*/
Four-part drama series about the 1970s criminal justice system: A Detective’s Tale; A Villain’s Tale; A Brief’s Tale; and A Prisoner’s Tale
This spring, the BBC re-broadcast Law and Order, its 1978 dramatic series depicting the criminal justice system. It was written by the then 31-year old G F Newman who would go on to script the far glossier if enjoyably implausible Judge John Deed. It stands up remarkably well.
The basic story is straightforward. The police are tipped off by informers about an impending armed robbery. They try but fail to catch the criminals on the spot, but they nevertheless arrest four men one of whom was not there. The defendants stand trial but the man who wasn’t there is the only one convicted. He begins his long sentence. The focus shifts in each, overlapping episode duly called A Detective’s Tale, A Villain’s Tale, A Brief’s Tale and A Prisoner’s Tale. The wealth of physical detail comes across through a very immediate, naturalistic, documentary style of filming. The camera and the audience are right there in the room with the characters. We smell the pubs and the courtroom almost as easily we hear the clack of manual typewriters. The only drawback is the amount of mumbling. You get the idea even if you have no idea what the actor just said.
The controversy at the time was the casual way in which the series depicted corruption. The shock is the utterly matter of fact way the police go about doing things – it is their way and they get away with it. Interviews with suspects take place before the arrested man is allowed to see his solicitor, not before. They begin with ‘you’re a villain, sit down and we’ll see how you shape up’. ‘You help the system and the system will help you’ is another inducement. A man in possession of a gun does what he’s told, to avoid prosecution. The police take money to drop a case. If they get investigated, their mates will do what they can to help them out.
"The controversy at the time was the casual way in which the series depicted corruption. The shock is the utterly matter of fact way the police go about doing things – it is their way and they get away with it"
Jack Lynn, the main villain at the centre of the story, is fitted up by the police because ‘it’s his turn’. Evidence is planted (hairs in a Balaclava he didn’t wear) while other evidence is suppressed. The lawyers are as bad as the police. Indeed the two are on excellent terms, and will cut a deal when it suits them, even if it does not suit the man in the dock. ‘I’d like to see if we can do business with the Old Bill, I know Inspector Pyle [of the Flying Squad], he’s accessible,’ Lynn is legally advised. Lynn is also told that his case is too complicated to be done on legal aid and the barrister he should instruct won’t accept a publicly funded brief. The lawyers who conduct his appeal promise him that it will succeed but it duly fails. His Old Bailey trial is a version of business as usual. The officer stands in the witness box and denies under cross-examination any wrong doing in the investigation. Afterwards he goes across to the pub and has a drink with Lynn’s solicitor. The latter is happy to take the case of the officer’s ‘well-liked mate’ aka a bent copper. Needless to say, the judge is wholly prejudiced. Throughout this is an almost exclusively male world. Women appear only at the fringes.
Two of Lynn’s many drawbacks are his temper and his big mouth. In prison he constantly misbehaves, culminating in a failed attempt at escaping. After that the authorities spend six months breaking his spirit utterly until finally he is docile. The prison sequence ironically is the least shocking to us. True, there is slopping out, the warders are sadistic and the prisoners are allowed to gang rape (off camera) a sex offender. Unlike our own times, though, there is no overcrowding, the prisoners spend most of the day out of their cells and the place is not high on recreational drugs.
The performances are completely believable. Did actors really have such different looking faces and bodies back then? It is an era worth remembering. Our own problems of criminal justice are different but no less real.
Reviewer: David Wurtzel, Bencher of Middle Temple and member of the Counsel Editorial Board
This spring, the BBC re-broadcast Law and Order, its 1978 dramatic series depicting the criminal justice system. It was written by the then 31-year old G F Newman who would go on to script the far glossier if enjoyably implausible Judge John Deed. It stands up remarkably well.
The basic story is straightforward. The police are tipped off by informers about an impending armed robbery. They try but fail to catch the criminals on the spot, but they nevertheless arrest four men one of whom was not there. The defendants stand trial but the man who wasn’t there is the only one convicted. He begins his long sentence. The focus shifts in each, overlapping episode duly called A Detective’s Tale, A Villain’s Tale, A Brief’s Tale and A Prisoner’s Tale. The wealth of physical detail comes across through a very immediate, naturalistic, documentary style of filming. The camera and the audience are right there in the room with the characters. We smell the pubs and the courtroom almost as easily we hear the clack of manual typewriters. The only drawback is the amount of mumbling. You get the idea even if you have no idea what the actor just said.
The controversy at the time was the casual way in which the series depicted corruption. The shock is the utterly matter of fact way the police go about doing things – it is their way and they get away with it. Interviews with suspects take place before the arrested man is allowed to see his solicitor, not before. They begin with ‘you’re a villain, sit down and we’ll see how you shape up’. ‘You help the system and the system will help you’ is another inducement. A man in possession of a gun does what he’s told, to avoid prosecution. The police take money to drop a case. If they get investigated, their mates will do what they can to help them out.
"The controversy at the time was the casual way in which the series depicted corruption. The shock is the utterly matter of fact way the police go about doing things – it is their way and they get away with it"
Jack Lynn, the main villain at the centre of the story, is fitted up by the police because ‘it’s his turn’. Evidence is planted (hairs in a Balaclava he didn’t wear) while other evidence is suppressed. The lawyers are as bad as the police. Indeed the two are on excellent terms, and will cut a deal when it suits them, even if it does not suit the man in the dock. ‘I’d like to see if we can do business with the Old Bill, I know Inspector Pyle [of the Flying Squad], he’s accessible,’ Lynn is legally advised. Lynn is also told that his case is too complicated to be done on legal aid and the barrister he should instruct won’t accept a publicly funded brief. The lawyers who conduct his appeal promise him that it will succeed but it duly fails. His Old Bailey trial is a version of business as usual. The officer stands in the witness box and denies under cross-examination any wrong doing in the investigation. Afterwards he goes across to the pub and has a drink with Lynn’s solicitor. The latter is happy to take the case of the officer’s ‘well-liked mate’ aka a bent copper. Needless to say, the judge is wholly prejudiced. Throughout this is an almost exclusively male world. Women appear only at the fringes.
Two of Lynn’s many drawbacks are his temper and his big mouth. In prison he constantly misbehaves, culminating in a failed attempt at escaping. After that the authorities spend six months breaking his spirit utterly until finally he is docile. The prison sequence ironically is the least shocking to us. True, there is slopping out, the warders are sadistic and the prisoners are allowed to gang rape (off camera) a sex offender. Unlike our own times, though, there is no overcrowding, the prisoners spend most of the day out of their cells and the place is not high on recreational drugs.
The performances are completely believable. Did actors really have such different looking faces and bodies back then? It is an era worth remembering. Our own problems of criminal justice are different but no less real.
Reviewer: David Wurtzel, Bencher of Middle Temple and member of the Counsel Editorial Board
Four-part drama series about the 1970s criminal justice system: A Detective’s Tale; A Villain’s Tale; A Brief’s Tale; and A Prisoner’s Tale
The Chair of the Bar sets out how the new government can restore the justice system
In the first of a new series, Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth considers the fundamental need for financial protection
Unlocking your aged debt to fund your tax in one easy step. By Philip N Bristow
Possibly, but many barristers are glad he did…
Mental health charity Mind BWW has received a £500 donation from drug, alcohol and DNA testing laboratory, AlphaBiolabs as part of its Giving Back campaign
The Institute of Neurotechnology & Law is thrilled to announce its inaugural essay competition
How to navigate open source evidence in an era of deepfakes. By Professor Yvonne McDermott Rees and Professor Alexa Koenig
Brie Stevens-Hoare KC and Lyndsey de Mestre KC take a look at the difficulties women encounter during the menopause, and offer some practical tips for individuals and chambers to make things easier
Sir Geoffrey Vos, Master of the Rolls and Head of Civil Justice since January 2021, is well known for his passion for access to justice and all things digital. Perhaps less widely known is the driven personality and wanderlust that lies behind this, as Anthony Inglese CB discovers
The Chair of the Bar sets out how the new government can restore the justice system
No-one should have to live in sub-standard accommodation, says Antony Hodari Solicitors. We are tackling the problem of bad housing with a two-pronged approach and act on behalf of tenants in both the civil and criminal courts