Guilty Pleasure

I quite enjoy watching Silk on BBC One - but it is a bit of a guilty pleasure.

I have watched tonight's episode and have again seen many errors in how matters proceed in Court - but I am sure that these errors are either unintentional or created in order to make the programme more entertaining. I could not work out why evidence was being given in Martha's case when it appeared to be a guilty plea - there was no apparent issue in the facts that suggested there was a dispute that required a Newton hearing. The hearing was not a trial as there was no jury present in Court. It was just odd. In Clive's case the level of abuse between the prosecutor/defence advocates and the witnesses was terrible. There were also errors where people were questioned about their previous convictions without there being any application to seek the Court's approval to have permission to ask them about previous misconduct. Also, questions about previous sexual conduct of the victim would have had to be approved by the Court before they could be asked.

Despite the errors I was still entertained. Views on Silk in the legal profession seem to be divided. Some enjoy it as I do, others find that they cannot stand to watch the programme.