Globalti
Legendary Member
It's been good with some first class acting but last night's episode stretched my belief too far - okay, the recurring theme of the series is how people dig themselves deeper and deeper into trouble as they try to wriggle out of it so perhaps the writer considers the eventual verdicts of secondary importance but I cannot believe that a jury would have found the bloke guilty of murder. Surely it was clear that he and his mates had no intention of killing the dog walker? The two mates kicked the victim many times while the Accused only punched him once, so why the murder verdict for him while his mates got off scot-free? Surely all three should have been convicted of manslaughter?
Where's Patrick?
Where's Patrick?