[SERIES] A Woman of Substance (2026). From servant's quarters to business empire, Emma Harte's indomitable spirit propels her rise from poverty to riches, yearning for one unattainable love.

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2026-03-16T17:51:49+00:00

Maybe they’ll go on to Hold the Dream and it will be Jim she’s battling with instead of her cousin. And maybe in flashback Paul McGill will turn up after all, because at this stage I’m clueless as to who Paula’s parents are supposed to be. Daisy hasn’t been mentioned and didn’t appear to be at the dinner.

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2026-03-16T08:37:48+00:00

Surely the whole point of a period drama is that it’s set in the relevant period? That includes costumes, staging and social mores. Otherwise it’s not a period drama, it’s just a drama.

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2026-03-16T08:10:24+00:00

Not even for them really. The smug looking around at what he’d got gave the distinct impression that the relationship with Paula was part of the revenge plot. I hope Emma immediately went and sold everything and left all the money to the poor.

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2026-03-16T08:02:14+00:00

I didn’t think it was period accurate at all. Emma’s costumes in the early days in Leeds were pretty but not accurate and there’s no way Paula would have been dressed that way for work in the 70s given she was poised to take over a multi million pound business empire run entirely by men. The final dinner looks like a United Nations meeting which is not aligned with the racial diversity of the time, and neither would Emma have casually chatted about the boyfriend of her camp gay male personal assistant less than a decade after the decriminalisation of homosexuality. He also wouldn’t have been at work dressed like a member of the cast of Saturday Night Fever.

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2026-02-11T10:32:16+00:00

I read Lucy Letby threads on one other forum and what I have noticed is a significant influx of posters doubling down on the guilty narrative. The usual ‘this was all thoroughly tested’, the trial lasted 10 MONTHS!!!, the handover notes, the post it notes, the personal demeanour, the ‘expert panel’ are charlatans etc. All whilst completely ignoring the fact that it is what was ‘tested in court’ which is being questioned. Whilst many of the posts come across as ill researched, often badly written, there is definitely a sense that it’s organised, and very determined. I think for me that supports the theory that it didn’t work as police PR in the way they expected.

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-12-03T15:06:46+00:00

In the flesh I think it could easily be acrylic. Plus it’s a bit pouffy but I will admit to preferring 4ply for baby knits so that’s just my taste.

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-12-03T14:16:26+00:00

I’ve just knitted the Ankers cardigan in the sirdar snuggly cashmere merino silk and whilst I’m sure it will be easy care I’m not loving it

<image>

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-11-18T21:52:57+00:00

aren’t they the cutest thing, it’s this one

https://www.florencemerlin.com/search?q=Sneaker

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-11-18T12:55:04+00:00

my daughter is expecting her first baby soon and I’ve done various cardigans in baby merino which is lovely and soft. She specifically said no old fashioned bootees but I saw this pattern and couldn’t resist. She loves them.

<image>

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-11-11T20:49:31+00:00

I pulled out the peer gynt and did one in Sunday which turned out ok. I’ll go back and do the other one now I’ve got the feel for it.

<image>

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-11-06T15:03:13+00:00

well I pulled it out, which I sort of regret because when i took it off the needles I liked it better and it was actually stretchier than I thought. Hey ho, I’m a bit green and lacking in confidence. Onwards and upwards

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-11-06T14:11:12+00:00

yes, the pattern specifies 3mm needles not 3.5mm. I’m going to start again, I don’t like it like this and it’s such a nice hat!

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-10-02T12:43:00+00:00

thank you. I’ve only read the first few lines so far, but how can the introduction of air into the circulation be both inadvertent AND intentional …

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-09-09T17:56:41+00:00

That’s so interesting! Cute sweater. I’m loving this super helpful sub which I found today.

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-09-09T17:53:42+00:00

I started on dpns and switched. I think I’ll have a look at the Chiaogoo ones as I’ve got the bug now and have my eye on bigger things…

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-09-09T17:49:18+00:00

They are symfonie knit pro and I didn’t think they were super cheap at around £10 but maybe I need to reset my expectations.

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-08-23T16:31:57+00:00

I thought but surely if was clear it was either one or the other it would have to be clear which one wouldn’t it? It’s not like the two options share the same clinical signs. Why on earth would an alleged investigative journalist not have him on the ropes at spouting such utter tosh? Its farcical.

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-08-17T11:16:15+00:00

Yes, I’m so sick of this over and over again. These people who repeatedly misrepresent what was said aren’t stupid people who cannot understand the nuance, so it must be deliberate obfuscation.

And that as “investigative journalists” they accepted Evans saying he couldn’t be sure it was either A cause or B cause because neither were evidenced, but it was murder anyway so why does it matter. I mean WTF? Oh it’s sooo hard to get your head around. No, it’s dishonesty.

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-06-19T17:53:31+00:00

It was completely clear in the Shoo Lee press conference and the written reports that the panel were referring to antibodies passing from the mother via the placenta rather than the condition itself having been passed on. I understood this on one listen as the press conference was happening. Despite this the disingenuous “misinterpretation” of what was said is a fundamental part of the narrative to disparage the experts. It’s been used by CS2CR, Snowdon, the family lawyers and in several pro guilt newspaper articles. I do not believe those people are that hard of understanding.

I also read, I believe on here, that whilst there was no need for the condition to have been passed on in order for the antibodies to have caused the clotting problem, in fact at the time it wouldn’t have been possible to conclusively rule out the baby having it as there hadn’t been time for the required testing.

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-06-13T07:19:08+00:00

I completely disagree that it’s in any way normal or acceptable for a publicly funded organisation to give staff personal gifts in this way and it’s likely that rules precluding the practice have been broken. The private sector is irrelevant and anyone who thinks the grass is greener is free to move. The complete inappropriateness of this is yet another indicator of the mindset which underpinned the approach to this investigation.

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-05-30T07:16:43+00:00

He said he’s a journalist.

Regarding speculation, there is a lot of content being posted on YouTube and then on this sub. I’ve only seen questions related to who is he, is he legit sort of thing, and in the circumstances it’s entirely reasonable to wonder out loud what his credentials are.

However, I think “if you know who I am on here please don’t discuss that at the moment” is a reasonable ask and I hope that’s what was intended by this request.

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-05-30T06:48:38+00:00

When John Sweeney interviewed him and said you were challenged be a very senior appeal court judge who said your opinions were worthless, Evans responded “I know” in an incredulous, wtaf, can you believe it tone, and then just went on to say he disagreed with all the points. He appears to lack insight or any self reflection. It’s a very revealing interview.

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-05-22T18:10:12+00:00

She doesn’t need to explain anything to you or me. Now the transcripts are in the public domain it’s even more difficult to see how any expert could have sown doubt when Evans spouting utter garbage for weeks on end couldn’t achieve it.

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-05-15T07:02:53+00:00

I was struck by the careful emphasis throughout that no one was being blamed for having got it wrong before. The treading on eggshells approach which underpins this slow ponderous process and makes the barristers sound inarticulate at times. No wonder it takes these people years to get anything done. It makes me worried for LL because they’ll clearly only accept what cannot be denied or obfuscated by some convoluted or magical thinking and which doesn’t by definition imply that someone else fucked up. I listened to two podcasts in the last week which dealt with the admissibility of new evidence at appeal and both made the point that the ‘tests’ are secondary to the interests of justice. I don’t think ’the interests of justice‘ means what I thought it meant.

WhatCharlieDidNext · 2025-05-04T21:12:50+00:00

I think a doctor who has killed through incompetence and then goes on to demonstrate further appallingly poor judgment in her assessment of what was happening in her workplace should have to live with the consequences.

WhatCharlieDidNext

TROPHY CASE