I don't know if it was a clue or not but when Tracey put the knife into Charlie's hand, when he was lying on the floor, she put it into his left hand and I think he was right-handed. I may be wrong, mind. I have been before, many times!

We noticed the left handed thing as well. The other thing is if Tracy was protecting herself the defensive wounds would not be where she did them and if she hit him when he was coming at her with the knife when she struck the blow it would have been at a different angle to when he was sat and she was stood and he would have dropped the knife it is highly unlikely that he would have been able to keep hold of it.

I found the episode too graphic for the time it went out on air feeling the need to send my young daughter out of the room & there are so many holes in the plot it was just laughable. I found the response from the street was...well... how should I say...beyond belief. Tracey was lead away from the murder scene to her mums without anyone batting an eye lid & as for her small wounds well as you said........

i think it took to long for her to actually kill him!

i didnt really think it was too graphic. but it was a bit daft when peter was banging on the door and she was just doing things like opening the knife draw and stuff, i felt corrie was just filling in spare holes in the script. but it wasnt bad i suppose. norris was funny. but my pooorrrrr charlie.

I was actually just reading that on Teletex. Someone wrote in to comment on that was it you Sloppy lol I think that will be some of the evidence against her.

Plus what was with the little pricks she put on the underside of her hand it was a knife he was "ment" to have not a nail gun.

quote:

Originally posted by bingette:
I was actually just reading that on Teletex. Someone wrote in to comment on that was it you Sloppy lol I think that will be some of the evidence against her.

Plus what was with the little pricks she put on the underside of her hand it was a knife he was "ment" to have not a nail gun.

No, it wasn't me, Bing. I agree with you about the wounds on her hand, too. Plus I didn't see any blood on her child's duvet as she held her and her hand was bleeding quite a lot.

Exactly it was well done show but there was a lot of incosistancy but hey who's perfect. I just hope she don't get away with it and heads off to sunnier parts

quote:

Originally posted by bingette:
Exactly it was well done show but there was a lot of incosistancy but hey who's perfect. I just hope she don't get away with it and heads off to sunnier parts

Me too! I was looking for clues as I watched it. I reckon I've been watching too many murder mysteries!

if she gets sent to jail though it'll be really interesting!

yea just think though she has done everyone a favor also poor peter eh he never deserved that but what a come back lol

quote:

Originally posted by Sloppy:
I don't know if it was a clue or not but when Tracey put the knife into Charlie's hand, when he was lying on the floor, she put it into his left hand and I think he was right-handed. I may be wrong, mind. I have been before, many times!

CSI: Soapland

Lols. Of course Tracey's going to get nailed. I think it was deliberate on part of the SWs to leave lots of obviouse clues for the highly trained professional forensics. Lol.

I want to know what the detectives are thinking/saying down at the police station. In the Bill there's a special domestic violence unit, are the same people dealing with Tracey on Corrie? In my mind she's nothing like a 'battered wife'.

also if she did cut her palm,it would have been painful,yet she used that hand to fone the police and hold amy

also lol she told the police charlie was coming after her when she hit him,but his wounds will show that the impact of the ornament is in the wrong place it would have been much lower,that will also be the same when he was on his hands and kness,they will ask her how he managed to cut her when he was standing,yet the wounds are too low etc

One thing that is bothering me. Peter has not been out of the stree all that long and Jason has lived in the street years and surley would have know Peter from before so why did he tell Charlie that some guy was dripping off Traceys hand and not just say it was Peter

good point there,bing deck,i aint sure if those two knew of each other

Good point Bing ~ Pete's been away 3 years. Unless you talk to your neighbour would you really recognise them after a few years? I'm not sure I would ~ mind you I can sort of recognise people, but I'm not able to place them. Can be quite embarrassing when they seem to remember you, lol.

lol angel i did that once,she was talking to me for about 10mins,i was saying to myself,who is she? think woman think lol,then after i said bye etc mr sizz asked me who she was,i said,i don't know he looked at me with a puzzled face and said,but you were talking like you did know her,i just laughed

I suopse I just imagine that since its a soap these things should be taken into consideration

true,bing deck,mind you if it was done perfectly everytime we might not have anything to moan at lol

Oh I will find something lol

lol i can just imagine you sat near the tv with a note pad and pen poised

It's a hoot isn't it, lol.

But Bing that's the best part ~ the SWs forget that Soapies will pick up on the finer points. Well spotted, because you got me thinking about it now.

quote:

Originally posted by sizzler:
lol i can just imagine you sat near the tv with a note pad and pen poised

What do you mean imagine lol

Its a head scratcher eh Angel lol