thawing towards William by the end of the afternoon. It was made clear
that she was planning to spend that night with him and that he was on a
promise...

Looking at it now, it's hard to see how the dates work out though. I'm
pretty sure that she told Kirsty exactly when her period had been due
(but this detail doesn't seem to have been recorded by Lowfield) and
that her cycle was regular as clockwork, and that was what we based our
views on.

--
Best wishes, Serena
People say nothing is impossible, but I do nothing every day. (A.A. Milne)
Serena Blanchflower
2018-03-05 20:40:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 05/03/2018 20:21, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
> On 04/03/2018 15:18, carolet wrote:
>> On 03/03/2018 21:12, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
>>> On 03/03/2018 20:57, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>>> I certainly _remember_ it as being uncertain, and the eventual
>>>> result actually a slight surprise: so either she'd been with Will
>>>> before marriage (certainly not uncommon), or George _was_ a
>>>> "honeymoon baby".
>>>
>>> She and Will were certainly sleeping together before the marriage -
>>> that's why he happily assumed that the baby was his, when Emma told
>>> him she was pregnant.  Two or three weeks after her night with Ed,
>>> Will took Emma to some kind of country fair and it was made clear
>>> that she spent the following night with him.  I assume that was the
>>> night when George was conceived.
>>>
>>
>> As I was hunting through yesterday, I did find something about a game
>> fair and William reminiscing about the one at which they really got
>> together for the first time. I didn't look back any further than the
>> hen night though, and didn't find it. I've just looked a bit further
>> back and not found any mention of it, certainly not at a time when it
>> might account for George. Here are few more things that I have noted,
>> though:
>>
>
> The visit to the Game Fair which I remembered was on 23rd July 2004
> (<http://www.lowfield.co.uk/archers/daily.phtml?20040723>).  As I
> remember it, Emma had been being very snippy with William for the
> previous week or three and I think had been staying with her parents
> again, for at least some of the time.  She very much enjoyed Matt's
> flattery and being invited to lunch in the members' tent and was clearly
> thawing towards William by the end of the afternoon.  It was made clear
> that she was planning to spend that night with him and that he was on a
> promise...
>
> Looking at it now, it's hard to see how the dates work out though.  I'm
> pretty sure that she told Kirsty exactly when her period had been due
> (but this detail doesn't seem to have been recorded by Lowfield) and
> that her cycle was regular as clockwork, and that was what we based our
> views on.
>


It suddenly occurred to me that, even if Lowfield hadn't recorded the
details of Emma's cycle, umra would have. A quick fossick around Google
Groups has found this, from Anne Burgess, posting on 23th August, 2004:

> Anne Burgess
>
> 13/08/2004
>
> Re: Emma is having a baby (now spoiler)
>
>> Am I the one who can't count, or is it the SW's? According to the
>> Lowfield summaries, "it" happened on Thursday 8th July, which means, by
>> my calculations, that her period is two weeks late, not three days
>> late.. No?
> No. It's the SWs who can't count.
>
> Emma tells Krusty on Monday 9 August that she is 3 days late, and that she is
> usually 28 days, like clockwork.
>
> So she must have been expecting her period to start on Friday 6 August.
>
> Counting back 28 days from 6 August is Friday 9 August.
>
> The hen night was on Thursday 8 July.
>
> So her previous period must have started **after** seabirding with Ed.
>
> So Ed *cannot* be the father.
>
> Anne B



--
Best wishes, Serena
Take heed, dear Friends, to the promptings of love and truth in your
hearts. (Quaker Advices and Queries #1)
Serena Blanchflower
2018-03-05 20:45:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 05/03/2018 20:40, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
> On 05/03/2018 20:21, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
>> On 04/03/2018 15:18, carolet wrote:
>>> On 03/03/2018 21:12, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
>>>> On 03/03/2018 20:57, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>>>> I certainly _remember_ it as being uncertain, and the eventual
>>>>> result actually a slight surprise: so either she'd been with Will
>>>>> before marriage (certainly not uncommon), or George _was_ a
>>>>> "honeymoon baby".
>>>>
>>>> She and Will were certainly sleeping together before the marriage -
>>>> that's why he happily assumed that the baby was his, when Emma told
>>>> him she was pregnant.  Two or three weeks after her night with Ed,
>>>> Will took Emma to some kind of country fair and it was made clear
>>>> that she spent the following night with him.  I assume that was the
>>>> night when George was conceived.
>>>>
>>>
>>> As I was hunting through yesterday, I did find something about a game
>>> fair and William reminiscing about the one at which they really got
>>> together for the first time. I didn't look back any further than the
>>> hen night though, and didn't find it. I've just looked a bit further
>>> back and not found any mention of it, certainly not at a time when it
>>> might account for George. Here are few more things that I have noted,
>>> though:
>>>
>>
>> The visit to the Game Fair which I remembered was on 23rd July 2004
>> (<http://www.lowfield.co.uk/archers/daily.phtml?20040723>).  As I
>> remember it, Emma had been being very snippy with William for the
>> previous week or three and I think had been staying with her parents
>> again, for at least some of the time.  She very much enjoyed Matt's
>> flattery and being invited to lunch in the members' tent and was
>> clearly thawing towards William by the end of the afternoon.  It was
>> made clear that she was planning to spend that night with him and that
>> he was on a promise...
>>
>> Looking at it now, it's hard to see how the dates work out though.
>> I'm pretty sure that she told Kirsty exactly when her period had been
>> due (but this detail doesn't seem to have been recorded by Lowfield)
>> and that her cycle was regular as clockwork, and that was what we
>> based our views on.
>>
>
>
> It suddenly occurred to me that, even if Lowfield hadn't recorded the
> details of Emma's cycle, umra would have.  A quick fossick around Google
> Groups has found this, from Anne Burgess, posting on 23th August, 2004:
>
>> Anne Burgess
>>
>> 13/08/2004
>>
>> Re: Emma is having a baby (now spoiler)
>>
>>> Am I the one who can't count, or is it the SW's?  According to the
>>> Lowfield summaries, "it" happened on Thursday 8th July, which means, by
>>> my calculations, that her period is two weeks late, not three days
>>> late.. No?
>> No. It's the SWs who can't count.
>>
>> Emma tells Krusty on Monday 9 August that she is 3 days late, and that
>> she is
>> usually 28 days, like clockwork.
>>
>> So she must have been expecting her period to start on Friday 6 August.
>>
>> Counting back 28 days from 6 August is Friday 9 August.
>>
>> The hen night was on Thursday 8 July.
>>
>> So her previous period must have started **after** seabirding with Ed.
>>
>> So Ed *cannot* be the father.
>>
>> Anne B
>
>
>


PS, you can read the thread, and all our chuntering on the subject at
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/uk.media.radio.archers/a_Ukwbs4jow%5B1-25%5D>

--
Best wishes, Serena
Maturity is a high price to pay for growing up (Tom Stoppard)
SODAM
2018-03-06 01:29:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Serena Blanchflower <***@blanchflower.me.uk> wrote:
>
>
> PS, you can read the thread, and all our chuntering on the subject at
> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/uk.media.radio.archers/a_Ukwbs4jow%5B1-25%5D>
>

What tenacity, Sherlock!

And reading the “chunters” was a walk down Memory Lane. All those Gonerats
(no, Brritski) - so many posts!

--
SODAM
The thinking umrat’s choice for editor
Serena Blanchflower
2018-03-06 08:28:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 06/03/2018 01:29, SODAM wrote:
> Serena Blanchflower <***@blanchflower.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>> PS, you can read the thread, and all our chuntering on the subject at
>> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/uk.media.radio.archers/a_Ukwbs4jow%5B1-25%5D>
>>
>
> What tenacity, Sherlock!

It was annoying me!

> And reading the “chunters” was a walk down Memory Lane. All those Gonerats
> (no, Brritski) - so many posts!
>

Yes, I enjoyed rereading all of that so my researches weren't exactly a
hardship :)

--
Best wishes, Serena
"It is not the mountain we conquer but ourselves." - Sir Edmund Hillary
Vicky
2018-03-06 09:08:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 6 Mar 2018 08:28:32 +0000, Serena Blanchflower
<***@blanchflower.me.uk> wrote:

>On 06/03/2018 01:29, SODAM wrote:
>> Serena Blanchflower <***@blanchflower.me.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> PS, you can read the thread, and all our chuntering on the subject at
>>> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/uk.media.radio.archers/a_Ukwbs4jow%5B1-25%5D>
>>>
>>
>> What tenacity, Sherlock!
>
>It was annoying me!
>
>> And reading the “chunters” was a walk down Memory Lane. All those Gonerats
>> (no, Brritski) - so many posts!
>>
>
>Yes, I enjoyed rereading all of that so my researches weren't exactly a
>hardship :)

I enjoyed them too, and wouldn't have found them myself.

--

Vicky
carolet
2018-03-06 16:06:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 05/03/2018 20:21, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
> On 04/03/2018 15:18, carolet wrote:
>> On 03/03/2018 21:12, Serena Blanchflower wrote:
>>> On 03/03/2018 20:57, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>>> I certainly _remember_ it as being uncertain, and the eventual
>>>> result actually a slight surprise: so either she'd been with Will
>>>> before marriage (certainly not uncommon), or George _was_ a
>>>> "honeymoon baby".
>>>
>>> She and Will were certainly sleeping together before the marriage -
>>> that's why he happily assumed that the baby was his, when Emma told
>>> him she was pregnant.  Two or three weeks after her night with Ed,
>>> Will took Emma to some kind of country fair and it was made clear
>>> that she spent the following night with him.  I assume that was the
>>> night when George was conceived.
>>>
>>
>> As I was hunting through yesterday, I did find something about a game
>> fair and William reminiscing about the one at which they really got
>> together for the first time. I didn't look back any further than the
>> hen night though, and didn't find it. I've just looked a bit further
>> back and not found any mention of it, certainly not at a time when it
>> might account for George. Here are few more things that I have noted,
>> though:
>>
>
> The visit to the Game Fair which I remembered was on 23rd July 2004
> (<http://www.lowfield.co.uk/archers/daily.phtml?20040723>).  As I
> remember it, Emma had been being very snippy with William for the
> previous week or three and I think had been staying with her parents
> again, for at least some of the time.  She very much enjoyed Matt's
> flattery and being invited to lunch in the members' tent and was clearly
> thawing towards William by the end of the afternoon.  It was made clear
> that she was planning to spend that night with him and that he was on a
> promise...
>
> Looking at it now, it's hard to see how the dates work out though.  I'm
> pretty sure that she told Kirsty exactly when her period had been due
> (but this detail doesn't seem to have been recorded by Lowfield) and
> that her cycle was regular as clockwork, and that was what we based our
> views on.
>


You're right, I missed that. It doesn't say anything that would lead me
to conclude that it could be George's conception day, but you clearly
remember it better than I do.

--


CaroleT
Loading...