well I would have loved to have watched this - I set all episodes up to record by Freeview (remembering to set Thursday's up separately as a previous poster mentioned) and Monday's recorded fine but yesterday's (Tuesday's) episode failed to record at all! & I'd checked it was there on my timer list beforehand which it was. So disappointed I just wiped Monday's episode off without watching it and all the remaining timers as I'd be totally lost if one episode was missing. Has anyone else had this problem of Freeview not recording Tuesday's episode?
well I would have loved to have watched this - I set all episodes up to record by Freeview (remembering to set Thursday's up separately as a previous poster mentioned) and Monday's recorded fine but yesterday's (Tuesday's) episode failed to record at all! & I'd checked it was there on my timer list beforehand which it was. So disappointed I just wiped Monday's episode off without watching it and all the remaining timers as I'd be totally lost if one episode was missing. Has anyone else had this problem of Freeview not recording Tuesday's episode?
The whole series is going to be repeated in the early hours of the morning on BBC1 next week.
I want to know what was meant by the chap, who's Ellas godfather, saying to the barrister in the mens toilets when he said " i know what it's like at home" or something like that. I'm wondering who's the victim in all this?
I'm expecting a real twist at the end - should be good.
Someone had hinted at the nightdress. When she was first in the cell she was quite agitated that her nightdress was on the wrong way. I couldn't see what she meant it looked right to me.
I think the backwards nightie will be relevant for the defence trying to prove she was anally raped and may even prove she didn't do it.
Anyone checking the nightie after she removed it would think the blood was down her front so she was lying on her back when her husband was killed, when actually the blood was on her back as she was face down, which would make it rather difficult for her to stab him.
I want to know what was meant by the chap, who's Ellas godfather, saying to the barrister in the mens toilets when he said " i know what it's like at home" or something like that. I'm wondering who's the victim in all this?
I'm expecting a real twist at the end - should be good.
And did the younger copper say something like, 'Look after her for us' to him too? I thought that whole dialogue had a sinister undertone, You'd get paranoid watching it, second guessing everything.
I don't think it was either the wife or the daughter. But I think the wife was involved in some way.
To me, it just seamed a bit odd that the fact she was pregnant was only revealed on Tuesday night. I guess she had known before, planned the killing, and was then going to take the wrap so she and her new born baby could be out of the way of the husband.
It was only at the end of the second episode last night that we learn that he has died.
So, now he is out of the way, can she now point the finger in the direction of who did kill him? But, who is now going to listen to her?
This was almost comically miserable. A 14 year old girl hears that her father has been stabbed to death. And her mother did it. Then mummy contemplates suicide. Then cell mate has scalding water thrown at her. And cell mate #2 digs holes in her wrists with a sharp object.
Dramatically what it needed was even a smidgen of light-heartedness - did that come in pregnant cop finding her detective husband is a slime-bag ? no doubt they separate by Friday's episode.
I was thrown by some very obvious continuity errors in episode 1, just after the stabbing.
1) When we see Juliet sitting on the bench in the park, I wasn't sure, for a moment, if it was really her. She had radically changed her hairstyle - from straight to curly. As though Kate Humble had suddenly arrived on set ...
2) Whilst on the bench, we see a ghastly fast motion sequence of the moon moving in the sky, to suggest to us rather crudely that some time had passed - maybe 30 minutes or an hour? Yet in the parallel sequence, the ambulance took the same amount of time to get to the hospital - which for Juliet was only walking distance away. So why did the director put in the fast motion moon rising over a completely unrelated part of London? I found it broke the atmosphere and created confusion in the viewer's mind.
3) Just as Ella is being driven off to the police station, the senior police officer Faber gets in his car, so you would assume he was going, too. Yet, in the next sequence, he is back inside the house. Why the confusion?
Unfortunately, these three continuity errors threw me a bit at an intense point in the episode, and puts to question the credibility of the storytelling. Maybe they were the result of heavily editing out scenes later, or the director changing his mind half way through. So, are we right to analyse every little clue handed to us on the way, or are they just inaccuracies? I'm afraid of being let down...
I know we're supposed to think that it is the dead husband - Joe - who was the person who was controlling and obsessive. Well, that's what it looks like anyway; all that writing down mileage in the notebook, checking distances in the car, counting his wife's tablets and inspecting the shower to see if it was wet.
But if he was as obsessive as all that, why did he only count the blister pack of tablets, why did he not actually rifle through the bin?
And seeing as she already knew he'd be checking up on the tablet situation - else why bother taking two out of the packet in the first place - whyever did she not flush them down the loo? Leaving them in the bin seemed to me to be a case of her asking him to find them.
Yet he didn't. So who was the real manipulator?
And as well, what about all this eyebrow hair plucking that .Juliette is doing? That's indicative of something. We've seen her doing it a lot and seen her scarred eyebrows, so that's going to tell someone soon that she's got OCD.
Some great theories in this thread. However, I have a horrible feeling that we're all going to be left feeling like "oh... this was it all along then?". I just think it's going to be a disappointment, especially in comparison to last year's series.
It is very confusing. i am interested reading the other views. It never occured to me the daughter could be involved or may be abused, I wonder how that will turn out. I thought at first she was having an affair with daughter's friends dad, turns out he is her doctor so not sure. The police and the courts are coming across badly, makes me wonder if the truth will come out. I will be glued to it for the rest of the week too
There was a long look between the psych and his wife when asked if there were any issues with Ella and her family......when they were taking Ella in - I didnt understand what that was about. As if the psych had something further to say......
I think the backwards nightie will be relevant for the defence trying to prove she was anally raped and may even prove she didn't do it.
Anyone checking the nightie after she removed it would think the blood was down her front so she was lying on her back when her husband was killed, when actually the blood was on her back as she was face down, which would make it rather difficult for her to stab him.
Thanks. I thought it would be very difficult for her to stab him with an upper thrust under the ribs action if she was lying on her back.
How could anyone examining the nightie think that the blood was at the front though as it had a definite bra shaped top and unless I missed something she had the nightie on with the bra shaped top at the front.
mmm icy cold and , yes, rather grim programme but - oh my how the hour passes
Also loving this thread. I am wondering about the convienient way that Joes legal pals appear to be in charge of Juliets future.
In the first episode; what was all that about the shower; her mileage etc?
Is the doc her lover or not ?
The nightie does seem to be at the centre of it all - but did we see any evidence of another person on the scene when he was stabbed?
more and more questions
has the daughter been abused; if so why does she have little time for Juliet?
why the overly sexist cop? which decade has he strolled in from?
mmm icy cold and , yes, rather grim programme but - oh my how the hour passes
Also loving this thread. I am wondering about the convienient way that Joes legal pals appear to be in charge of Juliets future.
In the first episode; what was all that about the shower; her mileage etc?
Is the doc her lover or not ?
The nightie does seem to be at the centre of it all - but did we see any evidence of another person on the scene when he was stabbed?
more and more questions
has the daughter been abused; if so why does she have little time for Juliet?
why the overly sexist cop? which decade has he strolled in from?
Yes I forgot to mention about the Judge/Barristers being very cliquey against the female profession. The Judge plays those sort of characters very well.
We are presuming that the mileage checking etc. is his way of being controlling.
I think we will find out the Doctor is more involved. Why did she ring him to ask if her watch was at his house? What was she doing there that needed her to take her watch off anyway?
I love it and I'm trying to think of all the twists there could be. Was the husband giving the wife the drugs to dope her up or were they intended for the daughter? I wish there were more programmes on like this.
I'm thinking there's got to be some significance to her disposing of the Vaseline the way she did. What can this mean? Does it contain evidence of someone else's DNA?
I'm thinking there's got to be some significance to her disposing of the Vaseline the way she did. What can this mean? Does it contain evidence of someone else's DNA?
Considering all the attention given to the pot of Vaseline - Ella sees her mother holding it when she leaves after the stabbing - it will certainly be a central point when Ella gives testimony. It should help to prove that Juliet was indeed subjected to sodomy by her husband. Juliet may have wanted to dump the evidence, probably to press the point that abused wives tend, against all logic, to negate the facts and cover up for their oppressive husbands (cf the Scouse cellmate "I walked into a door ...").
BTW, does anyone know why Joe would have smeared Vaseline under his arms and around his genitalia before going out for a run?
Well - I watched episode one again and I'm starting to feel sympathy towards the husband and feeling that it's the wife who was the manipulative one :eek:
Just a feeling at the moment - going to watch tonight with renewed interest!
ps - the fact that she was on a web page about the life insurance was noted by the police officers
Comments
The whole series is going to be repeated in the early hours of the morning on BBC1 next week.
Or have you ever tried the BBC iPlayer?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00n877s/Criminal_Justice_Series_2_Episode_1/
many thanks for that - fingers crossed it records it all!
I'm expecting a real twist at the end - should be good.
I think the backwards nightie will be relevant for the defence trying to prove she was anally raped and may even prove she didn't do it.
Anyone checking the nightie after she removed it would think the blood was down her front so she was lying on her back when her husband was killed, when actually the blood was on her back as she was face down, which would make it rather difficult for her to stab him.
I don't think it was either the wife or the daughter. But I think the wife was involved in some way.
To me, it just seamed a bit odd that the fact she was pregnant was only revealed on Tuesday night. I guess she had known before, planned the killing, and was then going to take the wrap so she and her new born baby could be out of the way of the husband.
It was only at the end of the second episode last night that we learn that he has died.
So, now he is out of the way, can she now point the finger in the direction of who did kill him? But, who is now going to listen to her?
Dramatically what it needed was even a smidgen of light-heartedness - did that come in pregnant cop finding her detective husband is a slime-bag ? no doubt they separate by Friday's episode.
1) When we see Juliet sitting on the bench in the park, I wasn't sure, for a moment, if it was really her. She had radically changed her hairstyle - from straight to curly. As though Kate Humble had suddenly arrived on set ...
2) Whilst on the bench, we see a ghastly fast motion sequence of the moon moving in the sky, to suggest to us rather crudely that some time had passed - maybe 30 minutes or an hour? Yet in the parallel sequence, the ambulance took the same amount of time to get to the hospital - which for Juliet was only walking distance away. So why did the director put in the fast motion moon rising over a completely unrelated part of London? I found it broke the atmosphere and created confusion in the viewer's mind.
3) Just as Ella is being driven off to the police station, the senior police officer Faber gets in his car, so you would assume he was going, too. Yet, in the next sequence, he is back inside the house. Why the confusion?
Unfortunately, these three continuity errors threw me a bit at an intense point in the episode, and puts to question the credibility of the storytelling. Maybe they were the result of heavily editing out scenes later, or the director changing his mind half way through. So, are we right to analyse every little clue handed to us on the way, or are they just inaccuracies? I'm afraid of being let down...
But if he was as obsessive as all that, why did he only count the blister pack of tablets, why did he not actually rifle through the bin?
And seeing as she already knew he'd be checking up on the tablet situation - else why bother taking two out of the packet in the first place - whyever did she not flush them down the loo? Leaving them in the bin seemed to me to be a case of her asking him to find them.
Yet he didn't. So who was the real manipulator?
And as well, what about all this eyebrow hair plucking that .Juliette is doing? That's indicative of something. We've seen her doing it a lot and seen her scarred eyebrows, so that's going to tell someone soon that she's got OCD.
Thanks. I thought it would be very difficult for her to stab him with an upper thrust under the ribs action if she was lying on her back.
How could anyone examining the nightie think that the blood was at the front though as it had a definite bra shaped top and unless I missed something she had the nightie on with the bra shaped top at the front.
Also loving this thread. I am wondering about the convienient way that Joes legal pals appear to be in charge of Juliets future.
In the first episode; what was all that about the shower; her mileage etc?
Is the doc her lover or not ?
The nightie does seem to be at the centre of it all - but did we see any evidence of another person on the scene when he was stabbed?
more and more questions
has the daughter been abused; if so why does she have little time for Juliet?
why the overly sexist cop? which decade has he strolled in from?
Yes I forgot to mention about the Judge/Barristers being very cliquey against the female profession. The Judge plays those sort of characters very well.
We are presuming that the mileage checking etc. is his way of being controlling.
We aren't sure re the Dr - yet.
No evidence of anyone else at the scene - yet.
Has the daughter been abused - we don't know yet.
Lots of yets to this programme LOL.
I love it and I'm trying to think of all the twists there could be. Was the husband giving the wife the drugs to dope her up or were they intended for the daughter? I wish there were more programmes on like this.
Glad I'm not the only one who noticed it then.
Considering all the attention given to the pot of Vaseline - Ella sees her mother holding it when she leaves after the stabbing - it will certainly be a central point when Ella gives testimony. It should help to prove that Juliet was indeed subjected to sodomy by her husband. Juliet may have wanted to dump the evidence, probably to press the point that abused wives tend, against all logic, to negate the facts and cover up for their oppressive husbands (cf the Scouse cellmate "I walked into a door ...").
BTW, does anyone know why Joe would have smeared Vaseline under his arms and around his genitalia before going out for a run?
It prevents chafing, apparently.
Just a feeling at the moment - going to watch tonight with renewed interest!
ps - the fact that she was on a web page about the life insurance was noted by the police officers