Series Worth Watching

[vanderark14]

12 minutes ago, Fairbairn said:

I really enjoyed it. Totally juvenile humour but funny with it. A couple of episodes are a bit too long but that’s a minor niggle. 

Agree with you, I watched Ted 2 before it and haven't laughed that much for ages

[EddardStark]

On the last episode of series 2 of You on Netflix. Really enjoying it. 

[Alibi]

On to series 3 of Slow Horses - second series was better than the first so hopeful that series 3 will keep up the high standard.  Main problem for me is remembering who everyone is because I'm hopeless at remembering names and faces.  Watch with subtitles because as with most things nowadays, it's often difficult to follow the dialogue.

Also binge watched One Day on Netflix.  Quite good and with a sting in the tail that I realised was about to happen about ten seconds before it happened.  Good soundtrack.

Edited February 14 by Alibi

[StirlingEgg]

Not sure if it's been mentioned already but the Six Nations: Full Contact series on Netflix is worth a watch. England's fly half has a whiff of Alan Partridge about him! Enjoyed the France episode - they sound quite philosophical and practical in their approach before and after matches. Interesting to hear compared to the "let them know what we're about" patter from across the Channel 👀 Their defence coach, Shaun Edwards, throwing in the odd French word in training is funny too. 

[TDYER63]

If you haven’t seen it, Pitch Invasion: How the Scottish and Irish changed football on bbc iplayer is good. Looks back at how Scottish and Irish players and managers made their mark on England. 

[stocky]

On 11/28/2023 at 11:48 AM, slasher said:

We are halfway through season 1 of Kin on iplayer, very good so far 👍

 

Just finished second series, very good 

Might even have been better than first...

[dan cake]

Criminal Record is a good watch, 8 parter about a possible racist/corrupt Met detective (imagine that) starring Peter Capaldi. Obviously fiction but probably could be a documentary given their reputation. 

[Hertsscot]

Just finished watching The Jury on Channel 4, very interesting, worth a watch.

[TDYER63]

11 hours ago, Hertsscot said:

Just finished watching The Jury on Channel 4, very interesting, worth a watch.

I was going to post the same after I had  watched it all . I haven’t seen the final part as I missed the start of it last night and it wasnt being streamed, but I thought it was interesting concept.
Not sure how it ends but its interesting to see how different people interpret things differently and how many use their own experiences to influence their thinking. 

[Fairbairn]

5 hours ago, TDYER63 said:

I was going to post the same after I had  watched it all . I haven’t seen the final part as I missed the start of it last night and it wasnt being streamed, but I thought it was interesting concept.
Not sure how it ends but its interesting to see how different people interpret things differently and how many use their own experiences to influence their thinking. 

The amount of people who had already made their minds up one way or the other at very start mirrored my own experience of jury duty.  I was blue in the face trying to get through to people that it's not what they "think" has happened but what the prosecution can prove has happened. Just because someone looks like a ned doesn't make them guilty.  I mean he was, and massively so, but that's not the point!

[TDYER63]

1 hour ago, Fairbairn said:

The amount of people who had already made their minds up one way or the other at very start mirrored my own experience of jury duty.  I was blue in the face trying to get through to people that it's not what they "think" has happened but what the prosecution can prove has happened. Just because someone looks like a ned doesn't make them guilty.  I mean he was, and massively so, but that's not the point!

😂 I know. I haven’t been on jury duty but am desperate to get on it. Got called up last month but wasn’t selected. Was gutted as I was quite excited about it.

My husband was on it years ago and he was chosen as foreman .  He was saying it was really hard not to make assumptions ,  he had the guy as ‘guilty’’ the minute he walked through the door due to the 6 inch scar down his face and all his henchmen sitting in the gallery. He had to try and disassociate himself from this although the guy was in fact found guilty. He was keechin his breeks when he had to stand up and deliver the decision at the end of the trial 😱. 

I will watch the final part of the programme tonight . The woman in the red dress had him guilty in the first episode without hearing a shred of evidence. She is a carer as well 😆 Though she was changing her mind as time went by. I was changing my mind back and forth too right enough. I think people try to play amateur psychologist  rather than listen to the evidence. 

Totally irrelevant to the court case but has anyone explained why the jurors have the same clothes on every day despite it supposedly being over a week and even filming them having a swally at night in their home ? 😁

[Hertsscot]

I've only been on jury duty once. It was in Chelmsford Crown Court but obviously not the court used in the programme that I think is the old building. Unfortunately due to the defendant's ill health (we heard him being physically sick outside the courtroom) we never reached the point of having to decide whether he was guilty or not.

[TDYER63]

I watched the last part of The Jury  last night. I would have gone with the outcome that the original trial brought if I had been on the jury, my husband the opposite, though I think he could have been talked round .
Would be interesting to hear what @Hertsscot @Fairbairn thought. 

Couple of questions, what did you think of the guy Ricky that was on the jury ? Husband and I both had different opinions of him. 
I think it does show that the current legal system is pretty flawed. I could see people in an actual trial just voting for something when there was no majority because they feel pressured or because they were fed up and just wanting it to end. Thats not the way someone should be tried. 

Denmark system looks good.  Getting trained up to be a professional jury person and paid for a year ! That would be a good wee move into retirement 🤔

[Hertsscot]

Wife and I both went for murder. I guess being schoolteachers just breeds cynicism and a default position of not believing anyone!!

I don't think he set out to kill her, he didn't wake up in the morning thinking I'm going to do her in. Something within him snapped, the issue for me is did that mean he didn't intend to kill her/didn't know what he was doing at the time and I felt there was enough evidence to suggest in the moment he could have stopped. He wasn't a bad person but did something very bad. I would be wanting clarification from the judge on the precise difference between manslaughter and murder.

If Ricky was the big loud mouthed businessman I wasn't a fan but felt he made good points about 'reasonable doubt'. I also felt that whilst, if you're convinced of the verdict you've got every right to argue that, he nonetheless came across as bullying others into sharing his viewpoint.

I did feel that the victim didn't really get fairly represented. She may well have had issues, been manipulative, provoking etc. but I'm not sure whether that was ever challenged. 

It's a reminder that no human system if justice is perfect and hopefully dies open up a discussion about the effectiveness of the jury system. I know there has been some discussion about having juryless trials for some sexual offences and I am sympathetic to that.

[Clootie Dumpling]

I've just watched 3 series of Berlin Station, although I enjoyed it it may not suit everyone.

[TDYER63]

4 hours ago, Hertsscot said:

Wife and I both went for murder. I guess being schoolteachers just breeds cynicism and a default position of not believing anyone!!

I don't think he set out to kill her, he didn't wake up in the morning thinking I'm going to do her in. Something within him snapped, the issue for me is did that mean he didn't intend to kill her/didn't know what he was doing at the time and I felt there was enough evidence to suggest in the moment he could have stopped. He wasn't a bad person but did something very bad. I would be wanting clarification from the judge on the precise difference between manslaughter and murder.

If Ricky was the big loud mouthed businessman I wasn't a fan but felt he made good points about 'reasonable doubt'. I also felt that whilst, if you're convinced of the verdict you've got every right to argue that, he nonetheless came across as bullying others into sharing his viewpoint.

I did feel that the victim didn't really get fairly represented. She may well have had issues, been manipulative, provoking etc. but I'm not sure whether that was ever challenged. 

It's a reminder that no human system if justice is perfect and hopefully dies open up a discussion about the effectiveness of the jury system. I know there has been some discussion about having juryless trials for some sexual offences and I am sympathetic to that.

SPOILER ALERT !!
 

Interesting.

I could not go for murder as I truly did not know if a ‘reasonable person’ would have done the same as no one knows what mindset he was in nor what a reasonable person would have done in that position. I actually think its a pretty unfair thing to expect a jury of normal punters to be making a  decision on this. 
If I was to have doubt it would probably be the fact he pulled himself back from strangling her to death and finished it with a hammer. But I dont know enough about psychology to know what happens when someone really loses it to the point of being totally out of control of their actions, or for how long.

Yes, Ricky was the big guy. The reason I asked was because my initial impression of him before he even uttered a word was ‘thug’. That was me making a judgement of an actual jury member. But I ended up really liking him and thought he had a very logical thought process. My husband didn’t like him and thought he seemed a bit of a bully whereas I saw a strong character that was probably needed or they would never have come to a decision. 

I thought the other jury had no one like him and thats why it wasn’t unanimous on their end . I felt the young girl who ended up making the ‘10’ required was kinda pushed into that decision in the same way some would argue that Ricky had pressured some on his jury. Both situations are hardly ideal when it comes to deciding someones fate. 

At the end it mentioned that the victims family were disappointed that they weren’t given a chance to speak at the trial. Why would that be ? She was the victim, I don’t really understand that . I am assuming they are meaning the real trial and not this mock up. 

[TDYER63]

Ps Still don’t understand why the jury had the same clothes on every episode when it was supposed to be over a number of days.  I only noticed in the second episode when the woman in the bright red dress had it on again, so I made a point of checking what others were wearing,  and none of them had changed clothes the entire series 🤔

[Hertsscot]

4 hours ago, TDYER63 said:

Ps Still don’t understand why the jury had the same clothes on every episode when it was supposed to be over a number of days.  I only noticed in the second episode when the woman in the bright red dress had it on again, so I made a point of checking what others were wearing,  and none of them had changed clothes the entire series 🤔

We noticed that as well. Did they actually shoot it over four days? In my very limited experience of jury duty it was very drawn out. I know they used the actual words of the trial but I wonder if they were edited down in order to fit things into less than four hours.

[Hertsscot]

4 hours ago, TDYER63 said:

I thought the other jury had no one like him and thats why it wasn’t unanimous on their end . I felt the young girl who ended up making the ‘10’ required was kinda pushed into that decision in the same way some would argue that Ricky had pressured some on his jury.

I would agree with that. I felt on the whole that jury was more reasoned up to that point, not projecting their own emotions and listening more to one another. However at the end, given the gravity of the decision they needed to make there was a feeling of 'Oh, come on you're letting us all down. Just make a decision so we can all get home for our tea'!

[TDYER63]

13 hours ago, Hertsscot said:

We noticed that as well. Did they actually shoot it over four days? In my very limited experience of jury duty it was very drawn out. I know they used the actual words of the trial but I wonder if they were edited down in order to fit things into less than four hours.

They showed footage of the jurors saying ‘goodnight’ and at home having a wee glass of wine and the voice over person was saying things like ‘ this is day three’.
You would think they would have said at the start , ‘ the real trial lasted ‘x’ amount of days but we have removed unnecessary scenes and filmed it all in one day.
To do otherwise sort of undermines the whole thing . 
Friends of mine took part in a TV show years ago, it was called A Place By the Sea. They wanted a house In Rothesay and took part in one of these shows that try to get you a house. It was shot over 4 days but it was supposed to look like it was all done in a day so they had to buy 4 identical set of clothes and wear them every day 😆 
You would have thought they would just do the opposite in this case if it was all filmed in a day. 

[TDYER63]

13 hours ago, Hertsscot said:

I would agree with that. I felt on the whole that jury was more reasoned up to that point, not projecting their own emotions and listening more to one another. However at the end, given the gravity of the decision they needed to make there was a feeling of 'Oh, come on you're letting us all down. Just make a decision so we can all get home for our tea'!

I know. It makes me hope I am never dependant on a jury making a decision on my fate at any time in my life 😫

[StirlingEgg]

2 hours ago, TDYER63 said:

I know. It makes me hope I am never dependant on a jury making a decision on my fate at any time in my life 😫

I did jury duty once at the Sheriff Court. The Michael Jackson trial was on at the same time so quite a few of the other jurors were more interested in discussing that or when they could get a fag break. They got a bit rowdy at times, having a bit of a laugh and at one point a clerk came in to tell them to keep it down as could be heard in the courtroom. Was quite mortifying given the defendant would have been wondering about his fate with all the carry on in earshot. The verdict was Not Proven and I was relieved about that based on the case details. I ended up friends with one of the other jurors but it did make me think about the impact of the decision and how I wouldn't like to be involved in a more serious case. 

[Orraloon]

On 3/2/2024 at 11:16 AM, TDYER63 said:

I watched the last part of The Jury  last night. I would have gone with the outcome that the original trial brought if I had been on the jury, my husband the opposite, though I think he could have been talked round .
Would be interesting to hear what @Hertsscot @Fairbairn thought. 

Couple of questions, what did you think of the guy Ricky that was on the jury ? Husband and I both had different opinions of him. 
I think it does show that the current legal system is pretty flawed. I could see people in an actual trial just voting for something when there was no majority because they feel pressured or because they were fed up and just wanting it to end. Thats not the way someone should be tried. 

Denmark system looks good.  Getting trained up to be a professional jury person and paid for a year ! That would be a good wee move into retirement 🤔

I watched the first episode. What a pile of over dramatised, unrealistic nonsense. Won't be watching any more. 

[TDYER63]

23 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

I watched the first episode. What a pile of over dramatised, unrealistic nonsense. Won't be watching any more. 

Other than that did you enjoy it ?? …

Of course its over dramatised, these fly on the wall shows are all like this. I enjoyed it despite all that, I thought it brought up pretty pertinent questions about the ability of jurys on trials like this. Over dramatic or not I  think jury members are absolutely influenced by things other than facts. 

[Hertsscot]

2 hours ago, TDYER63 said:

Other than that did you enjoy it ?? …

Of course its over dramatised, these fly on the wall shows are all like this. I enjoyed it despite all that, I thought it brought up pretty pertinent questions about the ability of jurys on trials like this. Over dramatic or not I  think jury members are absolutely influenced by things other than facts. 

I'm with you on that. They used the actual transcript from the trial. They obviously sped things up a bit, edited things out. Iirc it was meant to be a four day trial, not less than four hours! Nonetheless, and the lawyers also said this, it gave an insight into the jury system that we usually aren't privy to, and raises some serious questions about it.