Jump to content

The Verdict


James
 Share

Recommended Posts

Anyone watch that last night?

 

I thought it was quite an inriguing showcase of not only what goes on in a courtroom but society in general.

 

Quite informative on the tricks barristers play, and also shows how complex a rape case is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen it advertised like... Is it an actual case?

 

The witnesses are all actors who reenacted the crime a few months ago, but since then, everything has been done realistically ie police statements etc, and therefore the real-life barristers are working in exactly the same way they would for a proper case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Celebrity Big Brother in disguise, tbh.

 

Would say that you haven't watched it then, the celebs pretty much take a back seat to the courtcase, but when the trial has a break, cameras roll while the jury discuss the case, and it is really quite interesting how opinions differ from what is the same evidence. The producers have really done well to provide a real cross-section of society.

 

Highlights include:

 

Jeffrey Archer smarming up to everyone in the hope that they will all agree with him whenh he reaches his verdict.

 

Stan Collymore and Megaman telling anyone that listens that the girls are blatently lying because previous kiss and tell rape stories never got past the CPS, and that a footballer could have any girl he wanted, and getting pissed off by Portillo telling them that it doesn't make the defendants incapable of rape.

 

Jeffrey Archer trying to do the Barristers work for them, by thinking of things that the barristers didn't ask, and then going to other jury members and asking them questions, such as asking 'the only girl here I can see unwanted men coming onto' Jennifer Ellisson whether she would be able to stop them.

 

Ingrid Tarrant declaring that the alleged victim had been abused by her father, with no apparent evidence, and all the women agreeing with her.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw enough of it to see it for what it really is. Too much of an emphasis on the celebrity jury, who are all (except for that Alex chappie from Blur) preening themselves trying to make sure they look good for the telly...hence my comment about it being like CBB in disguise. Archer's loving his media rehab via this programme - and thanks to the BBC scheduling it as "high brow" entertainment on BBC2, it gains undue credibility.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest optimistic nit

him and piers morgan are really trying their best to rebuild their reputations now after the untold damage done by the media and HIGNFY.

 

piers attempts are like those of a social retard with no sense of common sense whatsoever.

His appearence on 8/10 cats was absolutely brilliant, and a clip of his america show i saw recently was basically him trying to be simon cow, except he doesn't know where the line is (or if it even exists) and made a 15-16 year old boy cry after asking his brother to sack him. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw enough of it to see it for what it really is. Too much of an emphasis on the celebrity jury, who are all (except for that Alex chappie from Blur) preening themselves trying to make sure they look good for the telly...hence my comment about it being like CBB in disguise. Archer's loving his media rehab via this programme - and thanks to the BBC scheduling it as "high brow" entertainment on BBC2, it gains undue credibility.

 

Sorry GM, but didn't you say on Toontastic...

 

Looked quite an interesting programme actually...will probably watch the rest.

 

Changed your mind since others slagged it off have you?  :buck2:

 

I've found it fascinating.  The previous version without celebs was very good, but only lasted one night and offered no insight into the characters on the jury.  This version though provides context for the majority of jurors and makes plain how they bring their own prejudice to the table, how they're able to dominate a discussion (or not) and how important it is not to be swayed by pressure if you're in this position.

 

Only The 12th Man has been a better cautionary tale on the importance of trial by jury and how seriously it should be taken by EVERYT member.

 

If some heat readers were swayed into viewing it because Tinhead's bird is in it, all the better.

 

....and Portillo impresses me more and more every time I see him.  Take away a political agenda and he's a very intelligent, measured bloke.  Henry Fonda if you will.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, HF - no flies on you - I definitely made that comment in the thread over on Toontastic, based on my initial impressions of the show, but I've subsequently had second thoughts about the licence fee being spent on appearance fees for the likes of Archer, Megaman, Collymore, Ellison etc...just doesn't sit quite right with me somehow...so what may seem at first glance to be inconsistency in terms of what I think of the show is probably more a reflection of recognising that (a) it is an interesting programme, dealing with thought-provoking subject matter in an engaging and accessible manner, but also that (b) that despicable snail Archer is getting air-time at the expense of the licence fee paying public, which is fucking annoying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since I don't know what anyone has been paid for appearing, and can find no details of it, it's not something I've considered in viewing.

 

I find Archer showing his warm-hearted side and giving away money on ITV as part of a gameshow that manages somehow to be less difficult and entertaining than Deal or No Deal far more offensive, and that's without my lisence fee paying for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...