You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Alapa on Ellen Director
New member
Oh I love Rupert Graves...he just isn't on my telly nearly enough!!
Lara maree
New member
No repeat indicated on the Sky EPG I'm afraid - just next weeks episode on ITV 1.
powerranger69
New member
They didn't accept that as they wanted to prove that he'd deliberately stopped taking his tablets, despite knowing what could happen if he did. Therefore, whilst in a balanced state of mind, he'd taken a decision, rationally, that lead to the murders.
Absolutely loving this, and Bradley Walsh is spot on as Ronnie Brookes
Absolutely loving this, and Bradley Walsh is spot on as Ronnie Brookes
Just watched the relevant section on ITV Player and can confirm the defence submitted a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity which the CPS boss, George, wanted to accept. The prosecutors, James Steel & Alesha Phillips said if they accepted the plea he would only be retained in a secure unit until they could claim he was sane enough to be released, and if he started to take his medication he could be out in a week. The CPS refused the plea to force the trial.
hotgyalnicky
New member
has this show been any good? i've just started watching it, and so far not impressed with Bradley Walsh's acting.
Mars Turrez
New member
Wish they'd start using some uk or original stories
snowbd122006
New member
I'm sorry to say the plot of last night's episode made no sense to me. They couldn't prosecute the priest for abusing children because they had no evidence, so they prosecuted him for manslaughter on the grounds that the victim had PTSD caused by the abuse - so didn't they realise they would still need evidence to show that the priest abused him in the first place?
(Then when they prosecuted him on 44 charges of abusing children, please tell me that some of those 44 people gave evidence against him and the whole case didn't hinge on Jamie Bamber's hearsay evidence?)
(Then when they prosecuted him on 44 charges of abusing children, please tell me that some of those 44 people gave evidence against him and the whole case didn't hinge on Jamie Bamber's hearsay evidence?)
I've mentioned elsewhere the nonsense at the beginning of this.
The forensic team "found" the bullet in a tree...a...hundred..yards..away. "What were the chances of that happening?" (anyway, doubtful if a bullet from an ordinary hand gun would have travelled that far after passing through someone's skull and stick in a tree)
They matched it with the gun.
The tragectory of the shot meant it could only have been self-inflicted.
As Ricky Tomlinson would say...........
I couldn't be bothered to watch any more.
That story line was so rubbish it wouldn't have been used on CSI Miami. At least that's funny.
The forensic team "found" the bullet in a tree...a...hundred..yards..away. "What were the chances of that happening?" (anyway, doubtful if a bullet from an ordinary hand gun would have travelled that far after passing through someone's skull and stick in a tree)
They matched it with the gun.
The tragectory of the shot meant it could only have been self-inflicted.
As Ricky Tomlinson would say...........
I couldn't be bothered to watch any more.
That story line was so rubbish it wouldn't have been used on CSI Miami. At least that's funny.