Looks like a MUST SEE and I have a suspicion may interest everyone intrigued by my own case.

The writer was a barrister and I gather has observed the system first hand at close up.

It really doesn't work.

Watch and think.

It looks like a very good mini serial judging by the trailers.

Also it is a look at the legal system and how flawed it is or can be.

I will certainly be watching it.

Interesting that the Police were more interested in a) solving the case without any evidence at all and b) The solicitor was interested in making sure that the accused did not hand over any info to the Police.

It proves that the solicitor was totally right about "winning" being everything and the truth being secondary.

The final comments about "money" earnt from the possible trial for everyone was surely a dig at the fact that "justice" makes profits for many people.

In an ideal world "justice" should be free and not another part of Capitalism and the Market culture of Modern Day living.

It goes to show that "money and influence" are more important in any "trial" than the actual FACTS or TRUTH of what has happened.

On this basis our prisons are probably full of innocent people and the criminals with "cash" are running around the streets of our towns "beyond the law"

Funny how New Labour are stuffed full of those who "work" the Justice system - and they have brought in so many new laws in the last 10 years for that system it must mean that lawyers now need double the time to look at cases....thus earning double the money.

Nice work if you can get it.

It really is a very interesting and valid examination in the guise of fiction.
I do hope people are getting the right message.

Totally getting the message.

What bothers me is that Ben Coulter (the accused) is being offered deals by the lawyers and yet if you don't know if you've killed the woman, surely you plead not guilty.

It is a fascinating drama, however, JK if you would have pleaded guilty, what sentence would you have had?

Joey Barton pleaded not guilty (currently serving a six month sentence) to assaulting a fellow team-mate. However, when told there was CCTV evidence against him and prosecution witnesses (fellow team-mates) who saw it, then he was advised to plead guilty resulting in a suspended jail sentence. He will probably be released next week.

I was advised to plead guilty, Mike, "because everyone is convicted in these kinds of cases where there is no evidence and it's one person's word against another's" and told - like all school teachers - "the jury automatically find middle aged men with grey hair and glasses guilty".

I was told I would then get two years maximum.

I refused, was convicted and was given 7 years.

Watch Vile Pervert: The Musical and listen to Plead Guilty.

The writer continually gets "digs" in about the "cost" of criminal justice.

Last night the accused was offered a Manslaughter Deal because of the higher cost of doing a trial ! The Police bloke was scandalised by this......and all the legal people were urging the lad to say he was guilty regardless of the truth.

If this is justice then it stinks.

It is very brave of the writer and the BBC to actually put this on TV.

Many people like JK and others have highlighted the massive unfairness of the Justice System in the UK over the last few years - but always from the side of the accused. This seems to be the first "expose" from someone from the "legal" side of the fence.

I dont believe that the decent Police believe in the system either. It seems to favour the criminal and penalise those who have no experience of the system.

As was said in the Prison sequences - it is all about negotiation and contracts and getting the best deal.

I would hope that if David Davis becomes Home Secretary at the next election he simplifies the legal system. In addition cases without evidence should not go to court and cases with evidence should not be allowed to go down silly routes of bargaining.

The whole system is designed to protect criminals and convict innocent people.

In addition without evidence no crime should go to court that has allegedly taken place more than 5 years ago. As John Leslie said - how on earth can anyone remember what they were doing/did 13+ years ago.

The Police seem to have given up dealing with current stabbings and crime which are out of control in order to pursue the "compensaion claim culture" offences which need NO evidence from 10 - 20 or more years ago.

This needs to be stopped and I think that all of us have a role to play when telling our MPs that we want a fair and transparent Justice system in the UK which relies on evidence NOT hearsay and "deals".

As another young lad is knifed at 16 years old and the Police are no-where to be seen on the streets of London ( you see them roaring around in cars with sirens instead ) surely it is time for a total rethink of the way in which our justice system has become an issue of MONEY rather than JUSTICE.

My solicitor told me that he advises all of his clients to say nothing at all to the police because everything can be used against them out of context. In one of his earlier cases the police discussed the weather with his client. The prosecution council then told the jury that thew defendant seemed to care more about the weather than "his crime". Our most innocent casual comment can be used against us.

I have downloaded 'Vile Pervert' at lunch-time, so I intend to watch it over the weekend.

I find that disgusting that if you believe you are innocent (or you are innocent), you are still advised to plead guilty to get a lighter sentence. What on earth has happened to the justice service.

Quite astonishing.

Like a lot of cases, I am always very suspicious when someone makes an allegation, a number of years after the 'alleged offence'. Especially in the celebrity field.

I am looking forward to Part 3 tonight, although I suspect that if the weather carries on in the same vein, Mr Murray may be on court at 9pm finishing his match with Nadal, hence delaying things.

After Episode 3 - some very good bits but it is veering towards caricature.

Didn't like the prison scenes (who pinched the mobile phone?), much preferred the court-room scenes, however, it is still very distrubing that Ben was not allowed to tell the truth.

I think that Con O'Neill has been terrific as Stone, looked at his profile, he has got an impressive CV.

Very annoying prison bits (forced heroin addiction? Never - people like myself would never have allowed that; unlike the image, prisons are mainly controlled by the many DECENT people in them).

I was very responsible for 12 people getting their convictions quashed on appeal (through intelligent reading of the documents) and many others released.

If that was one person in only 3 years and 3 jails, imagine the reality of us "prison lawyers".

Hi Folks

Back from my hols - have been enjoying this series very much (but very annoyed that the start was "delayed" because of some rifdiculous tennis match). I could have missed the start entirely and then not bothered watching the rest.

Yes - the prison scenes seemed to follow stereotyping - but the courtroom scenes were still electric - especially where the young barrister embarassed the Senior Policeman.

It does make you wonder though - there are 60 and 70 year old pensioners in Prison for not paying their council tax - yet there are people who injure and assault people who the system seems to keep on the streets at all costs............

Plus the many "decent" people who get stitched up by a system they dont know anything about. The "Nothing to hide" attitude is totally ridiculous when you have a system which the Police are ONLY a prosecuting force so from the moment the Police talk to someone they are looking to prosecute and make all information "fit" the paperwork.

This has been a real eye opener for everyone and no wonder the Legal Profession is up in arms about it. It is showing up their love of money and their disregard for truth.

The most upsetting moment in my entire experience was discovering that the police are not interested in the truth - they just want convictions.

I actually told them loads of stuff which I thought would help them discover the truth. They used it all against me.

I wondered how they could live with themselves. But they do.

I think they have very thick skin and a mortgage to pay JK.
I do have a shocking story from a friend and I must ask them if I can tell it.

EPISODE FOUR - sadly getting better as drama and less accurate as social observation.

Officers in no prisons I went to would behave like this lot did.
With a remand prisoner on a murder charge they are genuinely sympathetic.
Except for the odd bad apple.

Listeners are in a far greater position of trust than portrayed by the wonderful Pete Postlethwaite and do not sell their info to these imaginary prison "Lords".

The truly powerful in prison are the lifers (who have nothing to lose) who tend to be very calming and peaceful.

And the junior barrister's behaviour? No way.

As yesterday's observation, did not like the prison scenes and I felt the junior barrister's behaviour was inappropriate (kissing Ben). How would normal prison officers feel watching the fight scene and letting the prisoners get on with it.

However, you are right, it is a great drama and it has been very well acted.

Only just caught some of it now properly.
It is very ITV in style for a Beeb programme.
Quite addictive from the start and I really like the jade middle aged lawyer character who looks like he is more used to conveyancing, he is pretty real.
The rest of the characters, I really can`t take seriously.
"24", it is not, but then neither are more recent series of that classic programme.

Over 5 million viewers and winning the slot in the ratings every night by a long way.

So it is a substantial success. Let's hope some of the serious messages are getting through.

Love Con O'Neill in it. His conversation about dead skin from his infected foot on the new carpet (to a lady he then proceeds to sleep with) were classic!