Review of The Jury

The Jury (2002–2011)
2/10
Excellent acting, plot holes
22 October 2011
Warning: Spoilers
This should be a textbook example of an ensemble production. Everybody is excellent, and some of them are big names, too, such as Derek Jacobi, Anthony Sher, and (though not so famous at the time) Gerard Butler, who puts in a memorable performance as a recovering alcoholic. It also maintains its momentum over six episodes, and I was always keen to see the next one.

The plot has some weaknesses. The judge seems never to have explained clearly to the jury that you have to find a defendant not guilty if there is not sufficient proof of guilt. There are also inexplicable weaknesses in the evidence, such as absolutely no traces of blood on the defendant. If not, why not? What about DNA? I know this was in the early 2000s, but I would have thought it might have been mentioned. And why was there no clear medical evidence about the boy's shoulder? As for the drain, is it credible that the police, however complacent, would not have searched such an obvious location close to the canal? Also, as another reviewer has mentioned, why did the jury continually have to run the gauntlet of protesters outside the main door of the Old Bailey?

Despite these glaring defects, the acting and the quality of the direction make this well worth seeing.
12 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed