This is an unpopular opinion I know, from all the serial killers in Hollyoaks, Breda actually had a noble cause. She actually killed for a admirable reason. I'm not saying its right, just saying she's different than your usual psychopath.
Provided they make it all the way to Vienna. I have a slight suspicion Mac isn`t going to risk having James around for that long, and will try to interfere himself instead. Most likely while Breda is plotting to kill him, and we are heading for some kind of suspense climax, where Breda saves the life of either James or Harry by attempting to kill Mac. Or maybe Mac will kidnap James and Harry - secretly holding them hostage - while everyone else belive them to be in Vienna? Possibly even keeping them apart, so Harry (and us viewers) will worry James has been killed. Harry to be brought back only for two scenes in one episode seems unlikely, so maybe what we will have is him to be in scenes as Mac`s hostage, or busy trying to find out what has happened to a missing James?
Somehow Mac has knowledge and evidence Breda killed Louis, and now is blackmailing her to kill James, or Mac will report her to the police. Mac has gotten hold of the items of Louis`s which Breda tried to burn. How those would prove Breda killed him, though, you have to ask Hollyoaks about. Cause since Mac only photographed the burned items - not Breda burning them - the items in themselves would not have proved neither that Louis was dead - nor that Breda had anything to do with his death. The reason he had burned what was left from his old life, could just as well have been some kind of ritual, shaking off his past, or because he has assumed a new identity, using fake id, and therefore couldn`t have anything that could be linked to his true self remain. Therefore the burned items in themselves neither proves Breda a murderer - not even decisively suggest Louis to be dead. Apart from in the minds of Hollyoaks storyline producers, that is. They seem to think we are stupid enough to buy such nonsense. Unless DNA from Breda has survived the attempted burning of Louis` wallet and more, it would be impossible to charge her for murder, solely from the items Mac is in possession of, and uses to blackmail her with. Even if there is DNA from her on the items, all they would have proved was that she had handled the items - not that she had killed Louis. And if she claimed to have found the items, and had burned them because she suspected they had been left because Louis had committed suicide, and Breda wanted to spare Leela of that shock and guilt, since she had finished with him and thrown him out shortly before. That explanation would have sounded so reasonable, it couldn`t be excluded completely - meaning there would not have been sufficient evidence to charge Breda with anything beyond destruction of, or tampering with, evidence.
Will David Easter continue his role as a ghost, then? Someone else said just a few days ago that Easter had a 3 year long contract with Hollyoaks. If that is correct, it is odd he would be killed off now?
Its all a bit twisted and strange knitingales family. James is romeo dad and Juliet half brother!? Romeo and Juliet are brother and sister. .which means James sons sister is also his sister!? ..and don't even get me started with Mac...Juliet his daughter? Romeo is his grandson;? So that means his daughters brother is also his grandson!? Plus eliie and Alfie are romeos aunt and uncle and Juliette half brother and sister !? God knows what that makes Marline!? The fairy godmother I should think!!!!
I knew once breda knew what a good father james was she wouldn't be able to do it. But I find it hilarious that she thinks she could handle james strength. Not to be sexist but but come on he would have easily overpowered her.
Not necessarily. Had she gotten the silk tie/scarf around his neck and started to strangle him, his gut reaction would have been to get off what was around his neck. He would not be in a position to turn around, cause with a silk tie/scarf around his neck that could cause him both additional pain and more serious injury (which he would have felt the second he tried to turn around), or a more speedy death. And if he tried to rip the tie out of her hands, that would also subject him to the same risks and additional pains. In movies people being strangled are seen moving around a lot. But in real life that increases the forces around the neck, and therefore also the pain. When his arms both were busy trying to prevent being strangled, and the fact he couldn`t turn around to see who attacked him without risking instant death or more severe injury/pain, an ordinary person would have been pretty helpless. Specially trained soldiers might have stood a chance - but I doubt someone like James would. Breda was also wearing her overcoat, so her arms would have been protected should James get a hold of one, and try to squeeze or twist it. Had he done, he also would have tightened the tie/scarf used as weapon, increasing his own pain and also reducing his remaining time alive.
@@josephrolando5616 That is a little difficult to explain in English, but I`ll give it a go. You see when someone is being strangled, there are three potential ways they could die: Lack of oxygen to the brain cause the blood vessels are being blocked, ditto lack of oxygen to the lungs, and also build up of carbon-dioxide, because the airways and/or the blood vessels are being blocked. The third potential death risk is crushed windpipes and similar (don`t have the English vocabulary to be more precise). And in rare occasions a fourth cause of death can be shock. Our knowledge about previous deaths this ways has shown defensive wounds (cuts and bleeds) on the victims` fingers, nails and neck - suggesting they desperately have tried to rid themselves of the object used to strangle them, more than they have tried to attack the attacker. People who are being strangled from behind, might not even know they are being strangled. But could mistake the sudden pressure and pain for anything from strokes to heart attacks. And might not realize they are being strangled until it is too late. People who are being strangled from behind, unless they are trained in neutralizing such situations, have a lot less chance of surviving than those who are strangled face to face. And if they are sitting down, like James was here, survival will be even more difficult. Cause even it there are techniques allowing a victim to free him/herself from the attacker, they are much easier to execute standing, than when sitting down. If the victim is sitting down, the attacker has all the advantages. If attacked face to face, an alert victim can force his hands up between the attackers hands, and force them to opposite sides, and that way forcing the attackers hands off the victim`s neck. Provided the attacker use only his hands - otherwise that defensive move would be suicide. But all I have time for, the others don`t wont to wait for me any longer. Hope this was of help to you.
