The ITV Drama

[Roch]

no i will just be interested to know what others think that haven’t read about it. i’m wondering what i would think watching it if i hadn’t read about it. i’m not saying i know as much as many on here but i know what i have read about has made me feel as though he may be innocent. if i were to be watching the docu series and hadn’t read anything about it what would i think then?

I would say it's shrewd management of the case by those interested in such management.  It will create many new guilters, who previously had no opinion. It will also reinforce the view of existing guilters, who go by the usual touted line from the police in the case. Whoever is actually behind it being commissioned or has shaped it along the way (with a deliberate strategy of blanking the defence) is both brazen and shrewd.  They're clearly aware of the value of public opinion, which I have long said is crucial in this case. It's hardly a level playing field either is it? Since no defence based program can progress past the embargo that's in place.

[JackieD]

I would say it's shrewd management of the case by those interested in such management.  It will create many new guilters, who previously had no opinion. It will also reinforce the view of existing guilters, who go by the usual touted line from the police in the case. Whoever is actually behind it being commissioned or has shaped it along the way (with a deliberate strategy of blanking the defence) is both brazen and shrewd.  They're clearly aware of the value of public opinion, which I have long said is crucial in this case. It's hardly a level playing field either is it? Since no defence based program can progress past the embargo that's in place.

It’s scary that’s what it is

[David1819]

That is the way I understood it also. There have been a few scenes which I suspect never happened. Like Jeremy giving a speech to the press waiting outside the Coroner's Court after the verdict. I am pretty sure that never happened, although I haven't been able to find information it.

That's how I have understood it.

This is how CAL has put it on page 217 of her book.

"After Ann and Anthony arrived, something explosive passed between the group, although precise details have never emerged. Later, Ann would only say that they ‘must have accused Jeremy’ since he ‘showed the first sign of real emotion’ as they brought their simmering suspicions about him into the open."

What's interesting is that she does not actually cite the AE's 1991 COLP statement for this. But that is certainly were she got it from. Was it a sincere misinterpretation or a deliberate splicing of statements?

I will give her the benefit of the doubt.

[David1819]

I would say it's shrewd management of the case by those interested in such management.  It will create many new guilters, who previously had no opinion. It will also reinforce the view of existing guilters, who go by the usual touted line from the police in the case. Whoever is actually behind it being commissioned or has shaped it along the way (with a deliberate strategy of blanking the defence) is both brazen and shrewd.  They're clearly aware of the value of public opinion, which I have long said is crucial in this case. It's hardly a level playing field either is it? Since no defence based program can progress past the embargo that's in place.

Its being shaped by CALs "murder porn" book.

If the CT were not going on about Nevills 999 call or Sheila calling an ambulance at 6am they may not have been blanked. As its stands It would have been impossible to work them.

[Adam]

Nevill calling Jeremy. Nevill calling Chelmsford police. Sheila calling 999.

All go.

[Caroline]

I would say it's shrewd management of the case by those interested in such management.  It will create many new guilters, who previously had no opinion. It will also reinforce the view of existing guilters, who go by the usual touted line from the police in the case. Whoever is actually behind it being commissioned or has shaped it along the way (with a deliberate strategy of blanking the defence) is both brazen and shrewd.  They're clearly aware of the value of public opinion, which I have long said is crucial in this case. It's hardly a level playing field either is it? Since no defence based program can progress past the embargo that's in place.

None has been put forward or do you know different?

[Roch]

Its being shaped by CALs "murder porn" book.

If the CT were not going on about Nevills 999 call or Sheila calling an ambulance at 6am they may not have been blanked. As its stands It would have been impossible to work them.

I have some empathy for this view but I believe there's more to it than just plain old pro-police CAL. And why would the defence want a drama produced anyway? Surely It would have to more of a docu that allows the police to counter? They may come out on top re the two things you mention but some other stuff is not do easily explained.

[notsure]

i can’t imagine why the police let CAL see it all but won’t let jb , not fair imo

[Caroline]

i can’t imagine why the police let CAL see it all but won’t let jb , not fair imo

I don't think she saw any withheld files Notsure (if any exist).

[David1819]

I have some empathy for this view but I believe there's more to it than just plain old pro-police CAL. And why would the defence want a drama produced anyway? Surely It would have to more of a docu that allows the police to counter? They may come out on top re the two things you mention but some other stuff is not do easily explained.

Nevills 999 call and Shiela's ambulance call should never be in a true crime drama or documentary because they are proven false and just harms the defences credibility.

The authorities would not want anymore attention brought to this case. This show is not actually showing who was behind the trigger anyway.

Come to think of it. The format of this show has Sheila dead from the beginning. All they can do now is assassinate JBs character with hyperbole and half truths to imply to the audience that it was him. If they didn't do this then they wouldn't have a show or it would be a very boring one with bad reviews.

[notsure]

crickey I agree with you David

[lookout]

There are heaps of issues which have been omitted from that drama, which could have been condensed to give the viewer an overall idea of the much bigger picture than is presented.

[JackieD]

None has been put forward or do you know different?

Wrong

[JackieD]

I have some empathy for this view but I believe there's more to it than just plain old pro-police CAL. And why would the defence want a drama produced anyway? Surely It would have to more of a docu that allows the police to counter? They may come out on top re the two things you mention but some other stuff is not do easily explained.

I think there should be something on the case from a legal point of view. The legal discussion, a jury that could have been on the case and the biggest thing of disclosure

The general public would be horrified regarding this

There must be someone around with a legal background who would pitch the idea

[sami]

Nevills 999 call and Shiela's ambulance call should never be in a true crime drama or documentary because they are proven false and just harms the defences credibility.

The authorities would not want anymore attention brought to this case. This show is not actually showing who was behind the trigger anyway.

Come to think of it. The format of this show has Sheila dead from the beginning. All they can do now is assassinate JBs character with hyperbole and half truths to imply to the audience that it was him. If they didn't do this then they wouldn't have a show or it would be a very boring one with bad reviews.

sour grapes come to mind,dear dear