The Trial (Channel 4, 9pm, 21/05-25/05)

The Trial (Channel 4, 9pm, 21/05-25/05)

Author
Discussion

Megaflow

9,438 posts

226 months

Monday 5th June 2017
quotequote all
Just caught up on this. I was wavering between 50/50 to completely not guilty. The Lewis factor being the big element of doubt.

I finally went for non guilty based on her being pregnant, almost certainly by Simon. Lewis found out about the affair and the baby and lost it.

I have just finished watching the last episode, and I was wrong.

Very interesting program.

Also glad I am not the only one who thought Lucy was smoking hot.

youngsyr

14,742 posts

193 months

Tuesday 6th June 2017
quotequote all
speedking31 said:
youngsyr said:
... someone clearly strangled her, so if Lewis had a rock solid alibi, the case against Simon would move past a reasonable doubt, IMO.
No possibility of a third person's involvement for you then?
No reasonable possibility of a third person's involvement. People don't get strangled to death in their own home by a complete stranger; it's a passionate crime and when the victim is female, it's typically a current or ex-partner who's responsible.

The lack of any sign of a break in, the lack of any DNA except the husband's, the proximity of the husband and current boyfriend to the scene of the crime at the time, the lack of alibi for either, their history of violence and IMO it's beyond a reasonable doubt that one of them did it.

Edited by youngsyr on Tuesday 6th June 10:34

dai1983

2,916 posts

150 months

Tuesday 6th June 2017
quotequote all
Why the hell did she start having an "affair" with her husband?

youngsyr

14,742 posts

193 months

Tuesday 6th June 2017
quotequote all
Her actions can only be described as "erratic", probably for the purposes of the plot (e.g. continuing to live with a boyfriend she apparently hated for a long period).

bunglesprout

563 posts

92 months

Wednesday 7th June 2017
quotequote all
I've just finished watching this, really enjoyed it. I thought the acting was excellent and very believable. The only character who was a bit 'actorish' and not fully believable was the neighbour who saw the defendant hanging around the back door - back to drama school for you love. The lead defence barrister was hilarious. I was absolutely amazed at some of the jury members, allowing their own pre conceived prejudices to influence their conclusions instead of just looking solely at the evidence. The woman who said 'my instincts are always right' etc etc etc etc was dreadful, and the ex army guy - what a complete and utter bell end.

In the end of course he wasn't found not gulity, and it would no doubt lead to a re trial in real life.