Discussion
Interesting. I was aware of the case but didn't know much about it. In the courtroom although it was obviously really dodgy from his lack of logic in changing answers, it felt like they didn't have conclusive evidence - but the jury must have felt like everyone from ITV was saying that he just didn't play it like anyone normally would.
illmonkey said:
From what they showed, I don’t think they were guilty! But I’m sure there is a lot more to it
A lot more of what? If the programme was at all representative of the court case I am astonished that a jury could find them guilty based on the defence which I thought was terrific. Interesting point about the number of coughs in the film of the other million winner and also that ITV were relying on 19 coughs out of a total of over 190. Ingram was supposed to have been able to pick out the cough of one man whom he had never met. The whole ITV case seems to have been based on little more than a hunch.
Edited by lockhart flawse on Thursday 16th April 09:43
lockhart flawse said:
illmonkey said:
From what they showed, I don’t think they were guilty! But I’m sure there is a lot more to it
A lot more of what? If the programme was at all representative of the court case I am astonished that a jury could find them guilty based on the defence which I thought was terrific. Interesting point about the number of coughs in the film of the other million winner and also that ITV were relying on 19 coughs out of a total of over 160. Ingram was supposed to have been able to pick out the cough of one man whom he had never met. The whole ITV case seems to have been based on little more than a hunch.
Hub said:
Interesting. I was aware of the case but didn't know much about it. In the courtroom although it was obviously really dodgy from his lack of logic in changing answers, it felt like they didn't have conclusive evidence - but the jury must have felt like everyone from ITV was saying that he just didn't play it like anyone normally would.
But if he was listing answers aloud and listening for audience reactions to each one to get a clue, that would not be cheating IMHO. Also of course, it's not as if the phantom cougher had access to google or a list of answers, the most he could do was give an opinion. So even if he was trying to be helpful it's a bit borderline. Guffy said:
The show included dialogue between the Ingram's where they knew nothing about the alleged scam, so the show is clearly trying to steer the viewer to a not guilty verdict?
Based on the programme, I'm surprised there wasn't enough doubt for a not guilty verdict.
I was quite surprised how the outcome didn't match the defence.Based on the programme, I'm surprised there wasn't enough doubt for a not guilty verdict.
Her last statement was pretty damning and after that, they didn't really have any proof. Obviously they had to play it out like the real story but it seemed to go from 100% not guilty verdict to 100% guilty straight away.
They had Chris Tarrant on the radio this morning (Chris Moyles Show on Radio X), he basically said that although it made a good "drama programme", it wasn't really true to life, and they only depicted the defense wind up, and didn't put anything in for the prosecution wind up. Apparently it was a very well put together summation (obviously as it resulted in guilty), but they completely passed it over in order to leave viewers feeling doubt in their minds. Listen to the interview, Chris Tarrant is more than convinced of his guilt.
Also, not long afterwards Ingram was convicted of fraud in an unrelated case. Sorry, but he's dodgy scum and definitely guilty, no sympathy from me
Also, not long afterwards Ingram was convicted of fraud in an unrelated case. Sorry, but he's dodgy scum and definitely guilty, no sympathy from me
It was a light entertainment programme; you really can't form a view of the outcome of a trial based on a few minutes of a dramatised defence closing speech. I suspect there was a significant amount of (boring ie not suitable for tv entertainment) detailed evidence that the jury considered that led them to a guilty verdict.
V8covin said:
Going solely off the tv version of events there's no doubt in my mind they were planning on cheating but they largely failed and the Major won the million because he's an extremely lucky man....and not that bright
And yet he got into MENSA (?) Some general observations:
It was claimed Tecwen had a medical condition re coughing, but did he cough during his own appearance ? (err.. No!)
I'm not sure we ever did hear a good reason why Diana contacted Tecwen
Episode 3 showed Charles & Diana cribbing up for his appearance, but an earlier episode indicated that she got him into the show without asking him.
How long do you get from acceptance to filming I wonder ?
His defence lawyer claimed he didn't need help on some of the Q's because he was - I forget the phrase she used - a good quizzer, but in reality, the show indicated he wasn't, it was the wife & BiL who were.
He didn't appear to even know what a 'suspended' sentence was (or thats what the show claimed) !!!
All through his show appearance, he struggled....
So did Charles have the pagers strapped to him on the first day? - we'll never know, but it sure is suspicious that Adrian tried to apparantly use his mobile phone (according to the show)
Vaguely remember this from the time, just assumed he was guilty ever since and thought this was just going to be a retelling showing that.
Read a few of his tweets he's been making since and feel like I should watch this now.
Read a few of his tweets he's been making since and feel like I should watch this now.
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff