Accused- Helen's Story BBC 1 Mon

[yogasun]

Did anybody see this last night?
Great acting but could someone explain why the jury found her Not Guilty when she admitted the arson and why she did it?

[jackthehat]

I may have missed something, but...........

She must have been pleading Not Guilty with her original defence team (otherwise there would not have been a trial) which she then dispensed with.

Her addressing the jury ought to have been taken into account as mitigating circumstances when it came to sentencing........to find her Not Guilty (if the charge was indeed Arson) seems perverse.

As you say brilliant acting..........but I was left scratching my head a little.

[chelle7272]

I agree, it was briliantly performed but I was confused as to how they could return a verdict of not guilty. Then again I wasn't sure she would have been permitted to make such a speech in the first place - dramatic licence I guess.
Shame because Jimmy McGovern's writing is usually top notch.

[yogasun]

Yes, thanks for that Jack.

I was expecting a lenient sentence due to the mitigating circumstances. Maybe someone else might have ideas.

[lynbrown]

I also found the rejection of his pal's evidence as not being credible a poor way to get round things. He would be on oath and he sounded genuinely upset. Why would a jury doubt him?

[Invictas]

It's TV,when reality gets in the way of a good story it is dispensed with!
No doubt Mr McGovern would have some explanation that (as usual) nobody will understand.

[curlyperm11]

Arrrrgggh - was just in the middle of watching it - as i had recorded it - then read your link sh&T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Jemisa]

I recorded it too and watched it this afternoon. - But like others I felt the result should have been guilty.
I feel in the real world it would have been.
And I'm still not sure whether it was just an accident?

jem

[I.Don No]

I know it is not the real world but if I had been on that jury I would have found in her favour for the sake of justice for her son. And I reckon, although not sure, as the verdict was not guilty does that mean that the owner of the warehouse would not be able to claim on his insurance....I know, I know, 'tis not real

[madmaggot]

I think that,in a real case, the judge would have 'directed' the jury. But hey, it was a good watch.