>>The first comment I want to make may offend those of my f-list in the UK: I find I have a lot less consideration for British jurisprudence and processes now than I did before I started. I mean!! Allowing a verdict with less than 100% agreement among the jury?? In the US, the verdict at the end of this one would never have been presented. Instead, we would have had a "hung" jury, meaning either the prosecution decided to try the case all over again with a new jury (and both sides knowing all the nasty little bits of info that were going to come out this time) or the case would be summarily dismissed. >>
Well it effectively was dismissed. Personally I have very little faith in juries, they're morons. They make stupid decisions. I'd say let people with at least a masters in something academic like criminology be jurors, not lay people and not bloody lawyers. Yes it sucks if they can't all reach consensus but sometimes it's a bigger waste of resources to re try a case rather than go with a majority opinion. The US just jailed a woman for having a miscarriage and teachers for fudging standardized testing to help their downtrodden student out, with crazy long sentences. Both judicial systems can be a mess, but the British one has much more humanity and common sense.
>>I get it that the entire investigation had been bungled - even though it didn't quite seem that way when watching it unfold. >>
Heh, it did to me, but I thought 'oh it's TV, so there wil be no consequences for the bad policing' -- was pleasantly surprised to be wrong. In the end I wanted Joe to get off, not cause the massive wanker deserved a break, just cause it was gutsy storytelling, and audiences are always lulled into thinking 'oh whatever this is just drama, they wouldn't actually let a child killer walk'
>>with Ellie's ability to visit with Joe while in custody - although her attack on him was definitely a bungle. It could have been painted more sympathetically if Ellie had remembered that she flew off the handle when Joe, after expressing remorse for what he'd done to Danny, asked to see Tom. A mother's instinct to protect her child was behind her rage there - where was the prosecution pushing that interpretation? >>
Yep you are right, the prosecution dropped the ball over and over.
>>I have decided I do not like the character of Beth Latimer. She's shallow, quick to judge and use cruelty in her interactions with others. Yes, she's grieving, hormone-challenged after the birth of her new baby, and betrayed by a cheating husband; but she behaves in a totally unhinged manner, striking out at anyone in reach. Jodie Whittaker is a darned good actress to make me dislike her otherwise sympathetic character so much. >>
Completely agree! Am stoked to find someone else of this opinion cause yeah, I didn't just dislike her, I was bored by her scenes because I was so disengaged from her in S2. Excellent actress though! >> If there was a sympathetic character, it was Paul Coates. He really buys into his religion, and was trying to get Joe to repent and deal straight-forward with his guilt. Priests are called upon to minister even to the least-deserving, and Paul truly tried. It was satisfying, however, to see Paul slowly realize that Joe was being anything but honest - either with himself or with anybody else - and trying to weasel his way out of paying for what he'd done. Paul walking away from Joe in the jail, and then being present at the very end when Joe was faced with the township's united censure and expulsion of him, felt right and good. I'm also glad he's free of Becca Fisher, who seems now to be more of a town floozy without any sense of common sense or decorum.>>
I wish we could have had more time for Paul, even Becca. I was invested in these characters already. What I didn't need or care for was having the backstory of a bunch of alternately evil and incompetent lawyers cluttering up the screen time, I really couldn't have cared less. Same thing with the Susan Wright stuff, it went nowhere and I suspect that was at least in part because of all the time wasted on the lawyers' relatives *yawn* I mean as a character we may not like Susan, but she's interesting. Now we don't even know if she was lying about being fatally ill!
no subject
Well it effectively was dismissed. Personally I have very little faith in juries, they're morons. They make stupid decisions. I'd say let people with at least a masters in something academic like criminology be jurors, not lay people and not bloody lawyers. Yes it sucks if they can't all reach consensus but sometimes it's a bigger waste of resources to re try a case rather than go with a majority opinion. The US just jailed a woman for having a miscarriage and teachers for fudging standardized testing to help their downtrodden student out, with crazy long sentences. Both judicial systems can be a mess, but the British one has much more humanity and common sense.
>>I get it that the entire investigation had been bungled - even though it didn't quite seem that way when watching it unfold. >>
Heh, it did to me, but I thought 'oh it's TV, so there wil be no consequences for the bad policing' -- was pleasantly surprised to be wrong. In the end I wanted Joe to get off, not cause the massive wanker deserved a break, just cause it was gutsy storytelling, and audiences are always lulled into thinking 'oh whatever this is just drama, they wouldn't actually let a child killer walk'
>>with Ellie's ability to visit with Joe while in custody - although her attack on him was definitely a bungle. It could have been painted more sympathetically if Ellie had remembered that she flew off the handle when Joe, after expressing remorse for what he'd done to Danny, asked to see Tom. A mother's instinct to protect her child was behind her rage there - where was the prosecution pushing that interpretation? >>
Yep you are right, the prosecution dropped the ball over and over.
>>I have decided I do not like the character of Beth Latimer. She's shallow, quick to judge and use cruelty in her interactions with others. Yes, she's grieving, hormone-challenged after the birth of her new baby, and betrayed by a cheating husband; but she behaves in a totally unhinged manner, striking out at anyone in reach. Jodie Whittaker is a darned good actress to make me dislike her otherwise sympathetic character so much. >>
Completely agree! Am stoked to find someone else of this opinion cause yeah, I didn't just dislike her, I was bored by her scenes because I was so disengaged from her in S2. Excellent actress though!
>>
If there was a sympathetic character, it was Paul Coates. He really buys into his religion, and was trying to get Joe to repent and deal straight-forward with his guilt. Priests are called upon to minister even to the least-deserving, and Paul truly tried. It was satisfying, however, to see Paul slowly realize that Joe was being anything but honest - either with himself or with anybody else - and trying to weasel his way out of paying for what he'd done. Paul walking away from Joe in the jail, and then being present at the very end when Joe was faced with the township's united censure and expulsion of him, felt right and good. I'm also glad he's free of Becca Fisher, who seems now to be more of a town floozy without any sense of common sense or decorum.>>
I wish we could have had more time for Paul, even Becca. I was invested in these characters already. What I didn't need or care for was having the backstory of a bunch of alternately evil and incompetent lawyers cluttering up the screen time, I really couldn't have cared less. Same thing with the Susan Wright stuff, it went nowhere and I suspect that was at least in part because of all the time wasted on the lawyers' relatives *yawn* I mean as a character we may not like Susan, but she's interesting. Now we don't even know if she was lying about being fatally ill!