24 Hours In Police Custody Ch4 Last Night...

[trt]

Put here, as its not about TV.

Why didn't the two suspects, accused of under aged sex offenses, have solicitors with them, when being interviewed, as most of the other cases I have seen, have?

I was thinking, it might be because they knew, with the evidence against them, that they didn't have a chance of getting away with.

[MallyJ]

I noticed that....and It was obvious that they were both guilty because their faces were shown on screen. I felt vaguely grubby watching that programme to be honest.

[Mamyalynne]

I know nothing about the law but am sure they could have requested a solicitor - as you say maybe they knew they were doomed.

The second chap was quite convincing at first, creepy.

[anneasquith]

I assumed the solicitors were out of view of the camera ?

[pastafreak]

It was fascinating viewing. The first was in denial, the second convincingly believable.

[anneasquith]

But why agree to have it televised ? Or isn't really actors ?

[Mamyalynne]

They aren't actors.

[nailit]

Viewed this at my mates house last night, we both thought that the solicitors declined to be on camera.

[aelmpvw]

i was also puzzled why they would agree to be filmed

[ummmm]

Do they have a choice?

[nailit]

Havnt read it all yet but might go someway to explaining about the 'choice' suspects have re: been filmed.

[nailit]

forgot link https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/aug/23/privacy-rights-cops-style-tv-shows