Judge John Deed

I have definite rules for all television series. Do they hold my attention? Are they well written? Are they well acted? In the case of this series, the answers are yes, yes and yes.

Starting with the writer, nobody seems to mention him. The stories are well crafted, the different strands of each episode are seamless. I assume that Newman either has some knowledge of the law or access to those that do as the words of John Deed make sense to the viewer.

The cast is attractive with a large number of regulars who have stuck with it for some years, always a good sign of their belief in the project. Martin Shaw is always good value for money. The beautiful Jenny Seagrove, (what did she see in Michael Winner), Sir Donald Sinden doing his Donald Sinden act, Christopher Cazenove et als, all turn in quality performances.

Some have seen fit to compare this unfavourably with Rumpole of the Bailey, I cannot see the comparison. This is not played for laughs though there is humour a-plenty. This does not have the "clever" endings. This is a good attempt to portray English justice. At 90 minutes an episode, true things have to be tidied a little. A sub-plot is added and we see the human side of the characters' private lives. Each episode I have watched has held my attention, wholly and completely, to the credit titles at the end.

A better comparison than Rumpole is probably the late, great John Thaw in Kavanagh QC. This, I know, was based on a real character, latterly elevated to the bench before his untimely death, the real Kavanagh was a friend of mine. I do not know if Deed is based on a real judge, or judges, but I would guess at "probably".

I have seen some of the episodes more than once and they do not suffer from repetition. Yes I am a fan, long may Judge John Deed sit on the bench. And at only a handful of episodes a year, this viewer always yearns for his return.

I am rather disappointed as the series unfolds. What started as something very special and believable, is turning into a total farce. When I say "what started" I mean when I started to watch it, I have no idea what episode it was, actually I did only watch one or two episodes at first, and much latter got involved more regularly with it. But the last episode I watched was a case against animal right protest people who seemed to have maliciously planted a bomb in some animal lab resulting in someone's death. The problem with accepting so many side stories with the case is that eventually the case seems secondary to the stories. And the whole show seems bogged in a lot of superficial gossip material that does very little to entertain me. Just try this for evaluation. A judge has in his court for a murder trial his inexperienced and not really qualified daughter left in charge of the defense, occasionally helped by HIS deserting mistress - and here we're supposed to be talking about a Conservative judge! This is rather worrying - are we going to end up with judge john Days-of-our-life? There is no doubt about Martin Shaw's charisma. He is very good. I imagine, with series, directors and writers have to stretch beyond themselves and their talent for the show to go on. What a pity!

There have been two series so far of this programme. It seems deliberately to set out to contradict the impression of the British legal system portrayed by the excellent "Rumpole of the Bailey", of senile judges and smug arch-conservative barristers.

Here, the main character has radical leanings, a messy private life and a very active libido. Much of the sub-plot is involved with side-swipes at the (Labour) government of the day, although the implication is that power corrupts; the political complexion of the office holders doesn't affect their greed or ambition.

The one common factor with other screen portrayals of the British legal system is the very precise diction and grammar used by barristers and judges. The courtroom scenes are well worth watching.

Some elements of the plot rather strain belief, but the series is quite enjoyable.

I did actually work in the judicial sector many moons ago in an administrative role and I saw the day to day workings of the British judicial system. Judge John Deed is an extremely realistic show.

Martin Shaw can play any part and is the perfect choice to play the conservative judge. Each show has focused on Deed's courtroom antics and his private life along with the politics that go hand in hand with the judicial system.

Having worked for the judicial sector, I can tell you that this show is realistic on so many fronts. One thing that Deed has to put up with in this show is bureaucracy and politics from the powers that be and I know that is how the judiciary works. Deed is his own man and interested only in seeing justice served. He isn't interested in politics and advancing his career and will not compromise his principles to get ahead. In each show, he usually has to contend with Sir Ian Rochester, a squirmy little bureaucrat from the Lord Chancellors Department.

The courtroom scenes are fantastic and Deed does everything he can to get to the truth. He does seem to take on the roles of the barristers from time to time but he believes in the truth only.

Deed is a very conservative judge whereas a lot of real life judges in the UK are more liberal than conservative. Deed has no hesitation in punishing those who are guilty but if there are extenuating circumstances, then he will consider the options. Deed realises that the law is not black and white and that there are very grey areas in between.

All in all, a realistic portrayal of life as a senior judge. Check it out.

Having been bought up in Australia with a father who was a barrister and once offered a Supreme Court judicial appointment - I have to say that this program goes a long way to showing the true imperialism of the judicial system.

My father rejected the overtures for his own reasons but having watched Deeds I have to say I have seen it all. A judge is a mentor, a guardian, an executioner but most of all a human being. The politics that goes with the position is common.

Look at your own life! Change Deeds into the counselor at school, the mediator in a dispute, the local parish priest, the HR officer at work and somewhere there is a Deeds in it.

To look upon the law and see the stupidity of it is a gift most lack because there is no law just politics and Judge John Deed highlights that more than any law and order program now or in the past. I believe this is the intention of the program. Entertain - definitely - educate on how the system is and can be twisted more than likely.

Watch Deeds and say to yourself "Why is it so =- how can this happen - and how many times has it happened?". Watch again the next week and ask the same question.

Be prepared to think