Supercalifragilisticexpiali-guilty?

Part 2 The Witness

Hi there - thanks for your interest in my work.

I actually wrote this piece as a part of an HSC Major Work for Extension 2 English (A Year 12 course in Australia) and am looking forward to getting feedback on it as although it was marked as a part of my HSC - I (like everyone else) never got feedback for it. So I really want to know if you, my readers, like it or not.

I've uploaded the pdf (which contains original formatting and pictures) of it at the 'external link button' paired with this story if you wish to read it how it was originally presented (altogether). Also, as an author, I was able to create a reflection statement in which I get to explain and analyse my own story - this will be posted in the final part of this story. I have a feeling transferring it to here will throw out the formatting a bit - please see the pdf.

Thanks again and keen to get your feedback! (Literally - I want to know if you like it!)

-Desterman

Part II The Witness

SUSPICIOUS BANKS ABDUCTION

NOTORIOUS NANNY TO BLAME?     

TRIAL IN PROGRESS

Andrew Lark, Crime Reporter

Mary Poppins, age unknown, residential governess, has been accused of the abduction and suspected murder of the four Banks children named Michael, Jane, John and Barbara who were discovered to be missing upon the eve of the 14th by their beloved mother, Winifred Banks, wife of George Banks. Four items of clothing, one belonging to each child, were found in the river within the park adjacent to the home of the children in Cherry Tree Lane. Suspicion is placed upon Miss Poppins as she remains to be the last person to have seen the children. Evidence has been released by London authorities which includes a bottle of unknown liquid spilled across the nursery floor and points in the direction of Mary Poppins.

Questions have been raised about the safety of minors within families as the category of ‘external help’ has been called into suspicion after this event has occurred. Agencies have been impacted significantly as talks of introducing new campaigns regarding reducing the trust of strangers by children are in motion.

While it is alleged that Mary Poppins was not hired by the Banks family on normal terms or from an agency, the issue still concerns all families across Great Britain who have taken in an ‘external’ to maintain the life of the nursery.

Miss Euphemia Andrew, ex-governess of George Banks himself, has commented to The Times yesterday upon the situation through a letter, ‘[this] is utterly ridiculous, although [referring to Miss Poppins] there are always bad eggs, governesses should be trusted. Parents do not need the terrible burden of the existence of children within their lives’. The general public agree with this however it has been reported that an uneasy atmosphere of insecurity regarding such service has entered into the homes of families across London and greater England.

********

Placing aside your crumpled newspaper, you look upwards and see that the Banks woman has now composed herself and the Court is beginning to resume.

Turning in her seat, Mary Poppins surveys the room, catching your eye as she does. You particularly noticed during the cross-examination that Mary didn’t move once; only sat with the posture of a statue. Now, as she moves to stare at the Jury sitting complacently along the side of the room, she wrinkles her nose and stamps her umbrella.