2018 Season - UK Episode Discussion

[H&Alover]

7 hours ago, harrietjames said:

She was legally dead hence not an issue.

But was her body found?  Alf married Alisa only  three years after Martha 'drowned'  and you have to wait seven years before you can have someone declared legally dead.

[Gerard]

Good to see some scenes up at the Lighthouse. Not much else positive I can say about that episode. Not enjoying River Boys Take 2.

[Homeandawayfan.]

Martha was presumed dead in 1985 and a death certificate was issued but there was no total proof that she actually died. No body found. Since 1988, Alf must have mentioned a funeral of Martha but it may have just been a memorial service. I am sure that as there was no body found, Alf still had to wait 7 years for Martha to be declared legally dead. This means he could not marry Ailsa until 1992. He wed her in 1988. The whole storyline just reeks as it is very sloppy. It has messed with the timeline. I think it was always assumed until the 2018 season opener that Martha was properly dead and buried. When Alf wed Ailsa he never even once said "Martha's body was never found and I have to wait 4 more years". Also until now, there was no mention that she was just presumed dead.

[Red Ranger 1]

9 hours ago, harrietjames said:

She was legally dead hence not an issue.

Well, if she illegally faked her death and Alf knew that and used a marriage certificate he knew was false/inaccurate in order to marry someone else, then surely that's fraud and thus a crime and thus very much an issue.

So, the Ash/Robbo showdown ends in a whimper but perhaps that's the only way it could have ended.I guess we'll never know how far Ash would have gone if Colby and Murray hadn't intervened, but it seemed like he realised that it's one thing to swagger around town declaring that you're going to get someone, and another thing entirely to actually have your hands around their throat while they're barely putting up a fight.Even his attempt to gloat over him in the cells didn't seem to give him any satisfaction, as instead of an evil nemesis he's presented with a broken man who's clearly devastated at the pain he's caused.So once again, the person I liked least was Tori, whose self-righteous behaviour at the police station was as bad as in finale week, yet it's hard to shake the feeling that we're meant to see her as the lovely sweet caring doctor and the police as mean.(It's reached the point where she's starting to exhibit signs of the Messiah Complex that put a lot of people off Rachel, except she's far worse, since Rachel usually managed to balance her compassion as a doctor with her duty to the law rather than going screaming across moral lines out of arrogance like Tori has done.)Frankly, given that Tori's "medical examination" seemed to consist of taking his pulse and feeling his forehead, Murray's observation that running through half the town without difficulty shows Robbo's fine seems more accurate.

I'm as confused as Hunter over Jennifer's behaviour.The best I can come up with is that she does want to be with him but she'll kind of take whatever she can get and is kind of putting feelers out as to exactly how serious it's going to be.Which hints at low self-esteem, frankly.And yes, Jennifer was shown in the same classes as Coco not long after she first appeared (Raffy was put up a year so she's older than her).

[Dan F]

6 hours ago, H&Alover said:

you have to wait seven years before you can have someone declared legally dead.

 

4 hours ago, Homeandawayfan. said:

I am sure that as there was no body found, Alf still had to wait 7 years for Martha to be declared legally dead.

It's not the sort of thing that can just be answered with a quick Google though - unless there's some legal experts here that specifically know the NSW regulations from 33 years ago, then no-one can say whether it was right or wrong.

As it currently stands, it's not that cut and dry -- the seven year thing actually depends on the circumstances:

 

Where a person is not heard from for a period of 7 years by those persons who would be expected to have communication with that person, then a Court may presume that person dead. This period may be less depending on the circumstances of the disappearance.

Cases based on the presumption of death must be distinguished from cases where the Court is able to infer death in the absence of a body from the circumstances of disappearance, such as an aircraft disappearing over water.

 

Spoiler

As it happens, when Colby eventually gets back to Roo, he states that there was conclusive evidence from the investigation to suggest that Martha had drowned, therefore she would likely have been declared dead and the appropriate documentation issued. Again that is just from current legislation, but if anyone feels passionate enough to go back and find the exact laws that would have applied in 1985, then have fun with that.

We've also pretty much established that Alf didn't know the truth when he actually married Ailsa—and from what I can see, vow renewals are effectively just symbolic ceremonies, with no legal documentation/registrations required, so Alf doesn't seem to have commited fraud in any legal sense of the word.

[630si]

Thanks for your efforts there Dan. 

Personally I’m quite happy to allow the show to use its poetic license and I’ll go along for entertainment purposes. Enough time has passed not to get bogged down in laws etc. It’s a story and being a little far fetched is fine with me. If Alf didn’t know, I’ll be happy with an explanation as to when he found out and why he didnt tell Roo.

[H&Alover]

14 hours ago, Dan F said:

 

It's not the sort of thing that can just be answered with a quick Google though - unless there's some legal experts here that specifically know the NSW regulations from 33 years ago, then no-one can say whether it was right or wrong.

As it currently stands, it's not that cut and dry -- the seven year thing actually depends on the circumstances:

 

Where a person is not heard from for a period of 7 years by those persons who would be expected to have communication with that person, then a Court may presume that person dead. This period may be less depending on the circumstances of the disappearance.

Cases based on the presumption of death must be distinguished from cases where the Court is able to infer death in the absence of a body from the circumstances of disappearance, such as an aircraft disappearing over water.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

As it happens, when Colby eventually gets back to Roo, he states that there was conclusive evidence from the investigation to suggest that Martha had drowned, therefore she would likely have been declared dead and the appropriate documentation issued. Again that is just from current legislation, but if anyone feels passionate enough to go back and find the exact laws that would have applied in 1985, then have fun with that.

We've also pretty much established that Alf didn't know the truth when he actually married Ailsa—and from what I can see, vow renewals are effectively just symbolic ceremonies, with no legal documentation/registrations required, so Alf doesn't seem to have commited fraud in any legal sense of the word.

Alf and Ailsa were actually  married in a regsitery office so he would have been committing bigamy if he knew Martha was alive. Guess we will have to wait and see what really happened when Alf tells Roo the truth.

Was a bit of a damp squib ending to the Ash versus Robbo/Ryan battle, I don't think Ash could have killed a man in cold (well OK hot) blood, especially as Red said the person you were wanting to punish had given up all fight and wanted to die. I think that when Ryan and Ash were looking into each others eyes on the cliff top Ash realised what Robbo/Ryan had said about he'd lost his wife was true so knew how he felt. Yabby Creek cops like to bend the rules when it suits, just a bit of cajoling from Ash persuaded Murray (?) to let him talk to Robbo/Ryan who explained more about his lost family - which I'm sure I heard him say was down to him - before he was Beckett Reid - so  not an accident then.  Robbo/Ryan is a fit guy - more ways than one  - and his ability to run like he did would have been down to adrenaline pumping through his veins, he was running for his life. Was nice to see the lighthouse again and those houses near it look very smart. I do have to say the River Boys soon wimped out and didn't put up too much of a fight and were soon overpowered by the cops. Guess they'll be leaving now as they are no longer needed, though we do have the Colby/Dean connection that will need to be resolved.  One theory, mine alone, is Colby did used to be a River Boy, but left and went to the city, if he had no charges against him, as in he didn't get caught,  there wouldn't have been a problem in joining the police, unless someone knows differently.

Tori did rather blag her way into seeing Robbo/Ryan by guilt tripping Murray  on the premise that if anything happened to him and it came out he'd been refused a medical examination it would be on their heads. A proper examination would have been useful though, not just taking his pulse and temperature and asking how his leg was.   As for Murray's comment about his running across town and up to the headland had to mean he was OK see above comment about adrenaline, he could have a delayed reaction to the injury incurred.

Very neat move of Justin's getting Ash out of the cop shop, he was lucky there that Robbo/Ryan didn't want to press charges, before he revealed all about Justin and Tori hiding him which would have got them both charged with harbouring a fugitive/aiding and abetting a criminal. Justin did get it right that under any other circumstances Ash, the old Ash, would have done exactly the same if a friend had been in trouble.  In a previous episode we saw Willow trying to find out information about Robbo/Ryan's family but she was looking under the name Reid, now they know his real name couldn't she try again but using the name Shaw? Does now seem Ash and Tori's relationship is completely broken.

Know what you mean Red about Hunter and Jennifer, I'm confused.com too. She says she realises it was just a kiss and wasn't expecting more, but was she just saying that. I like he asked Leah's advice, but he has to take it slow, it's only been a week or two and he was with Olivia for a couple of years, though I can see he likes the attention from a lovely young woman, it wouldn't be fair on either of them and we are seeing a nicer, kinder side of Jennifer.  Did he really let her go to the hospital by herself to get her shoulder put back?

 

[harrietjames]

21 hours ago, H&Alover said:

Alf married Alisa only  three years after Martha 'drowned'  and you have to wait seven years before you can have someone declared legally dead.

Not necessarily - this is a suspected death rather than a missing person case. If she just hadn't come home, then the 7 years would apply.

As she was in a boat accident, death was a reasonable assumption. The investigating officers would have reported the suspected death to the coroner as per CORONERS ACT 1980 (the appropriate law in NSW at the time). Coroner made a finding of death. Alf got the death certificate and was legally able to marry Ailsa. (Alf found out Martha wasn't dead after he was legally married.)

Enough bits to get the idea from Ref: http://www.coroners.justice.nsw.gov.au/Pages/coroner_role/missing_persons_.aspx

"The police officer in charge of a missing person investigation must report the matter to the Coroner once they are satisfied that no further enquiries can be made as to whether a missing person is alive or deceased. This should occur as soon as the investigator is of the belief that the missing person is now deceased. "

"Missing persons cases are reported to the Coroner by investigating police officers in the form of a 'P79B Police Report of Suspected Death', which outlines the factual background of the missing persons case."

"Can I get a death certificate for a missing person? Yes, if the Coroner makes a finding of death"

@Dan F " unless there's some legal experts here that specifically know the NSW regulations from 33 years ago" Not a legal expect, but the legislation is online...

CORONERS ACT 1980 and Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1995 applied at the time.

The actual laws under the spoiler tag - no one wants to read that stuff...

Spoiler

CORONERS ACT 1980

12A   Obligation to report death

(2)  A police officer to whom a death or suspected death is reported as provided by subsection (1), or by section 12B (5), is required to report the death or suspected death to a coroner or assistant coroner as soon as possible.

 

13   Inquests into deaths or suspected deaths

(1)  A coroner has jurisdiction to hold an inquest concerning the death or suspected death of a person if it appears to the coroner that the person has died, or that there is reasonable cause to suspect that the person has died, in any of the following circumstances:

(a)  the person died a violent or unnatural death

14 Coroner may dispense with inquest except in some cases

A coroner who has jurisdiction to hold an inquest may dispense with the inquest except in those cases in which an inquest is required to be held.

16A   Notice of particulars of death to be given to Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages

(1)  If a coroner holds an inquest in respect of the death of a person, the coroner must, for the purpose of enabling registration of the death of the person to be effected or completed, give notice in writing to the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages of such particulars as are known to the coroner relating to the death of the person.

(2)  If a coroner dispenses with the holding of an inquest under section 14 or suspends an inquest under section 19, the coroner must, for the purpose of enabling registration of the death of the person to be effected or completed, give notice in writing to the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages of such particulars as are known to the coroner relating to the death of the person.

(3)  If a coroner is satisfied (whether before or during an inquest in respect of the death of a person) that there will be a delay in concluding the inquest and that he or she is able, on the basis of such evidence as the coroner considers sufficient, to determine the particulars relating to the death of the person, the coroner may, for the purpose of enabling registration of the death of the person to be completed or effected, make that determination and give notice of the determination in writing to the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages.

(4)  A notice under this section must not include any matter incriminating any person.

(5)  In this section, a reference to the particulars relating to the death of a person is a reference to the identity of, and date, place and cause of death of, the deceased person.

Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1995 No 62

38   Circumstances in which death must not be registered

(1)  The Registrar must not register the death of a person unless the Registrar has been given one of the following:

(c)  a notice given by a coroner under section 34 (1) or (2) of the Coroners Act 2009 for the purpose of effecting or completing registration of the death,

(section 34 (1) or (2) of the Coroners Act 2009 replaced Section 16 in CORONERS ACT 1980 above)

 

 

 

 

[Dan F]

27 minutes ago, harrietjames said:

@Dan F " unless there's some legal experts here that specifically know the NSW regulations from 33 years ago" Not a legal expect, but the legislation is online...

Thought it probably was Did have a quick gander at some of the legislations but was looking under Presumption of Death rather than missing persons

37 minutes ago, H&Alover said:

Alf and Ailsa were actually  married in a regsitery office so he would have been committing bigamy if he knew Martha was alive.

Already addressed that in the post - the initial marriage and then the renewal.

[harrietjames]

38 minutes ago, H&Alover said:

 he would have been committing bigamy if he knew Martha was alive.

Morag says no....

Bigamy is the act of entering into a marriage with one person while still legally married to another^. 

Martha has been declared dead by the coroner.  She is LEGALLY dead. As such, Alf cannot remain legally married to Martha.

Even if this wasn't the case, Alf could have secretly divorced her. Martha has left for over 12 months - the minimum length of time for a separation - her abandonment of the marriage is grounds for divorce.