Crown Court - Face Value (1982)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 фев 2025
- Lucy Brennan has accused Edward Morrison of indecently assaulting her at her home following a dinner engagement earlier in the evening. Watch out for Cherry Gillespie (Lucy), who was a dancer in Pan's People on Top of the Pops, no less! Simon Rouse (Edward) is known for his appearances in The Bill and Bernard Horsfall (Prosecuting Counsel) previously appeared in many shows including Doctor Who, The Avengers and Secret Army.
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
Great episode of a wonderful drama series. Crown Court is fondly remembered by those of us of a certain age.
Ah, the presence of one of the most subtle, intelligent and most influential actresses of her generation, which is given some time here: Vivien Merchant.
Crown Court was a very good series in every respect: a blend of quasi documentary, good scripts, a genuine insight into the machinery of the judiciary, and very good actors. The fact that it captured the last recorded appearance of Merchant, shortly before her tragic death, is very special. The beauty of the eyes and expression, that exquisite voice, timing, gentility and steel are still intact.
This was a miscarriage of justice.
The judge indicated that that only two people were present, and that one of them was lying. This indicated a 50/50 balance between the two sides. But it was not actually the way it was.
The Friend gave a very clear witness as to the distress of Lucy, her torn clothes, her bleeding lip and state of shock.
The police officer plainly accepted what she said to be true, based on her state when he saw her.
The gave evidence that the wounds were inflicted.
On the other hand, the evidence of the yaxi-driver had no credibility whatsoever.
The young woman's statement was well-supported by the circumstantial evidence, while there was no evidence of any kind to support the man's statement.
agreed
Absolutely
You are confusing justice with the outcome you wanted. What is more important. Believing the woman or the assumption of innocence.?
@@brucecohen3001,
The presumption of innocence unless proven guilty is of great importance.
But in rape cases and other sexual assault cases, then defence often treats the victim as a guilty party.
In this case, the woman had suffered physical assault and had a split lip and bruises.
Bruises around the neck and a split lip might merely indicate that the accused was beating up a woman that he had known only briefly because of a difference of opinion., in the way a man might beat up a wife who he accused of nagging or of failing to iron his shirts that way he liked them.
This is not a very likely scenario.
The story presents a case where there is considerable evidence. It is important that the victim was reminded of the charge, because the charge itself was provable by the evidence of damage to her face and neck. to which there were two witnesses..
A charge of attempted rape was NOT PROVABLE, and had such a charge been laid, then, at that date, the accused would almost certainly have got off.
Unfortunately, the victim's insistence that it was an attempted rape did not help to get a conviction. for the more generalised assault charge.
It i interesting to compare this case with the case of Prince Andrew, where his guilt is accepted as fact by popular opinion, in the light of no evidence at all, except one very dodgy photo which could have been easily photo-shopped.
People believe that Prince Andrew was guilty, merely on the evidence of his association with Epstein, and under the mistaken notion tht Epstein's main line of business was pimping teenager girls.
In fact, Epstein's business was facilitating contacts, contracts and trade. He provided the facilities and the entertainment. Girls were available, like the Martinis, the scuba gear, the squash courts and the roulette wheel. Epstein's clientele were not obliged to take up every option. Prince Andrew was a British Trade representative.
I have made this comparison- If a man goes to KFC, then he wants chicken.
But if a man goes to his local pub, then he might want a beer or a cider; a game of darts or a game of snooker; the band, the big match, the karaoke; the steak sandwich or the ploughman's lunch.
You cannot presume that the man in the pub is there for the beer, OR to pickup a girl for the night, although girls might be there in plenty. .
Ms Giuffre's story and the accusations have had at last three different incarnations.
@@brucecohen3001 on your basis then there would never be any prosecutions though. Evidence of injuries, his own comments of an attitude that women who take part in contests are asking for it. Bit of typical verdict of the 1970s
Despite the fact that this is fiction, I hope the surviving members of that jury look back on their verdict with shame.😡
Indeed
Exactly
Yes but I'll bet exactly the same miscarriages of justice occur in the real world all too often. All that it takes is a very strong willed bully on the jury who strong arms people to his point of view.
I stumbled on this channel yesterday, as an attorney myself (USA however), I find this series very entertaining.
you should do, US law and court system all come from the mother country !
even the bill of rights
I am out in Wyoming, a retired English Prof, and I, too, just came across this series. I love good courtroom drama. Nobody does it better than the Brits!🙋👍🏻
It is very subdued series. No location work, no special effects, just a camera placed in court and covering proceedings. Excellent work from Granada Television.
@MrKingdig Americans do a lot of things well, but legal drama is not one of them!
OMG this is the one with Vivian Merchant as the judge, I've always wanted to see this as I'm a fan of hers. the chilling thing is she died later that year of alcoholism, which was very sad. Thank you so much Jez, your a star!! :)
My pleasure, Tina! :)
I also liked her work, and at first I didn't recognize her but her voice sounded very familiar.
Btw, is there a Brit alive today who knows the difference between "your" and "you're"?
Agreed; she was excellent in The
Offence. Pity Viv was too fond of the bottle, like Wilfrid Brambell, another who’d
have made a good judge. Then again his estate was worth £160K upon his death so
maybe money wasn’t an issue.
Agreed; she was excellent in The Offence. Pity Viv was too fond of the bottle, like Wilfrid Brambell, another who’d have made a good judge. Then again his estate was worth £160K upon his death so maybe money wasn’t an issue.
Viv seems a bit sloshed there actually. V sad. She was great in Hitchcock's 'Frenzy'.
Good grief. I can't believe their verdict!
That was what often happened in those days.
Sadly the last performance by Vivien Merchant before her untimely death - fantastic actress
no wonder women dont want to carry through such a case.......a good, powerful episode.
yup the defendent was the best prosecution witness but till got off
Quite. Terrible verdict.
This episode was brilliant in showing that assault is hard to prove, even now 2019. Its a he says one thing, she says another The victim often ends up on trial instead of the accused and the defense can go after a victim and win a not guilty verdict by dragging the victims private life into the open and using it against them
As for the constable, he was just advising the ladies of the chances of winning in court and he turned out to be right.
Her story is consistent, unchanging. The defence barrister is what was called an unreconstructed chauvinist. She was definitely telling the truth.
An opinion derived from the burst of misandry excited by the apparently unjustified verdict.
However, there is some justification for a feeling that justice was not served. I felt sure that, if I was a member of the jury the impression gained of the girl was an arrogant and wilful person; of the man, a person with little or no respect for women and an inflated view of himself and certainly his evidence portrayed this outlook, his evidence was weak and his actions on the day of the incident more indicative of guilt -- why run away, surely not because of the dog? On balance, I would have found for the girl her evidence was corroborated by both her flatmate and the police officer and supported by the doctor. In short, I would have voted 'guilty'.
a brilliant episode. Made me boil with its injustice. How much bias went on in the jury room between male overbearing egos and compliant women. Victim brilliantly portrayed her beliefs and parried the aggressive and sleazy attack by the defence lawyer. A Brilliant episode!!
If I was ever going to commit a crime in the early 1970s, I'd do it in Fulchester!
😀
I have to say after this case along with so many others where the verdict is not guilty, I would hate to have to put my trust in British justice. That was an outrageous verdict.
Thanks be much for posting these
I don't want to go into my feelings about the result. The most terrible thing is that Vivien Merchant drank herself to death that year following the breakdown of her marriage to Harold Pinter, may she rest in peace 😔🥀
Only just discovered Crown Court (I live in Oz where free-to-air TV is rubbish, so I frequently trawl RUclips & Daily Motion for good British drama) and it's great. So good to see Simon Rouse outside the Bill ... he's a great actor. In this case, I think the verdict should have been guilty, but as an oldie, I know the verdict was probably a sign of the times.
Glad you’re enjoying Crown Court, Susannah! If you haven’t seen them already, “Hunger Strike”, “A Man with Everything” and “To Love, Cherish and Batter” are particularly good, if a little dark. “Crime Passionel” is good if you prefer something lighter. Enjoy! :)
I cannot believe that verdict.No way would that happen,
I won't say what it was in case another person reads comments before watching. Thanks again for the downloads.
Any chance of doing the US comedy series 'Soap'? Jessica who wants to seu life to music
Jury dressed well in them days. I on one this year, jurors look pulled from Butlins on hot day !
Wide lapels. Kipper ties. Flared trousers. And terylene, lots of plastic cloth. Sweaty armpits.
Cherry out of pans people, she was beautiful
I kept 'seeing' TOTP in my minds eye!!! Thought she was.
Jez T's always so careful to note the Dr Who actors, I'm surprised he missed Shirin Taylor here, so memorably eaten by one of the Stones of Blood. As per IMDB, apparently also in Dragonfire, but being as how that's a McCoy one, I've almost no recollection of it.
A Judge letting someone stand with their hands in their pockets!!! No way.
how is that verdict possible??
she had no chancs in those days. Taxi driver lied, the only truth he told was when telling about all the work he recieved from the club.
The cab driver had no reason to lie, the roommate did.
And one year before this Paul Freeman played Belloq in Raiders of the Lost Ark, and earlier Bernard Horsfall had appeared in Gold, Shout at the Devil and Enemy at the Door
The accused, Simon Rouse, before becoming honest and appearing as Inspector Jack Meadows in 'The Bill' on ITV.
Cherry from Pans's People!
It is isn't it❤!
Please stop ruining it for viewers, who may accidentally read these comments before watching, by giving away the verdict. Some people read these comments before watching the episodes fully.
Stop reading them before the verdict.
yes the councillor on the left was brilliant in Indiana jones too..
Superb joke around the 43:30 mark - a refernece to Norman 'Bites yer Leg' Hunter.
Reference - damn typing boxing gloves!
The accused is DCI Jack Meadows of The Bill
Maybe he joined the police after his experience in court
Ha ha Andrew James. A very young DCI Jack Meadows proving he's a pretty decent all-round actor. Mind you, I've watched him being interviewed and as a human being he comes across as a bit of a dick***d.
rouse was also great in The Professionals in 1978.
He was in the Bill too. He was in Bread also for a few episodes, as a baddie!
Think this maybe your last one jez..how do I get the others that people have put on .
Another unbelievable verdict. I would have argued tooth and nail for a guilty verdict.
Shocking verdict, he was obviously guilty.
Please stop ruining it for viewers, who may accidentally read these comments before watching
Don't spoil
@@johnking5174. The trick, I find, is not to scroll down to the comments before watching the show.
Its amusing to watch how the legal system works there as compared to ours in the USA. No objections by either attys. The intervention of the judge, which at times seems a little pro for the defence. Etc,etc. But, on the whole, pretty entertaining.
This episode is quite unusual in that neither Counsel lodged any objection during the Trial. This happens often in
other episodes.
He was as guilty as sin. Stupid jury didn't listen carefully to his testimony. What he said about her on the catwalk convinced me.
Good for her, that girl defended herself every way she knew how.
It's not fair, the prosecution barrister insinuating Lucy Brennan being tipsy - having had two glasses of wine. The judge (from 25:10) is clearly seriously hammered. In fact, look her up on the interweb.
Cherry Gilespie from Pan's People
You might be inclined to think the fact that the plaintiff's roommate was the ex-fiancee of the defendant -- with emphasis on the "ex"! -- would have prompted more interest from the court, especially since his reported behavior toward both women was less than honorable to say the least.
Thanks Jez
The judge looks pissed.
The actress, Vivien Merchant died shortly after from alcoholism, so she likely was pissed.
I think she only 52 here but poor thing looks far older thanks to grog
As a newt 😂
I agree that the verdict sucks but thankfully things have improved since then (1982) and, don't forget, the prosecutor has to prove his guilt
One would need to be 'blind Freddie' not to see he was guilty as charged.
It's quite surprising that such a jury including an equal number of both men and women should come to this conclusion.
Perhaps this reflects the attitudes of the time. It certainly would seem to indicate that some women were certainly prejudiced towards certain types of other women. The implication being that a young woman who parades her body in front of a male public is morally questionable and therefore not to be believed.
Looking at it today it seems absolutely incredible that he should get away with this based on the testimony. He really had no case other than his own word. And his arrogance and sexism are equally incriminating.
This is a stark reminder of how much the attitudes of the law and public opinion have changed since then.
Why didn't the prosectution make more of the fact that the defendant ran? That cross examination was very weak.
Guilty as hell. Why did they not ask how the bruises got there if not inflicted by him?
the defense lawyer was more authoritative. the prosecution failed that lady. they hardly asked any serious questions
Debbie Horsfield is an excellent writer, later known for Making Out, Cutting It and Poldark. This was in the bad old days when every alleged rape or sexual assault victim was, in practice, required to prove beyond reasonable doubt that she did not ask for it. Of course, these days they just don't bother prosecuting any of them.
Defo guilty..no way that girl is lying.
The obvious question nobody asked: if Lucy was so hot to trot, would she have allowed matters to progress to such a pitch, knowing that her friend was out walking her dog and could return any minute?
I will not tolerate this in MY court!
The defendants arrogance is nauseating
Only two mistakes. Entering a beauty contest and inviting that man back for coffee. Otherwise a wrong verdict which drove Vivien Merchant to drink her self to death. RIP Vi.
missing in the series is jury selection, the process that is. it seems the prejudice against women who bring such cases to court runs rampant among the british public, particularly the male of the species.
Spoiler alert: comments give away the verdict. Moving on...
horrible verdict!
Absolutely agree. Though the judge's guidance played a big part in it.
I think the scriptwriter could not have chosen a more irritating character than the judge, with her facile rebukes and patronising, grating voice. As for the jury; considering these were members of the public and thus a representation of real life jurists, I wonder if there is any hope for the justice system in this country! How the hell could these numbskulls come up with a not guilty verdict?!!!
That's how it was then
@@kathleencampbell1138 sadly true. The taxi driver was likely to have been cohersed too and "bought off."
What a dirty rotten spoiler.
@@johnferguson40 Sorry, John. That wasn't my intention. Personally, I never look at the comments beyond the first couple of words until after I have watched the video myself. And after all, the comments section is there for people to exchange views on what they have seen.
@@williambunter3311: Quelchie wants to see you in his study.
Well, in fairness to the police officer he did try to warn her, which was based on his experience of what the likely outcome would be.
A year later Cherry Gillespie played midge in the brilliant James Bond film Octopussy
Amazing to see Pan's Person & one of Ruby's Flippers, Cherry Gillespie in an acting role. Stood her in good stead presumably for all that non speaking, background glamour posing in Octopussy. The former renegade Time Lord Bernard Horsfall being very human for once. I wonder if he spotted the barmy Simon Rouse from Dr Who's Kinda? One of the many Mrs Mike Baldwins, Shirin Taylor, wearing a scary jumper. She should have worn that when camping by The Stones of Blood. Good job Vivien Merchant wasn't a judge when she had that illegal abortion in Alfie. She might have had to sentence herself to something very severe indeed.
I wondered where I'd seen her before!!!!
She was beautiful
Belloq for the defence!
I wonder if Cherry had as "bad" from Mr J. Savile on Top of Pops ! 🥺
Yes, she did. The creep licked her hand.
Having a Crown Court bonanza day today thanks to Jez! *****Spoiler follows*****
Three episodes I have watched today, and none of them got the verdict I was expecting and hoping for!!!! But I guess that is the beauty of allowing the members of the public to decide, rather than scripted. Still, in all the cases I have seen today, I would have been the awkward juror refusing to run with the rest of the herd!!!!
Wo ist es?
Disgusting verdict!
Gramaphone!!! 😂
Gramophone.
The plaintiffs advocate did her a disservice....so many points to object and he kept quiet. seems he too shared in the male chauvinism of the time
51:50 Robert DeNiro and Clint Eastwood???
Huh, Really??????
In those times more often than not men got away with indecent assault, attempted rape and even rape itself. I am glad that times have changed and a woman has as good a chance of being believed as a man nowadays .
So much irrelevancy in the arguments
WHA!!??
Did not k pw that Simon rouzeead on crown coimy
Wtf
Thanks jezz i thought he would be found guilty,cut lip marks round neck dress ripped ect,Now days he would be convicted.Her as a beauty queen didnt help her though.
bruce hill I didn't like the assumption that just because you were a participant in a beauty contest, that somehow made you "easy".
Oh no, he doesn't get away with it!!! Serves me right for reading the comments. It's so obvious that he's guilty.
@@up4itgal Men run more risks today than back then, but it doesn't stop the stupid ones from still trying.
False allegations really do happen you know
Not guilty, absolutely correct.
BS!!!!!!!