Cosy crimes and gritty sagas by Corrie Blog editor Glenda, published by Headline. Click pic below!

Friday 26 May 2017

The Face of an Assailant

When the "Who Attacked Ken" storyline spoilers first hit t'interweb, ITV's publicity machine offered a photo of all the potential suspects including a non-family member, Pat Phelan. They do this sort of thing. Then, quite often, they throw a twist in the works and the culprit ends up being someone entirely different and "expendable", a secondary character. I really thought that's where this was going at first and I suspected either young Seb, perhaps caught in the act of robbing Number 1 or Chloe, hoping to set Peter up for it.

In an unusual twist, the identity of the attacker is indeed in the above photo. As the inept DS McKinnon arrested or seriously questioned one after another until she'd hit on every one unsuccessfully, the airwaves were full of red herrings, clues and hints. Amy? No, Amy wouldn't have hurt her grandfather even if she was angry with him. She couldn't have done it and gone on as if nothing had happened after. Pat Phelan certainly had form for it but it wasn't him, either. Amy directed the police to Adam whose fingerprints were on a kitchen worktop while he was supposed to be out of town. Daniel has often shown a sudden and violent temper. Tracy was upset because she felt Ken showed preferred treatment to her blood relatives, which she is not. Everyone had a motive. Everyone had opportunity, or so it seemed.

Little by little, alibis were given and some were proven, some were not. By the end, Daniel's alibi, proven with a tram ticket, was in tatters and the mis-identification of a pair of red trainers as his seemed to have sealed his fate in Ken's memory. But Ken still only remembers the shoes, not the face.

Then Adam decided that he'd leave town after a dressing down by Peter and Tracy. Adam previously pretended to leave town when Ken ordered him out. He'd hit rock bottom and had no other option but he didn't actually leave. I didn't believe he'd have upped sticks and gone so quietly after Peter and Tracy's suggestion. I had been coming to the conclusion over recent weeks that he was the attacker all along, because Adam has been far too focussed on trying to move the attention away from himself, trying to find reasons to pin the blame on anyone else. When one person was cleared by the police, he'd move on to the next and so on. There wasn't any more evidence against him than there was with anyone else, just enough to be circumstantial but nothing really definitive while Ken still had no memory but Adam was determined he wasn't going to go down for it. Why? Because he's guilty, that's why. Or so I thought.

Ah. But Ken's starting to have memory flashes. Was Adam so quick to decide to leave town to escape the inevitable? That's what I thought. Tonight, it seemed Adam signed his own arrest warrant inadvertently. Ken had recognized those shoes and Sinead identified them as Daniel's but she thought he meant the heap of clothes next to the shoes. Ken only said "who owns that stuff?", not "who owns those trainers?". Adam came to say good bye and right on top of his things in an open duffel bag were the shoes in question.  Oh heck. It was Adam! Ken even called the police on him though Adam is insisting it wasn't him though admits he was there but was too angry at his grandfather to call for help when he found him at the bottom of the stairs.

But Daniel was planning to go off as well. In a very contrived situation, his ex-landlord has waited almost 6 months to insist on a paint job at his old flat which you would think he would have rented out to someone else rather than lose that money for that long. But no. Swallow that one and move on.

Daniel is persuaded to bring Ken with him which he did try to avoid but couldn't (hmm. Suspicious, that) and Ken offered to help him revise for a poetry exam, using that big book he gave him awhile back, the one he wrote a message in.  You remember, the message had a phrase that Ken used to Sinead who repeated it to Daniel. He realized it was Ken that was the reason why Sinead felt she had to go through with the abortion and he was livid. Remember that sudden, violent temper he's got?

This, then, is the face of Ken's attacker.

And this, then, as we later discovered, is the blunt object used to thump Ken on the back of the head, still bloody. Daniel had to buy another copy and forge the note and now the two of them are going to be in an empty flat alone together. Ken still hasn't remembered the actual incident but as Brian found out, sometimes memories can flash back to you when you least expect them. It's very likely going to happen next week. 

And once Ken remembers, since it isn't a murder charge, Daniel's fate isn't a done deal. I think that since it isn't that sort of crime, Ken can refuse to press charges if he wants (or can he?) and it's possible he might do that. He's been aware that his own interference has caused his son's anger towards him, and he's long felt guilty about abandoning Daniel who probably holds old resentment. But I expect, since Ken was willing to call the police on Adam, he'll do it on Daniel as well. Will Ken withdraw the charges in the long run? Wait and we'll see, I guess.

I really enjoyed this storyline. It kept me guessing, how about you?  I'm glad ITV didn't take the usual safe route of landing us with a secondary character that we don't care for as the villain of the piece though if it had been a murder case, I have no doubt that's what would have happened.

I wonder where they'll take Daniel now. Will he be humbled by his father's (anticipated) forgiveness? Will he become the family pariah? Will Tracy be insufferably smug because there's someone else to take the heat off her criminal past? Will we ever find out what happened to Daniel's mother?  What do you think?

Tvor (Twitter @tvordlj)
Cross posted from State of the Street 

Please read our advice for leaving comments on the Coronation Street Blog
All original work on Coronation Street Blog is covered by a Creative Commons License


Newfy Pearl said...

I enjoyed it too...very much...for all the reasons you listed. Great write up TVOR!

Canuktuk said...

I'm actually surprised that it wasn't Amy. Have they ever had a child murderer on the Street before? Although I suppose they did have David push his Mum down the stairs and they do love the recycle storylines.

@NickJay6 (Manchester) said...

Good write-up again from Tvor - although putting aside the fact they've dragged this out rather too long, it has been *slightly* intriguing, although I summised who it was pretty much from the first door knock on Ken's door! (clue!). Ask yourselves who else would have access to Daniel's shoes? (another clue!). Then after the first door knock was shown (as if to suggest it wasn't them) knocking on other doors too. There was no indication of the time frame at that point however.

So rightly or wrongly, probably going to end up with a BIG load of egg on my face for getting it wrong, I'm saying it's .... SINEAD! Wait and see then I can say I told you so!! :P :D

Tvor said...

The red shoes were a red herring. Adam admitted he was in the house and saw his grandfather on the floor. That's when Ken saw the red trainers. Daniel wasn't wearing them.

Maricha said...

That was a great post Tvor.I did enjoy this storyline though I wish we'd gotten to know and like new characters like Daniel and Adam more before we were expected to suspect them.

What I mean by that is that if Daniel does end up gone, it won't be a lot worse than if it was Seb.We don't know much about him.I really didn't want it to be characters we're more invested in like Peter and Tracy.

Ken can just claim he doesn't remember and forgive Daniel. The fact is that without his testimony the police don't have much of a case. Ken reported Adam because if he'd been the assailant it would be purely out of greed and anger at thinking he was given as little as in the old will. Daniel's assault is something done in grief and anger:he should get therapy not the jail time or criminal record he'd undoubtedly face if the police arrest him.

Rapunzel said...

The preview which ran at the end of Friday's episodes has Ken digging up a rose bush then demanding that Daniel tell him what happened to his mother.

Suggesting that Denise may be buried in the garden?!

It would be quite something if, fed up with the paparazzi spoiling their non-spoilers, TPTB played a double blind and leaked rumours of Denise Welch's return when in fact the real twist is that Daniel killed her ...

Having said that, I don't actually want Daniel to leave.

Maricha said...

That would be a twist!
Then again, seeing Denise around the set never meant she was still alive. Perhaps the actress was there to film the scenes leading up to and including her character's murder in flashbacks.

Anonymous said...

Denise Black played Denise Osborne. Denise Welch played Natalie Barnes in Corrie

Rapunzel said...

Whoops my bad! Should have double checked my Denises!!


You might also like...

Coronation Street Books for Fans