*/
The BBC drama Criminal Justice 2 raised important social issues, believes James Woolf
Last year I reviewed Criminal Justice for this magazine (see (2008) Counsel September, p 38). Its screening led to a public row between the Bar, and Peter Moffat, former barrister and writer of the series. Tim Dutton QC, last year’s Bar Chairman, accused the BBC of a woefully inaccurate depiction of the Bar, in particular because of the huge chasm between the on-screen barristers’ ethical practices and the actual Code of Conduct. Moffat’s response was to say that this was an overreaction, adding “[Timothy Dutton QC] wants to see things in black and white. At the Bar, just as in life, standards are all too often a different colour – grey.” My own view was that the series closely missed out on being brilliant because of these moments of implausibility. To cut a long story short, Moffat won a Bafta, the Bar forgot all about it and time marched on.
In the event, the Bar was less bothered by Criminal Justice 2 than its provocative but wayward elder sibling. Having spoken to barristers, they largely took the view that this was pure entertainment (served in nightly chunks) rather than a “state of the nation” legal drama. Therefore, even though there were clearly legal inaccuracies and exaggerations, a typical barrister would say that you should take no more account of those than if you had just been watching Judge John Deed.
This may be true, but only up to a point. Criminal Justice 2 did suffer from a tendency to resort to cliché or to distort. The QC’s clerk (played by Eddie Marsan) was more loyal dog than complex human and the legal establishment was lazily depicted as something of a self-preserving male club. And because of these faults, it’s all too easy to write the series off as frothy entertainment. But to do so would be a failure to recognise and engage with the important issues that Criminal Justice 2 undoubtedly raises.
As the Guardian argued, the series was probably the most realistic television portrayal of domestic violence in recent years. Julie Bindel, who has worked extensively with female prisoners, made the point that women facing charges of murder often refuse to disclose rape as a final act of provocation, even though they are looking at the prospect of a life sentence. She continued that the way the solicitor “encourages and enables her [client] to disclose that abuse should be a lesson to us all.”
And then of course the context to this domestic violence was striking. Joe Miller QC (Matthew Macfayden) – first shown appearing as a QC in a murder then became the victim in a murder trial himself. But he was also a perpetrator of violence towards his wife, who in turn also straddled both victim and perpetrator roles. Maxine Peake’s performance as Juliet rightly won many plaudits, drawing in our sympathies whilst simultaneously infuriating us by her apparent unwillingness to assist her own cause. Thirteen-year-old daughter Ella (Alison Sykes) was movingly caught in the crossfire of domestic and legal machinations, whilst Sophie Okonodo as Juliet’s solicitor offered a practical approach which was certainly a bonus to her client in comparison to her somewhat ineffective barrister (Zoe Telford).
There is no doubt that Moffat has much to say in the way of pertinent social commentary. The harsh imprisonment of Juliet led to a final image of her being separated from her baby which will haunt many viewers for years to come. But then, a small amount of specialist knowledge of the legal system makes the story start to unravel; why did the judge not have a pre-sentence report at his disposal; and why was there no appeal against a five-year-sentence that was obviously biased? The mark of a great writer is surely to dramatise without us ever once doubting the validity of the story. And on that point, with both series of Criminal Justice, the jury is still definitely out.
James Woolf is a member of the Bar Council secretariat. He is also a playwright
In the event, the Bar was less bothered by Criminal Justice 2 than its provocative but wayward elder sibling. Having spoken to barristers, they largely took the view that this was pure entertainment (served in nightly chunks) rather than a “state of the nation” legal drama. Therefore, even though there were clearly legal inaccuracies and exaggerations, a typical barrister would say that you should take no more account of those than if you had just been watching Judge John Deed.
This may be true, but only up to a point. Criminal Justice 2 did suffer from a tendency to resort to cliché or to distort. The QC’s clerk (played by Eddie Marsan) was more loyal dog than complex human and the legal establishment was lazily depicted as something of a self-preserving male club. And because of these faults, it’s all too easy to write the series off as frothy entertainment. But to do so would be a failure to recognise and engage with the important issues that Criminal Justice 2 undoubtedly raises.
As the Guardian argued, the series was probably the most realistic television portrayal of domestic violence in recent years. Julie Bindel, who has worked extensively with female prisoners, made the point that women facing charges of murder often refuse to disclose rape as a final act of provocation, even though they are looking at the prospect of a life sentence. She continued that the way the solicitor “encourages and enables her [client] to disclose that abuse should be a lesson to us all.”
And then of course the context to this domestic violence was striking. Joe Miller QC (Matthew Macfayden) – first shown appearing as a QC in a murder then became the victim in a murder trial himself. But he was also a perpetrator of violence towards his wife, who in turn also straddled both victim and perpetrator roles. Maxine Peake’s performance as Juliet rightly won many plaudits, drawing in our sympathies whilst simultaneously infuriating us by her apparent unwillingness to assist her own cause. Thirteen-year-old daughter Ella (Alison Sykes) was movingly caught in the crossfire of domestic and legal machinations, whilst Sophie Okonodo as Juliet’s solicitor offered a practical approach which was certainly a bonus to her client in comparison to her somewhat ineffective barrister (Zoe Telford).
There is no doubt that Moffat has much to say in the way of pertinent social commentary. The harsh imprisonment of Juliet led to a final image of her being separated from her baby which will haunt many viewers for years to come. But then, a small amount of specialist knowledge of the legal system makes the story start to unravel; why did the judge not have a pre-sentence report at his disposal; and why was there no appeal against a five-year-sentence that was obviously biased? The mark of a great writer is surely to dramatise without us ever once doubting the validity of the story. And on that point, with both series of Criminal Justice, the jury is still definitely out.
James Woolf is a member of the Bar Council secretariat. He is also a playwright
The BBC drama Criminal Justice 2 raised important social issues, believes James Woolf
Last year I reviewed Criminal Justice for this magazine (see (2008) Counsel September, p 38). Its screening led to a public row between the Bar, and Peter Moffat, former barrister and writer of the series. Tim Dutton QC, last year’s Bar Chairman, accused the BBC of a woefully inaccurate depiction of the Bar, in particular because of the huge chasm between the on-screen barristers’ ethical practices and the actual Code of Conduct. Moffat’s response was to say that this was an overreaction, adding “[Timothy Dutton QC] wants to see things in black and white. At the Bar, just as in life, standards are all too often a different colour – grey.” My own view was that the series closely missed out on being brilliant because of these moments of implausibility. To cut a long story short, Moffat won a Bafta, the Bar forgot all about it and time marched on.
The Chair of the Bar reports back
Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group, explains how global events can influence the performance of pensions and ISAs, and why taking a long-term approach to investing is often the most effective strategy
Mário Barroso, Head of R&D and Method Development at AlphaBiolabs, discusses what family law professionals need to know about hallucinogens, from the main hallucinogenic drugs encountered in family proceedings, to their effects and the testing options available
Harmony Christian Ministries is the latest charity to benefit from a £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative
By David Green
Mário Barroso, Head of R&D and Method Development at AlphaBiolabs, examines the forensic science underpinning hair drug testing, its evidential scope and limitations, and why it remains the gold standard for evidencing patterns of drug use in family proceedings
Developing a tech start-up demands a different definition of excellence to the Bar, says Saara Idelbi. The co-creator of Advocatr on entrepreneurship, AI advocacy training, and matching the thrill of a killer cross-examination
At the start of her term, Chair of the Bar 2026 Kirsty Brimelow KC set out a series of priorities for the year ahead. One of those priorities was children in the justice system
As the world becomes more digital, Barbara Vinagre Mota examines international research into the mental health consequences of judges’ exposure to graphic and immersive evidence, highlighting the importance of support systems
Reviewed by Daniel Barnett
James McNeill Whistler at Tate Britain until 27 September Rothko in Florence at Palazzo Strozzi until 23 August Reviewed by Stephen Cragg KC
