What was the result? I watched all week then fell asleep last night before it came on!!

Last nights show was just a catch up, the verdict is tonight. I still have not made up my mind !

Nah, It's got perjuring, ex convict, prostitute afficionado Lord Archer on it. After he was rude to my missus I refuse to watch the odious slime ball ...... This said I do keep an eye out for the oik coming to Sheffield so I can properly remonstrate with the ermin clad urchin.

You have such a lovely way with words SV :D

So they decide tonight if those 2 men are guilty or not??

So they decide tonight if those 2 men are guilty or not??


Yes, tonights the night. Apparantly, it all kicks off in the jury room between Colleymore, Mace and Archer !!!

I dont like that Stan, he seems very pushy and I think he had had his mind made up from day 1

I dont like that Stan, he seems very pushy and I think he had had his mind made up from day 1

He is very rude and pushy (especially to women) but I think he has a clever brain. Maybe he is a little too attached to the case as he was a footballer once and said he can see how easy it is for these guys to get caught out. I KNOW it's not a real case before anyone gets on their high horse.

Enjoy tonight.

I missed the first episode but it's interesting. The jury discussions are a sort of thinking person's Big Brother.

It is interesting but Stan is just annoying. I agree that he is a clever person but he is just too pushy he thinks everyone should think the same as him - which of course is never going to happen as everyones different.

Stan???isn't he the footballer who beat his then girlfriend ulrika johnson up in a bar? Then it also came out that he liked to go dogging?
I think he's the last person that should be on the jury' he probably gets a kick out of the whole thing!!!

did anyone esle watch it? what did you think? I would have found them not guilty on all counts because i had doubt in my mind. What about you, guilty or not guilty?

*Jury, i meant jury not jurr

Will we ever get to find out what really "happened"?

Will we ever get to find out what really "happened"?

Would have been interesting at the end to see what the counsel and the judge made of the the verdict.

They got off as, although the majority of the jury thought they were guilty they didn't believe the prosecution proved the case. I did think the prosecution could have been more robust really.

I'd have come to the decision of Count 1 - not guilty, the other 3 Counts - guilty as charged. Just hope I never have to do Jury Service ... too much of a responsibility. :|

I didnt watch it ,as i didnt like any of the Celebs on the jury. :gag:

I didn't watch it, because I'd have found it impossible to take seriously. We KNOW it didn't happen; the victim and defendant were actors. Ergo, nobody is guilty of anything.

It strikes me as actually being a good idea in some ways to do this sort of project, but I don't see how it can BE done and taken seriously, given that you can't ask someone to commit a vicious crime just in order to make a TV programme of it.

I'd have loved for someone on the first night to say "alright Archer, what's it feel like to be on this side of the dock for once?" :)

did anyone esle watch it? what did you think? I would have found them not guilty on all counts because i had doubt in my mind. What about you, guilty or not guilty?

*Jury, i meant jury not jurr

I also found them not gulity based on the prosecution evidence, it left doubts in my mind. Good insite into the dilemas faced by a jury.

QUOTE=rubydazzler;1958415]Would have been interesting at the end to see what the counsel and the judge made of the the verdict.
[/QUOTE]
We did hear some comments from the prosecution barrister. She said that the jury probably did come to the right decision based on strict standards of evidence. She thought that there was some doubt about the first charge but the defendants were likely to have been guilty of the others. (The jury's only major split, however, was on the first count).

The format of the programme was interesting, although the case was fictional. This jury, like most real ones, obviously put a lot of thought and care into reaching their decision.

I think it was a good insight into how hard it is for jury's to make the right verdict. I belive those boys were guilty but like they said - there wasnt enough evidence to prove it. I would have liked them to say if they were in fact guilty or not

i would have said counts 1 & 2 guilty, counts 3 & 4 not guility.

If memory serves me right by a majoity verdict not guilty on any charges.