The quality of Crown Court puts to shame what TV offers today. I watch very little TV today, always on catch up so I can use the fast forward button. U Tube is my entertainment now. It leaves every other broadcaster in its wake.
Wow!! I was relaxing enjoying the episode and then the eldest daughter spoke. I was shocked and now hooked. It is great how the scripts are used sometimes to provide facts about a particular issue. Great acting and a ery brave topic to cover.
The psychiatrist's testimony was mind-blowing and he practically took over the court with his express-train fastidiousness. And what he was saying was so convoluted you could hardly keep up - added to the fact that what he said was so shocking. Excellent. Not the last time Bill Paterson would play a psychiatrist so well.
Unnerving episode and very brave of Frank Windsor to accept the role. Given the revelations, the verdict was the only possible one. The judge handled this extraordinary case with great dignity.
'I breed dogs' must be the most defiant line I've heard in Crown Court episodes, delivered by Mrs Selsey in cold rage. This is superb writing and acting with a stern judge to keep the lid on an explosive cauldron of emotions. Yes, far ahead of its time and still topical in an age when we know what Jimmy Savile, Rolf Harris and others were capable of. I remember that the actor William Gaunt went on to be a regular sitcom performer in pretty poor, bland shows - what a waste! He could have done a lot better if he'd found more roles like this one.
Nice to see William Gaunt as the defending barrister. Back then he was more well known for his role in the 1960s adventure series "The Champions". And also nice to see a young Bill Patterson play the medical expert. But, by God, this is very powerful drama. If it was shown on TV today it would be massively controversial. Brilliantly acted by everybody.
Well. This is one of two episodes in Crown Court that has stayed stuck in my memory since childhood. Not everything that happened - it was over 40 years ago when I saw it, but a particular moment when the older daughter gave evidence. I was 11 at the time and remember being both confused and shocked. It was one of those things I just never forgot. Watching it 40 years on it is still shocking, but I was very glad to have the chance to watch it again this time as an adult and be able to understand it properly from an adult's perspective - as well as appreciate the awesome acting - and it has sort of put the old memory I had to rest. The other episode that I remember is also here (To Love Cherish and Batter) and I will watch it properly soon. Jez I already greatly appreciate you uploading all these wonderful Crown Court episodes but am particularly grateful to you for uploading these - thank you.
It's quite mindboggling to step back in time and be reminded how ill-informed and casually society viewed the sexual abuse of children! To hear the prosecutor suggest that in most cases the situation would happily resolve itself 🤦 that barristers keep referring to 'making love ' 🤦 Thank God we've moved on from a psychiatrist who almost seems to condone what happened. The mother is a strong contender for having been abused herself..her rigidity, frigidity and utter lack of a moral compass and care for her own daughters. There is still a strong urban myth that the perpetrators of these abuses commit the offences because they were abused themselves. Statistics repeatedly prove this wrong. Most perpetrators are male and most victims are female. It does a great disservice to victims to keep alive the myth that they are somehow now programmed to become abusers themselves. A very thought provoking episode. Brave performances from the actors playing the parents.
Excellent comment. This was 1979 - the heyday of P.I.E. who were affiliated to the National Council for Civil Liberties until 1982. I noticed NCCL got a mention in this episode. P.I.E. hijacked the gay rights movement to advocate for what they disgustingly called 'children's sexual rights' - they even got airtime on Newsnight. As a child growing up in the 70s and 80s, it doesn't surprise me that Savile got away with it. We must never let those attitudes gain a foothold again.
Abusers can raise abused abusers but then straight parents raise gay kids, gay parents can raise a gay child and vice versa. That's if you want to frame child abuse as in the orientation frame which definitely exists but the motivation is usually just one part of a larger function of power, humiliation and so forth. I agree that even 30-40 years ago, language and sentiment was terrible about issues like sex, drugs etc but a lot of it can be placed at the door of improper "research" and training that were often haphazard and biased. Modern research has come a long way to giving the public and professionals something more robust to hand their attitudes on than some 20th century text "On the treatment of X" by some self declared expert on whatever topic that borrows heavily from unverified sources and the author's opinion.
@@aj2080xy6Yes. I still say that programs like this may have been, and still are difficult for some viewers. But, the benefits of educating the public at large about taboo subjects such as this is are important for so many reasons. i.e. there could be a person suffering sexual abuse in the home, or the parent who has remained passive, perhaps until seeing such a program. Such a program could be the catalyst for change within that very home.
I suppose, after sitting through that utterly astonishing piece of 70s DAYTIME drama, no doubt because I was eventually numbed to the entire theme, the thing that rather sadly sticks in my mind is Michael Elphick's acting gesture to someone "off" for "a quick snifter down the pub" - the thing that he struggled with throughout his life and which took a talented actor from us long before what should have been his time.
Ineresting to hear the link between this case and the National Council for Civil Liberties mentioned in dialogue at 1:09:46. This was the body to which the Peodophile Information Exchange was affiliated at the very time this story was broadcast. The NCCL, today known as "Liberty" made submissions to parliament in 1976 that "Childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult result in no identifiable damage… The real need is a change in the attitude which assumes that all cases of paedophilia result in lasting damage". Harriet Harman in 1979 gave an argument in a paper that bore her intials that the age of consent should be lowered to 10 years old.
As a relative and friend of several people who have been seriously damaged by child abusers, I want to take those parents and string them up. The father may well have been abused himself and also, on some level, thinks it’s normal, but the mother.... “nobody was harmed” ! Selfish *@%&*. Fantastic drama! Sadly all too realistic.
These cases may be fictional, but usually very true to life. I bet the statistics are correct. And that was 40 years ago. Very brave scriptwriter to put such a brilliant and revealing story together. Very brave of all the actors involved. So sad that humans are so 'programmed' and ignorant that we find so many ways to damage and destroy each other and ourselves.
Many thanks Jez. I was particularly interested to note that this episode was written by acclaimed British author the late David Yallop. I live in New Zealand, and Mr Yallop wrote a book 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt' about the high profile Arthur Allan Thomas murder case here during the 1970s. Mr Thomas spent a decade in prison but was eventually pardoned and paid almost a million NZD (a vast sum back in those days) in compensation.
I noticed an uncredited Jonathan Morris (19 at the time) he would later to go on to play Adrian Boswell in seven series of Carla Lane's sitcom Bread 86-91
Thanks Jez T, i am watching avidly, and brilliant actors like Michael Elphick, in a number of roles, also William Gaunt, and more i noticed the young actors in the front of the barristers , like Jonthon morris from tv series bread, in this episode ,
Not easy watching, I agree. Phenomenal acting though, especially from Frank Windsor. Some CC episodes were shown in the evening. I suspect this may have been one of them.
Even then, the evening ones were at 7.30pm if I recall. It always seemed in those days that the rules were fuzzier about daytime content, since they assumed children weren't watching.
I think the evening times varied depending on where you were watching it in the country, given that ITV was regional when the programme was made. Still, whatever time it was on, this particular story was not the most comfortable of viewing.
I remember seeing the final episode when it was originally screened. I must have been off school. Anyway, coming from an ordinary family I was totally shocked by what I was hearing. It had never ocurred to me that this sort of thing went on. I was very naive back then. I don't think defence/prosecution counsels would refer to the Bible as factual these days!
There was a case in Japan in the 1960s where a daughter killed the father who raped her. This seems to be loosely based on that and hence the psychiatrist's allusion to incest being normal in Japan. In general, I think the take on this subject was more eye opening than would be acceptable today. Society nowadays likes its morals more distinct and without any blurring of lines. Perhaps today's approach makes for a safer world but it doesn't capture the complicated and sometimes mysterious aspects of human interactions very well.
They all were. I only ever got yo see them when I was at home, off school ill. The theme music makes me think of a bed made on the settee with Heinz chicken soup and my cat.
Plenty for the QCs to discuss in the pub! My guess was that the father was violent in the striking sense, but I didn't see the statutory rape coming. The mother was almost as blameworthy as he was. Great storyline and acting. Michael Elphick and the other QC played the roles so well. So did the family members. I knew Frank Windsor's face from the early '70s, but only remembered the advert he did. Z-Cars and Softly Softly, then!
Well, there ARE some interesting twist and turns in this one, not the least Michael Ken Boon, Gerhardt Schultz Elphick putting in a surprisingly believable performance as a legal counsel - and I'm only 33 mins in! Well, there ARE some interesting twist and turns in this one, not the least Michael Ken Boon, Gerhardt Schultz Elphick putting in a surprisingly believable performance as a legal counsel Well, there ARE some interesting twist and turns in this one, not the least Michael Ken Boon, Gerhardt Schultz Elphick putting in a surprisingly believable performance as a legal counsel!
Does anybody know which episode the actress Tessa Worsley was in? she was a prolific radio actress for most of her later career and was absolutely brilliant.
You would struggle to get this past the censors after the watershed to-day, how they managed to get away with confronting such heavy topics on daytime television I have no idea, good though.
It’s difficult hearing them refer to the sex they’re having as, “making love”. Actress who plays Mrs. Selsey was in my favorite Dalgliesh series. She played a real witch of a nursing instructor in a nursing school in the Dalgliesh series, “Shroud for a Nightingale.”
A truly shocking and explosive storyline. Did this episode go out at the normal afternoon timeslot ? If it did I would suggest there were very many red faces amongst its viewers
Although I realise it's fictitious, the only thing I wonder about is bearing in mind the attitude of the girl's parents, how did it get to court in the first place?
Wow. I lost myself in this one and she'd a tear. The poor girl shouldn't have had to sit through it. The prosecution should have thrown in the towel wgen the impish elder sister threw the hand grenade. Heartless
You're quite right, Kirk, they don't mention the sentence. I suppose we're left hanging as his defence counsel tries to negotiate the sentence down on his behalf.
Bugger me sideways! That took a turn eh? Did anyone else think of Dr. R. D. Laing when the psychiatrist spoke? I'd put money on the writer being influenced by him!
Ya know, that stuff about Japanese law was pretty out there. Sure, incest between consenting adults isn't a crime, but the same could have been said for France (and currently Spain and Portugal, but I'm not sure if it was legal in 1979). The way they said it made it sound like any dad could do what the dad did in Japan, but of course Japan (and other countries where adult incest is legal) has an age of consent. Uncool.
A VERY EDUCATIONAL PROBLEM IN SOCIETY: This should be shown in every High Schools: Instead of ramming Contraception on the teenage GIRLS: Children should have Knowledge taught to them, where the family or parents are backward .... like this family/or similar. It's such a delicate subject: ●●●● Look at the MOTHER, SHE WAS THE CAUSE OF DESTROYING THE FATHER AND THE 2 DAUGHTERS: AS YOU CAN SEE THE BURDEN IS ON THE FEMALE TEENAGER: SO MUCH RESPONSIBILITY: THESE YOUNG TEENAGER GIRLS ARE STILL DEVELOPING PHYSICALLY & MENTALLY: I MUST COMPLIMENT THE ACTORS..
My goodness me , referring to a psychiatrist ? What could he or she possibly do that common sense and moral decency could not be answered by the average man or woman ? Diplomas and degrees in psycho babble , and they call themselves experts.
Another episode that just proves once again that British actors and actresses will always be the greatest.
The quality of Crown Court puts to shame what TV offers today. I watch very little TV today, always on catch up so I can use the fast forward button. U Tube is my entertainment now. It leaves every other broadcaster in its wake.
True , I dumped TV 7 years ago , never missed it one bit.
Wow!! I was relaxing enjoying the episode and then the eldest daughter spoke. I was shocked and now hooked. It is great how the scripts are used sometimes to provide facts about a particular issue. Great acting and a ery brave topic to cover.
Fantastic work all round. An astonishing set of episodes.
The psychiatrist's testimony was mind-blowing and he practically took over the court with his express-train fastidiousness. And what he was saying was so convoluted you could hardly keep up - added to the fact that what he said was so shocking.
Excellent.
Not the last time Bill Paterson would play a psychiatrist so well.
Unnerving episode and very brave of Frank Windsor to accept the role. Given the revelations, the verdict was the only possible one. The judge handled this extraordinary case with great dignity.
think Frank Windsor admitted his agent "ripped him off" somewhat after Softly Softly finished and was forced to take any work by the late 70s
I’m only 58 but recognised him from somewhere. I’d completely forgotten about Softly Softly.
Frank Windsor played the role brilliantly
'I breed dogs' must be the most defiant line I've heard in Crown Court episodes, delivered by Mrs Selsey in cold rage. This is superb writing and acting with a stern judge to keep the lid on an explosive cauldron of emotions. Yes, far ahead of its time and still topical in an age when we know what Jimmy Savile, Rolf Harris and others were capable of. I remember that the actor William Gaunt went on to be a regular sitcom performer in pretty poor, bland shows - what a waste! He could have done a lot better if he'd found more roles like this one.
Your right about Gaunt. A talent frittered away.
She almost bred inbreds.
Powerful episode. One of the best. The acting is sublime by all . Thank you 👌
Nice to see William Gaunt as the defending barrister. Back then he was more well known for his role in the 1960s adventure series "The Champions".
And also nice to see a young Bill Patterson play the medical expert.
But, by God, this is very powerful drama. If it was shown on TV today it would be massively controversial. Brilliantly acted by everybody.
Well. This is one of two episodes in Crown Court that has stayed stuck in my memory since childhood. Not everything that happened - it was over 40 years ago when I saw it, but a particular moment when the older daughter gave evidence. I was 11 at the time and remember being both confused and shocked. It was one of those things I just never forgot. Watching it 40 years on it is still shocking, but I was very glad to have the chance to watch it again this time as an adult and be able to understand it properly from an adult's perspective - as well as appreciate the awesome acting - and it has sort of put the old memory I had to rest. The other episode that I remember is also here (To Love Cherish and Batter) and I will watch it properly soon. Jez I already greatly appreciate you uploading all these wonderful Crown Court episodes but am particularly grateful to you for uploading these - thank you.
My absolute pleasure! 🙂👍
I remember this one well
It's quite mindboggling to step back in time and be reminded how ill-informed and casually society viewed the sexual abuse of children! To hear the prosecutor suggest that in most cases the situation would happily resolve itself 🤦 that barristers keep referring to 'making love ' 🤦 Thank God we've moved on from a psychiatrist who almost seems to condone what happened. The mother is a strong contender for having been abused herself..her rigidity, frigidity and utter lack of a moral compass and care for her own daughters. There is still a strong urban myth that the perpetrators of these abuses commit the offences because they were abused themselves. Statistics repeatedly prove this wrong. Most perpetrators are male and most victims are female. It does a great disservice to victims to keep alive the myth that they are somehow now programmed to become abusers themselves. A very thought provoking episode. Brave performances from the actors playing the parents.
Excellent comment. This was 1979 - the heyday of P.I.E. who were affiliated to the National Council for Civil Liberties until 1982. I noticed NCCL got a mention in this episode. P.I.E. hijacked the gay rights movement to advocate for what they disgustingly called 'children's sexual rights' - they even got airtime on Newsnight. As a child growing up in the 70s and 80s, it doesn't surprise me that Savile got away with it. We must never let those attitudes gain a foothold again.
Abusers can raise abused abusers but then straight parents raise gay kids, gay parents can raise a gay child and vice versa. That's if you want to frame child abuse as in the orientation frame which definitely exists but the motivation is usually just one part of a larger function of power, humiliation and so forth.
I agree that even 30-40 years ago, language and sentiment was terrible about issues like sex, drugs etc but a lot of it can be placed at the door of improper "research" and training that were often haphazard and biased.
Modern research has come a long way to giving the public and professionals something more robust to hand their attitudes on than some 20th century text "On the treatment of X" by some self declared expert on whatever topic that borrows heavily from unverified sources and the author's opinion.
And also thank God for the development of statistical methods of analysis and fostering a more open minds.
@@aj2080xy6Yes. I still say that programs like this may have been, and still are difficult for some viewers. But, the benefits of educating the public at large about taboo subjects such as this is are important for so many reasons. i.e. there could be a person suffering sexual abuse in the home, or the parent who has remained passive, perhaps until seeing such a program. Such a program could be the catalyst for change within that very home.
One of the unsavouriest CCs I've seen so far. Keep 'em coming Jez!
Thank you so much for uploading these, Jez.
What a tale. Thanks Jez.
Top rate writing, but this was a disturbing watch. Thanks for the upload, though.
I suppose, after sitting through that utterly astonishing piece of 70s DAYTIME drama, no doubt because I was eventually numbed to the entire theme, the thing that rather sadly sticks in my mind is Michael Elphick's acting gesture to someone "off" for "a quick snifter down the pub" - the thing that he struggled with throughout his life and which took a talented actor from us long before what should have been his time.
I think I'd need more than a quick snifter after hearing all that - seriously.
Ineresting to hear the link between this case and the National Council for Civil Liberties mentioned in dialogue at 1:09:46. This was the body to which the Peodophile Information Exchange was affiliated at the very time this story was broadcast. The NCCL, today known as "Liberty" made submissions to parliament in 1976 that "Childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult result in no identifiable damage… The real need is a change in the attitude which assumes that all cases of paedophilia result in lasting damage". Harriet Harman in 1979 gave an argument in a paper that bore her intials that the age of consent should be lowered to 10 years old.
Unbelievable, I am sorry, but they are mentally sick in my opinion.
The performance by the actress who played the mother was excellent eh?
Top one never expected the twists and turns this case took daddy was a bacon bonce poor kids, thanks for your upload jezz.
I have to say that in the whole of the Crown Court series this episode is the most painful to watch.
Bloody hell wasn't expecting this to turn out as it did
As a relative and friend of several people who have been seriously damaged by child abusers, I want to take those parents and string them up. The father may well have been abused himself and also, on some level, thinks it’s normal, but the mother.... “nobody was harmed” ! Selfish *@%&*. Fantastic drama! Sadly all too realistic.
This took my breath away!
So powerful.
These cases may be fictional, but usually very true to life. I bet the statistics are correct. And that was 40 years ago. Very brave scriptwriter to put such a brilliant and revealing story together. Very brave of all the actors involved. So sad that humans are so 'programmed' and ignorant that we find so many ways to damage and destroy each other and ourselves.
Why was the father not arrested immediately after the evidence was tendered? Wasn't he a flight risk?
No
They were arrested after
Many thanks Jez.
I was particularly interested to note that this episode was written by acclaimed British author the late David Yallop. I live in New Zealand, and Mr Yallop wrote a book 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt' about the high profile Arthur Allan Thomas murder case here during the 1970s. Mr Thomas spent a decade in prison but was eventually pardoned and paid almost a million NZD (a vast sum back in those days) in compensation.
The same David Yallop which later wrote a excellent book on FIFA called How They Stole The Game
Loving these - thanks for posting - wasn't that a stunning episode - a few jaw dropping moments! They don't make em like that anymore. Brilliant..
63 (in 2023) and even I, having lived through the tumultuous times post vietnam war era, I am gobsmacked!
'O' that was different, we never know what happens behind closed doors until...
Daytime TV didn’t pull its punches back then
Very disturbing episode! Brilliantly acted!
I noticed an uncredited Jonathan Morris (19 at the time) he would later to go on to play Adrian Boswell in seven series of Carla Lane's sitcom Bread 86-91
Did I spot 'Our Adrian' from Bread sitting in the row in front of the barriesters? Great episode, very uncomfortable watch.
... kinda like your spelling of "barristers".
I was shocked...absolutely brilliant acting.
Thanks Jez T, i am watching avidly, and brilliant actors like Michael Elphick, in a number of roles, also William Gaunt, and more i noticed the young actors in the front of the barristers , like Jonthon morris from tv series bread, in this episode ,
great episode
Thanks Jez.
Blimey - good wholesome lunchtime viewing - those were the days:)
Some weren't aired in the afternoon
Best time to broadcast - while the kids were in school.
I love how Michael Elphick's character signals 'fancy a quick drink?' to the other barrister at the end, just as the credits start to roll.
I didn't notice that at first but, yes, what a nice touch at the end! A lot for the two barristers to discuss....
I spotted that, a great touch!
In another episode Michael Elphick plays a witness. The episode is "Treason".
I’m not surprised after that case....😵
I think a stiff drink would be in order after a case like that
Shell shocked by this one. And to think, it was shown at lunchtime...
Not easy watching, I agree. Phenomenal acting though, especially from Frank Windsor. Some CC episodes were shown in the evening. I suspect this may have been one of them.
Even then, the evening ones were at 7.30pm if I recall. It always seemed in those days that the rules were fuzzier about daytime content, since they assumed children weren't watching.
I think the evening times varied depending on where you were watching it in the country, given that ITV was regional when the programme was made. Still, whatever time it was on, this particular story was not the most comfortable of viewing.
I watched the afternoon ones, none were this disturbing
Yep, checked, and this one was shown at 1.30pm in all regions. Astounding.
I think I would have remembered being off school for this one. Its no wonder is it that everyone in the Granada land region was suicidal
This looks a good one jez. Be Christmas before I finish these,great though.
Wonderfull Episode Frank Windsor was so good it very heavy subject the eldest daughter throws a spanner in the works
I remember seeing the final episode when it was originally screened. I must have been off school. Anyway, coming from an ordinary family I was totally shocked by what I was hearing. It had never ocurred to me that this sort of thing went on. I was very naive back then. I don't think defence/prosecution counsels would refer to the Bible as factual these days!
There was a case in Japan in the 1960s where a daughter killed the father who raped her. This seems to be loosely based on that and hence the psychiatrist's allusion to incest being normal in Japan.
In general, I think the take on this subject was more eye opening than would be acceptable today. Society nowadays likes its morals more distinct and without any blurring of lines. Perhaps today's approach makes for a safer world but it doesn't capture the complicated and sometimes mysterious aspects of human interactions very well.
Ouch, that was a tough one. Bless those girls.
Without doubt, the best episode that I have seen! So many twists!
Wow,so strong and disturbing for the time. This wouldn't have been shown in the afternoon I bet,
They all were. I only ever got yo see them when I was at home, off school ill. The theme music makes me think of a bed made on the settee with Heinz chicken soup and my cat.
Plenty for the QCs to discuss in the pub! My guess was that the father was violent in the striking sense, but I didn't see the statutory rape coming. The mother was almost as blameworthy as he was. Great storyline and acting. Michael Elphick and the other QC played the roles so well. So did the family members. I knew Frank Windsor's face from the early '70s, but only remembered the advert he did. Z-Cars and Softly Softly, then!
William Gaunt loved him
Well, there ARE some interesting twist and turns in this one, not the least Michael Ken Boon, Gerhardt Schultz Elphick putting in a surprisingly believable performance as a legal counsel - and I'm only 33 mins in!
Well, there ARE some interesting twist and turns in
this one, not the least Michael Ken Boon, Gerhardt Schultz Elphick putting in a
surprisingly believable performance as a legal counsel
Well, there ARE some interesting twist and turns in this one, not the least
Michael Ken Boon, Gerhardt Schultz Elphick putting in a surprisingly believable
performance as a legal counsel!
Does anybody know which episode the actress Tessa Worsley was in? she was a prolific radio actress for most of her later career and was absolutely brilliant.
Wow , this is powerful stuff .I`m glad I was too young to understand words like incest when I was home from school for lunch .
Weren't we lucky to have a childhood. Even the youngest children are casually familiar with things I found shocking to discover as an adult..
.turning in to a good one this.
You would struggle to get this past the censors after the watershed to-day, how they managed to get away with confronting such heavy topics on daytime television I have no idea, good though.
The psychiatrist sounds like he was making a case for incest
It’s difficult hearing them refer to the sex they’re having as, “making love”.
Actress who plays Mrs. Selsey was in my favorite Dalgliesh series. She played a real witch of a nursing instructor in a nursing school in the Dalgliesh series, “Shroud for a Nightingale.”
Ugh horrendous. I can't watch it. 😢
Detective Sergeant John Watt taking it 'Softly Softly'. Still, there's 'No Place Like Home'. What a 'Boon!'
I see what you did there, JKMMOC...! ;)
yeah M Elphick was great, so was the No place like home/champions actor. Best combination of barristers so far..
William gaunt
Michael Elphick gesturing to the defence barrister at 1:12:16 to a drink foreshadows his eventual alcoholism.
Damn. Grim story. Great acting.
48:33 - Enjoy your trip?
there r many such bastardly heartless fathers.....
Theres a man and woman on the jury who keep going bright red
Not surprisingly
She is going to prison, to visit her father.
Trick cyclists usually more effed up than their patients.
“One must never say that the police are liars “
-Quentin Crisp
Some of these are terrible, others are like film noir. This is a humdinger.
Glad you enjoyed, kalistalev. I loved this one as the whole trial turned on its head once the daughter took the stand. Great writing and acting.
Did know that Jonathan Morris was in crown court
sick, sick, sick...both of the parents!!! i take it they were arrested, tried, declared guilty, and sent to prison for many years.
A truly shocking and explosive storyline. Did this episode go out at the normal afternoon timeslot ? If it did I would suggest there were very many red faces amongst its viewers
Although I realise it's fictitious, the only thing I wonder about is bearing in mind the attitude of the girl's parents, how did it get to court in the first place?
Police MUST operate from the law’s perspective. Bring charges. The courts are there to sort the trash, and impose sentences set by law.
Wow. I lost myself in this one and she'd a tear. The poor girl shouldn't have had to sit through it. The prosecution should have thrown in the towel wgen the impish elder sister threw the hand grenade. Heartless
The psychiatrist reminded me of Peter Tatchell. I was quite surprised when he said 'Japan' and not 'Sambia Tribe'.
Gosh, the mother would make a great Lady Macbeth.
What was the sentence.in the man with everything jez.
You're quite right, Kirk, they don't mention the sentence. I suppose we're left hanging as his defence counsel tries to negotiate the sentence down on his behalf.
So that poor kid leaves the court and goes back home with dear old Mum and Dad??
Alan Rowe! Electrocuted by a Rutan, as I recall.
He didn’t fair too well in The Moonbase either, if I recall!
Actors are members of the public.
If you're referring to the jury, you're correct, except that the jury foreman had a speaking part and so had to be an Equity member.
Bugger me sideways! That took a turn eh?
Did anyone else think of Dr. R. D. Laing when the psychiatrist spoke? I'd put money on the writer being influenced by him!
😲😲😲😲😲😲
Ya know, that stuff about Japanese law was pretty out there. Sure, incest between consenting adults isn't a crime, but the same could have been said for France (and currently Spain and Portugal, but I'm not sure if it was legal in 1979). The way they said it made it sound like any dad could do what the dad did in Japan, but of course Japan (and other countries where adult incest is legal) has an age of consent. Uncool.
They all look the same, anyway, those Japanese - as do the Chinese and other similar peoples!
this wouldnt never made the assizes !
Follow that with a vase of lowers Nancy Kominski if you can!
The Selseys have to be the worst advert for Anarchism I’ve ever heard .
Incest, a game the whole family can play.
Sick story line! I’m out..
Watch the Freemason hand signs.
A VERY EDUCATIONAL PROBLEM IN SOCIETY:
This should be shown in every High Schools:
Instead of ramming Contraception on the
teenage GIRLS:
Children should have Knowledge taught to
them, where the family or parents are
backward .... like this family/or similar.
It's such a delicate subject:
●●●● Look at the MOTHER,
SHE WAS THE
CAUSE OF DESTROYING THE
FATHER AND THE 2 DAUGHTERS:
AS YOU CAN SEE THE BURDEN
IS ON THE FEMALE TEENAGER:
SO MUCH RESPONSIBILITY:
THESE YOUNG TEENAGER GIRLS ARE
STILL DEVELOPING PHYSICALLY &
MENTALLY:
I MUST COMPLIMENT THE ACTORS..
Typical bunch of hypocrite 'so-called Church goers" family storyline. (such circumstances does exist) Very poignant for the actors to play the role.
Typical? Really?
Scary how Mom Insists It's Private & Acceptable.
My goodness me , referring to a psychiatrist ? What could he or she possibly do that common sense and moral decency could not be answered by the average man or woman ? Diplomas and degrees in psycho babble , and they call themselves experts.
Be gender aware.
Michael elphick was giving evidence in one episode and he's a barrister in this one he's gone right up the ladder
"A Family Affair" would have been a better title 🥸