Law & Order (UK) Monday 11th

[deanopatt]

Last night I watched Law & Order (UK). In it a policeman doesn’t go to his gay partner’s aid as he lies dying of gunshot wounds. The policeman says he raced there as fast as he could but went to the wrong street by mistake. Unfortunately for him, he is caught on CCTV as he stands around (for 5 minutes) waiting for his partner to die - he was gay so he deserved it!

Unfortunately for the lawyers, in the judge’s opinion the CCTV shots are deemed to be a little bit too unclear to be sure who the policeman in the footage actually is so deems them unacceptable to the court and shouldn’t even be mentioned.

The policeman gets off.

My question: Surely the barrister would have asked the accused “Is that you in the CCTV footage? And if it’s not you, who was the other policeman hanging around the scene when you got there?” And why doesn’t the CCTV footage show you arriving when you said you did?”


Or am I missing a subtle legal technicality?

[chrissa1]

I think that judge ruled that they could not be shown to a jury as they weren't clear enough, therefore the whole cctv part of the evidence was not admissable. The policeman would hardly admit it was him, and would also have been advised by his defence barrister not to answer any questions regarding the cctv.

I think!!!

[lynbrown]

I felt they should have been able to force the young policeman to come clean about covering up.

[Jan1957]

It's a tv programme!

[chrissa1]

Yes, we know that jan but we're just discussing the storyline. No one thinks this is real life for heaven's sake!

[Jan1957]

Sorry, but that is what your question sounds like. Of course in real life they would have asked about who the policeman is supposed to be. I have found from watching all the US versions of Law and Order normally this story resurfaces when the same cop has done something else and assume this will lead on to another story later on.

[Bert]

There is a petrol station with supermarket near where I live that loses hundreds of pounds every week through shoplifting. They had one individual on CCTV "caught in the act". When a policeman viewed the footage he immediately recognised the broccoli, but said that was because he knew the individual. If the tape was played to a judge or jury they would not be able to recognise the individual as the person in the dock (who would obviously be wearing different clothes) as the quality was so poor. So that was that. No prosecution. The same place has security guards, but they are not allowed to stop people who walk in and take stuff off the shelves and walk out with it in full view. If the thief tries to hide the goods, then they can. This is what the shop manager told me.

[puzzled54]

This is the first one I've watched, I thought it was nowhere near as good as the US ones. I know I didn't see previous series, but was this a boring episode or normal?