The Appeal

by Janice Hallett

  A large, wealthy, influential family is a powerful unit. The Haywards are successful, intelligent business people. They employ many locals and run a high-profile drama society. They are well respected in the community and by their employees. Sarah-Jane mentions how hard everyone works, unpaid, during Poppy’s Ball. Meanwhile, Celia and Joel volunteer at The Grange, while Emma takes in Paige’s sick and troublesome dog. Celia and Carol compete for friendship with Helen. Being of value to the alpha family can lead to increased social standing and subsequently greater confidence and self-respect within the community.

  We see how someone not part of this social hierarchy – like Nigel Crowley – isn’t as sympathetic or keen to go the extra mile. Meanwhile we also see, initially at least, that Sam and Kel want to be part of this world. They join The Fairway Players despite having no interest in theatre, and as soon as they learn about Poppy’s illness, they mine their medical contacts for information to help her (27 April). Sam quickly commits to run a sponsored half-marathon and tries to help the family when she suggests on 30 April that Martin lobbies Parliament (which later leads him to construe that she is paranoid about authority).

  We should consider Sam’s behaviour in the context of what has gone before. In Bangui, she tried to bring the truth out into the open, but was discredited and silenced. We suspect her accusations against Dan Bhatoa could be behind her discharge from frontline medical volunteering, even if her health was cited as the reason.

  When she arrives at St Ann’s, it seems Sam’s commitment to putting right what she sees as wrong is undimmed by her recent experience. During her first meeting with Claudia on 22 April she lists everything she thinks is wrong with the Elderly Care ward. She either hasn’t learned the fate of the whistleblower, or she’s learned it but is strong enough to put herself on the line again. By her second meeting on 18 May, she’s using Claudia for information about Tish Bhatoa.

  Martin concludes that Sam is paranoid about authority, but is that any surprise when she has challenged authority, only to have it close ranks and let an injustice go unpunished? It surely cannot be a coincidence that they have arrived in Dan Bhatoa’s sister’s Healthcare Trust. If Sam’s intention is to discredit Bhatoa, in revenge for defending Dan in Bangui, then can her actions be viewed in that light and her accusations dismissed? Does she see things that aren’t there and stir up trouble where none exists? Early in this correspondence, Issy observes that the UK ‘probably seems very dull in comparison’ to the Greenwoods’ life abroad. Is Sam subconsciously generating excitement and drama to replace all she lost over there?

  As it is, Sam reports Tish to the BMA on 18 May and follows up her accusation with evidence in the form of the Poppy’s Ball programme on 5 June. She’s out to get Tish in whatever way she can.

  We also noted that Sam is not afraid to lie and deceive when the aim is to uncover a deeper, more significant truth. While we have no access to Sam’s personal emails here, we do in fact hear directly from her. In the ‘voice’ of Clive Handler on 30 May, she describes the suggestion that he use an offshore account as ‘not “quite legitimate”, it is a loophole, but one I am prepared to jump through for the greater good’. Through the course of this correspondence Sam deceives the Haywards, Claudia, Isabel and others, all in pursuit of a ‘greater good’. By the time she confronts the Haywards at the dress rehearsal on 4 July she has clearly amassed what she believes to be strong evidence that they have deceived and defrauded their loyal friends in order to preserve their own businesses and lifestyle. But is she right?

  What did Samantha tell the drama group, and could she be correct?

  There is no question Samantha Greenwood hits a nerve when she addresses The Fairway Players at their dress rehearsal for All My Sons. Helen, who ‘so rarely cries’, exhibits inconsolable distress, and Martin is so disturbed – possibly by Sam’s accusations, possibly by the uncharacteristic reaction of his wife – that he abandons the crucial rehearsal completely. The community is firmly on Helen’s side. We believe the key to Sam’s murder lies in what she revealed that night. But how right is she, and who stands to lose the most from what she says?

  From Sarah-Jane we discover that Sam claims to know the following:

  • The appeal is a ‘financial conspiracy’.

  • There are no experimental drugs. Poppy is undergoing a course of conventional chemotherapy at Mount More.

  • Poppy’s notes are not kept at the hospital.

  • Helen did not have a little boy who died of meningitis, as she claims – it is a story to engage the community with the appeal. There is no mention of it here, but as we will see below, Poppy’s ‘sight loss’ is exactly this.

  • That if he really were the victim of a fraud, then Martin deserves to be beaten at his own game. Sam seems to doubt the Lydia Drake story.

  • Martin later distils what Sam says about the appeal into the phrase ‘poorly run’, as if to dilute the power of her accusations.

  We would like to explore Sam’s claims.

  To what extent is the appeal being used for personal gain, and by whom? We are unanimous that someone is using Poppy’s fund money for their own purposes, but is it Martin, Tish or both? If it’s both, then are they in collusion or not? At this point we cannot rule other members of the Hayward and Reswick families in or out of the deception.

  Both Martin and Tish have onerous financial responsibilities. But which came first: their money worries or the appeal? The appeal raises a great deal of cash very quickly. Did they see this and then realise they could solve their financial issues – confident the cash flow would continue? If so, then we can see how it might subsequently be difficult to stop taking money from the fund, especially as they can hide behind Sarah-Jane while she lobbies friends and family. The curse of easy money . . .

  If we chart the progress of the ‘lie’ that Poppy is going blind, we may find some clues. It starts with good intentions. On 18 May, Sarah-Jane must convince Nigel Crowley to play at Poppy’s Ball for free. There is no time to find another band and she wants to spend as little of the fund money as possible on event expenses. Initially she tells him Poppy is a fan of his music and listens to it while having her cancer treatment. This innocuous untruth does not convince Crowley to change his mind. The more emotive lie about Poppy losing her sight is blurted out just as he seems out of reach. Having pulled this ‘fact’ from thin air, Sarah-Jane is then honest with the Haywards about what she’s done, expressing horror at telling such a ‘whopper’. The Haywards find this predicament amusing, with Martin content to continue the ‘lie’ for the benefit of the event. At no point does anyone suggest revealing the truth to Crowley.

  Inevitably, word gets around about Poppy losing her eyesight. Isabel believes the family has ‘the wrong end of the stick’. Meanwhile Sam sources information that suggests the family is simply focusing on the side-effect they fear most. Both have enough medical knowledge to doubt the claim.

  It does not escape the family that any mention of blindness increases donations to the appeal. In fundraising updates, Poppy’s sight loss is continually alluded to: ‘We are also facing the fact her eyesight will be affected – which makes every day that she can still see all the more poignant’ (9 June). Having said that, a few days earlier Glen questions what people will think when they see Poppy is obviously not blind: ‘We don’t want anyone feeling they’ve been conned, when they’ve been kind enough to support us’ (3 June). Is this something he would say if it were a premeditated deception? We suspect that, after the lie works so well with Nigel, the family comes to regard such ‘fibs’ as an acceptable part of the fundraising process.

  By the time Martin sends his update telling their fundraising community about the Clive Handler hoax on 23 June, he categorically states that Poppy’s chemo has ‘resulted in hair loss and blindness’. We are unanimous in the belief that Poppy is not losing her eyesight – we later learn she has not lost her hair, either, yet Paige shaves her head on 2 July because people ‘expect�
�� a child with cancer to be bald – are they cynically manipulating their friends, or is it simply a convenient lie they now believe themselves?

  Martin becomes increasingly vague about how much money has been raised and how much is needed. He is otherwise pedantic and efficient, yet we can see throughout this correspondence how reluctant he is to engage with Sarah-Jane’s requests for a definitive figure. His son James refers to his ‘petulant vagueness’ in response to stress. Yet on occasions when we might assume Martin is under pressure, such as after Sam’s outburst at the dress rehearsal on 4 July, he displays great clarity of thought and measured calmness in his correspondence with both Sam and Sarah-Jane. Could it be that he is undertaking a ‘financial deception’ that is the source of far greater stress and anxiety than anything concerning the drama group?

  We also have another train of thought. That the Haywards are acting in good faith, but that Tish Bhatoa is deceiving them. Samantha Greenwood exercises suspicions early on that Tish is not being honest with them about the drug treatment Poppy needs. The whole Clive Handler hoax throws doubt on the entire premise of the appeal. In Bangui, Sam witnessed Bhatoa work to get her brother off charges of inappropriate behaviour. This could easily colour Sam’s perception of anything Bhatoa says or does, but just because Tish is prepared to bend the truth to protect her brother does not mean she is guilty of defrauding the Haywards, or of Sam’s murder. Similarly, the fact that Sam harbours a grudge against Tish does not mean the doctor is innocent of defrauding the appeal.

  We both agree on one thing: by the time Martin reveals the truth about Lydia Drake on 3 July, he, James and Glen are all on the same page, all in on some sort of conspiracy – apparently in isolation from Helen, Paige and Olivia. It seems the Hayward women are spared any stress and financial responsibility. Martin tells James and Glen on several occasions to keep facts from Helen.

  Martin very clearly calculates a time to tell the drama group about the Lydia Drake fraud: ‘Tuesday. After their committee meeting and before the play. Don’t email. Come round if you need to speak’ (1 July). This is also one of many occasions when Martin tells his son and son-in-law not to email, apparently mindful that this evidence could be used against them. We also note a curious one-line email from Martin to James on 2 June: ‘I know what you mean. Thank you’, in response to a bland statement about making memories with Poppy. We think Martin thanks him for the reminder that this correspondence could be used as evidence in their favour, should they be found out.

  Speaking of evidence, we see Glen’s panic when the police visit on 4 July. Martin says: ‘Surely they’d come here first. Is Paige there? Can you hide?’ There is palpable relief when the police only want to see the Healing Doll. What are they hiding?

  Finally, on 3 July Sarah-Jane MacDonald says to Kevin: ‘The stress is written on their faces.’ But is it solely the stress of Poppy’s illness, or also a financial fraud that has spiralled out of the family’s control?

  Do the experimental drugs exist at all?

  This is the question behind Sam’s deception of the Haywards when she poses as Clive Handler on 20 and 30 May. Why does she play such a cruel trick on a family already under enormous emotional pressure? It seems out of character for her. If we follow the correspondence, its primary aim is to discover where in the US the drugs originate. On 2 May Sam asks Martin and Tish, but can’t get an answer; she asks her medical contacts, no luck there either. So she resorts to this underhand way to find out, perhaps not appreciating how much it will hurt the family.

  Speaking as Handler on 30 May, Sam tells Tish that the fund is a lie to manipulate the Haywards. If she has hit the nail on the head at this point, surely Tish would bail out there and then, knowing she’s been found out – and by someone unafraid to speak. Therefore if the appeal is a fraud, the Haywards must be in on it to some degree.

  Sam’s success as Clive Handler serves another, unanticipated function. It leads her to construct a more sophisticated deception later, when she poses as Isabel to trawl through the medical records at Mount More.

  Poppy is having conventional chemo at Mount More – so why are her notes not kept at the hospital?

  We can say for sure: Poppy’s drugs are administered by Hickman line into her chest on a twice-weekly basis at Mount More’s Paediatric Oncology department. By manipulating Claudia, Sam poses as Isabel to infiltrate the system there on 22 June. She fails to find Poppy’s medical notes. While we have no idea how typical this is, or if there could be an innocent explanation – Poppy is one of Tish Bhatoa’s private patients, after all – the fact that Sam identifies it as unusual has to be taken into account. We are not entirely in agreement that, having been out of the country for eight years, Sam could know what current treatment pathways are, or that her professional experience would qualify her to judge the decisions of a senior consultant in Oncology.

  Did Helen have a little boy who died of meningitis or is this a story to engage the community with the appeal?

  Sam is consulting a genealogist about Helen on 25 June, so presumably she is the source of the information that Helen did not have a child before James. What led Sam to go down this route of enquiry we don’t yet know, but Andrea Morley is likely to be the ‘Andy’ we hear on the answering service the night Sam is killed. Sam often goes missing from work through illness or days off. But is she ill with the condition that we know she has, or is she meeting Andrea, or both?

  This question is one that seems to play on Sarah-Jane’s mind after Sam’s outburst at the dress rehearsal. Emma’s corroboration convinces Sarah-Jane and, on the whole, us too. However, with no further evidence, we do not feel able to explore this point fully.

  Is there any mileage in the accusation that Martin fabricates the Lydia Drake ‘fraud’?

  As we’ve seen, the ‘financial conspiracy’ accusation is very likely true, to one extent or another. However, Sam throws doubt on the Lydia Drake fraud here, and we can’t see why Martin would pretend to have been conned. We are more inclined to believe greed convinced him to fall for Lydia Drake’s promises – whether that ‘greed’ is for Poppy’s cure or his own financial gain remains to be determined. It does beg the question: who is Lydia Drake?

  What is the relationship between Sam and Issy?

  With only one side of this correspondence available to us, nonetheless we can see how Isabel Beck quickly becomes a needy, high-maintenance friend. However, through her we learn some key facts about Sam, especially when James – one of the few characters sympathetic to Issy – asks her what Sam is like. From Issy’s answer we deduce that: people listen to her, she gets on with everyone and she gets things done. These qualities all backfired in Bangui, and again at the dress rehearsal. We were interested to observe that when Isabel ‘speaks’, as she does through the committee minutes she sends to the whole group on 6 June, for the most part people take very little notice. Sarah-Jane even says to her ‘no one cares what you think’. Issy is simply not high enough up the social ladder to have a voice. We are also bemused to note that Issy is the only cast member of All My Sons not credited by name in the online review published on 6 July. Even onstage, Issy goes unnoticed.

  Sam tells Claudia she’s desperate to be rid of Issy, but is that true? Sam uses Claudia and Isabel to conduct an audacious deception that leads directly to her making the accusations that very probably lead to her death. Sam asks Claudia to arrange a tour of Mount More for ‘Isabel’. Only the email address she gives her is a false one. Sam, as Isabel, accepts the invitation and meets Ziggy for the tour, where she absconds to look up Poppy Reswick’s treatment plan and medical records. Our primary evidence for this is how Ziggy describes the ‘Isabel’ she meets as ‘chatty and interested’. The Isabel we know is the exact opposite of that.

  We wonder why Sam doesn’t simply organise a tour of the department under her own identity. We think she is wary of Tish Bhatoa hearing her name and feels safer undercover.

  This deception is one Sam finds herself having to s
hore up repeatedly. She must tell Isabel she was speaking to Claudia about having Frances (you-know-who or YKW) moved from Elderly Care. Isabel then nags her about this on 23 and 25 June. Sam must also lie to Claudia on 26 June and say that she’s ill, in order to keep her away from the Yogathon, where she’ll meet Isabel – who knows nothing about the tour. After the Mount More visit, Sam must keep them apart. When Sam’s relationship with Claudia threatens to undermine her relationship with Issy, Sam is obliged to foster Issy’s flagging friendship. As much as Sam might find Issy a drain, she wants to keep her onside, to use her and avoid her becoming vengeful.

  We believe Sam fails to appreciate the long-term consequences of her actions when she has her mind set on a higher truth.

  It is easy to focus on what Sam thinks of Issy, but we should also take into account how Issy feels about Sam. Her neediness borders on obsession, and where obsession is concerned, isn’t there a fine line between love and hate? Obsessive love – if it can be described as ‘love’ at all – can change direction in a flash. When Issy spots Sam having lunch with Claudia in the Orangery on 13 June, she types an unsent email that ends ‘I hate Claudia, I hate myself and I hate . . .’ The missing word, we think, is ‘you’, meaning Sam. Issy feels dependent on Sam for her own social status and self-respect, but dependence breeds resentment.

  We discussed at length Issy’s curious inaccurate observation on 1 July that Topps Tiles is visible from the Greenwoods’ balcony and have the following theory to expound. There is a moment, the morning after the Yogathon, when Issy wanders around the Greenwoods’ lounge. This is when Issy has hands-on access to Sam’s life.

  During the altercation between Arnie and Barry, when Kel and Sam separate their troubled friend from the affray, Arnie blurts out to Sam that Kel has been seeing Claudia. We believe Issy hears this, too. Isabel describes herself as someone who likes to plan ahead. But we can see she is just as much an opportunist. Therefore we think it possible that, when the opportunity arises, Issy uses Sam’s laptop – an old one, so old it does not feature a security password – to send an email to Michael D’Souza. She impersonates Sam to tell him about the affair, to hammer the final nail into Sam’s friendship with Claudia and stir up trouble for her nemesis. We are going to assert that Topps Tiles is visible from elsewhere in the flat, where Issy was situated at the exact time she pretended to be out on the balcony.