Law & Order

This beautifully and cleverly researched series of three separate plays touched a sensitivity at the time; and history has proved that it was not too far from the mark. It was shown on BBC2 in 1978. THIS SHOULD BE RELEASED ON VIDEO/DVD before this magnificent 'tour de force' is lost forever.

Three stories; the Detective's Tale, The Villains Tale and the prisoner's Tale. Each character's situation, raison d'etre is explored ruthlessly by Newman and each character's flaws and mind sets contribute to a withering examination of the legal profession, the police and villainy in general.

The story was broadcast at the time of the notorious 'Countryman' country-wide police enquiry (mischevious timing perhaps) and made the whole country think again about the truth that some (very) few, police officers had become a law unto to themselves. Beautifully scripted with wry humour.

The actual story has three central characters Jack Lynn (villain), Alex Gladwell (lawyer) and the magnificent Inspector Pyle of the Met.Police, who produces the ultimate portrayal of a bent detective, a classic example of a good detective, gone wrong.

The background is an armed robbery that went wrong but had sufficient substance in it to enable Pyle to fit up Jack Lynn.

There are no heroes in this film.

This play will anger, frustrate, disturb and uncomfortably amuse.

Finally released on DVD in April 2009, well worth the long wait too.

Totally compelling TV, numerous short clips in many documentaries over the years gave a small indication of the superior nature of this drama, I can tell you those indication were entirely correct.

Extras include a 25 min film on the making on the series and the effects it had, on TV drama and on the body politic.

This is no mere 'bash the police' work, it's far more complex than that, more of a 'plague on all your houses' for the justice system, prison system and criminal classes too.

The tone, acting dialogue all ring true-the latter within the constraints of the watershed for swearing at the time (though it was still attacked for this and many who saw it thought it was far worse than it actually was).

For me, another stark element of Law And Order is just how Britain, London, looked in the late 1970's. Without the tedious and contrived shots of famous London landmarks-Big Ben, Tower Bridge etc, that are often inserted into shows in assuming an international audience is stupid, the drabness of the streets is so apparent.

I've noticed this too with The Sweeney (Euston Films tended to film outside scenes with as little 'dressing' as possible), the greyness of London suburban high streets, fewer cars-fewer people too, less advertising, drab shops. At night, in Law and Order, the streets look to us now, something like London in the blackout of world war 2, shops nearly all closed in the later afternoon, fewer places to eat out. One suspects that then, the only brightly lit parts of London were Piccadilly Circus and the clubs, sex shops and strip joints of Soho.

This adds to the general atmosphere of Law and Order, a lot is made of detectives, as a matter of routine, taking 'bungs' from recovered stolen money, insurance scams, payoffs from informants. Not to excuse this, but in 1977/8, when this series was made and shown, the police were poorly paid. (One of the first things the Thatcher government did was to change this, there may have been an element of anticipating using them later to bust mass strike action, however it's just as likely that trying to break the practices shown in this series was also a factor).

However, nothing is for nothing, from the early 80's, the laws and procedures concerning interviewing of suspects, evidence, public prosecutions, was radically changed. Whatever your political views, this was an overdue change, given that a few years before, Law and Order had provoked fury amongst many politicians and other parts of the establishment, which then settled into some soul searching, this superb piece of drama, made without excessive controls and constraints, maybe played a small part in this change.

In any case, if you want highly absorbing, gritty, realistic and now with a 30 year hindsight, fascinating historic drama, I cannot recommend G.F. Newman's Law and Order highly enough. Like the adverts for Coca Cola at the time - it's the real thing.

I wonder whether the inexcusable omission of this series from the Video and DVD catalogues has anything to do with potentially causing the same sort of disquiet.I do hope not. Controversy is now the stuff of TV drama. No subject is sacred.

The attention to detail as far as 'correct' police procedure is concerned was commendable. This happens rarely today. The poetic licence taken, makes one wonder why police advisers are employed. Actually I believe that it is only to give some insipid police drama some sort credibility.

Whatever, nothing must get in the way of the obligatory love story, sex scene, unbelievably stupid senior police officer and so on.

This magnificent mini-series should be seen as superlative drama, not as some sort of contemporary social comment.

This superb series now seems to be lost forever - at least, I have found no way of viewing it again. Shot it a style which appears convincingly to be a documentary, it tells the story of London blagger Jack Lynn from four different perspectives: the detective's tale, the villain's tale, the brief's tale and finally the prisoner's tale. The cops are bent and Lynn is 'well overdue' for a bit of porridge, so DI Fred Pyall fits him up for an armed robbery. Despite his protests of innocence, Lynn is duly convicted and gets, I think, a seven stretch. We see him at the end languishing in jail for a crime he had nothing to do with. At least that's my recollection of it - I saw it once (in 1978) and have been yearning to see it again ever since. (This was in the days before VCRs.)

"Law & Order" was recently shown on BBC4 as part of that channel's policy of televising classic dramas, often from the seventies. It is a series of four connected plays dealing with the commission of a robbery. It is sometimes said that each of the four stories is told from a different perspective, but this is not quite correct. The first story is told from the perspective of Fred Pyle, the detective investigating the robbery, the second from that of Jack Lynn, a criminal, and the third from that of Alex Gladwell, the solicitor who acts for Lynn when he is accused of involvement in the robbery. The fourth story is again told from the perspective of Lynn, but he is now in jail, having been convicted of the offence.

When originally broadcast in 1978, the series was highly controversial because of author G F Newman's obviously jaundiced view of the police, the legal system, the prison system, and anyone connected with them. The police are shown as corrupt. Pyle is an amoral character who will do anything to obtain a conviction, including falsifying evidence. The only criminals whom Pyle does not want to prosecute are those who are prepared to pay him backhanders in exchange for immunity, or those whom he can persuade to give evidence against their fellows. He does not really care whether their evidence is true or false, so long as it will convince a jury. He is not in fact particularly concerned about whether the defendant is in fact guilty or innocent; Lynn, for example, was not involved in the robbery for which he was convicted, and Pyle knows it.

The prison staff are shown as brutal and prepared to use violence against prisoners at the least provocation, something which the prison governor tacitly encourages. Gladwell poses as a radical lawyer, but is in fact a cynical opportunist, prepared to act for both police and criminals if the price is right. He acts as Lynn's defence solicitor, or "brief", but does not mention to him that he is a friend of Pyle, the police officer who is trying to "fit him up" for the robbery. (The criminal fraternity tend to refer to all lawyers as "briefs", although strictly speaking the term is only applicable to barristers).

Newman was predictably denounced by the Establishment; some MPs went to far as to demand that he be prosecuted for sedition. (A ridiculous demand; the offence of sedition, which has since been abolished, required a direct incitement to disorder and violence). He was frequently referred to as a "left-wing playwright", although he himself has said that he does not identify with either the Left or the Right. Moreover, unlike some leftists, he never attempts to romanticise or sentimentalise criminals, or even to make excuses for them. Lynn has not been forced into a life of crime by unemployment or poverty; he has deliberately chosen that lifestyle because it affords him a higher standard of living than working honestly. (We learn that he owns a house worth £25,000, at a time when the average price was around £15,000).

Newman's dialogue is mostly written in a colourful Cockney vernacular; those not familiar with criminal slang may have difficulty following some of what is said. I am a lawyer myself, and even I learned a few new terms. (Criminals usually refer to informers by the familiar term "grass", but the policemen in the series tend to prefer "snout", which was new to me).

Another feature of the series is how cold and uninviting everywhere seems. You wouldn't expect a prison to be visually attractive, but the police station, Gladwell's office, the London streets and even Lynn's home seem equally dull and colourless. I had forgotten just how drab Callaghan's Britain could be.

There are three excellent performances in the main roles- from Ken Campbell as the sly, foxy Gladwell and from Peter Dean as the thuggish hard-man Lynn, full of righteous indignation over the fact that he has been convicted of a crime that he did not commit, but overlooking he has gone unpunished for numerous crimes, some of them involving violence, that he did commit. The best, in my view, is that from Derek Martin as the shamelessly corrupt Pyle, a man who is as great a threat to law and order in Britain as an overt villain like Lynn.

My main criticism of the series is that Newman tends to overstate his case. There doubtless were bent coppers and vicious prison officers in seventies Britain; Newman, however, does not seem to believe that there were any decent or honourable ones. Overall, however, this is a powerful and gripping drama, well overdue for its recent re-airing on BBC4. 7/10.