Coming back to the original subject in a roundabout sort of way, I watched the end of the BBC drama 'A very British Scandal' last night. I do remember it happening but could not recall the details. What struck me most was how the jury was manipulated by both the defense and the judge. The defense ripped into witnesses for the prosecution, which was their job of course. But not with anything particularly relevant to the case in question. It was all about scoring points by presenting the 'truth' with the slant in their favour. The judge, in his summation, was ridiculously biased but somehow got away with it apart from having the piss taken out of him for years to come by contemporary comedians.

What happened in the end of course was that Thorpe, who in all probability was guilty of inciting murder at the very least, got away Scot free (no pun intended) There are those on here that would have us believe that such manipulation is perfectly acceptable and they indulge in it regularly. I do not accept that it is is and, even though this is a very trivial forum, we should not allow such dishonesty a foothold or we may end up seeing it everywhere.

Just my 2p and bringing us back to Al's original point of being able to discuss without getting so serious and emotional about it. Eventually :-)