Rumpole of the Bailey (TV Series) Rumpole and the Show Folk (1979) User Reviews

Mitigate

[ygwerin1 · 9/10 · 29 October 2018]

The case highlights the difference between Rumpole and other barristers, in that he is actually interested in his client. Rumpole goes that extra mile, in doing everything he can to prove their innocence.

Contrast this approach with that of the cases leading council, a Barrister who never makes any effort to put himself out for anybody. He says it all, with his comment of "I can't do anything with this case" and proceeds to try and convince the client into a plea of 'Manslaughter'

Something that even the prosecution is prepared for. With their presumption that after all "she was caught bang to rights, with the murder weapon in her hand.

The cases leading council seems merely intent to secure his fee, for doing as little work as possible, by Mitigating.

This legal approach is rammed home to Rumpole at the local bar association dinner, after the case has been won. This is where the legal system is seen preserved in aspic, ancient precepts fossilised in the decaying forms, of local judges and barristers.

Where Rumpole is on Trial, for carrying on to defend the client, after his Leader has been Sacked. The attitude being that Rumpole "Should have been proud to be sacked" and got someone else to lead him. "There's a tradition here of standing by your Leader" remonstrates the leading council.

Rumpole has had the temerity to go ahead and actually win the case, this is unforgivable and unpardonable behaviour. For which his peers proceed to fine Rumpole the minimum of 12 bottles of claret, in sentence for his heinous crimes.

A bit of a revelation

[trimmerb1234 · 7/10 · 22 January 2020]

Other barristers as well as judges are, through Rumpole, writer John Mortimer's targets, frequently comically portraying them as rather incompetent to the cost of accused and at the cost of the reputation of legal profession.

Here though the criticism is serious Rumpole is troubled - has he been conned by the performance of his actress client accused of murder? It is though the drunken jolly "circuit" dinner following the trial which is a revelation. Members of the local circuit of judges are in celebratory playful mood - no thoughts of justice only of their profession and their friendly rivalries. Rumpole is disillusioned and ashamed. It was a "Northern" circuit, Rumpoles last line is to the taxi driver's "Where to, Guvnor?" "South!" says Rumpole emphatically. Mortimer's comic mask appears this time to have dropped to reveal a distaste for his profession - in particular how it operates up "North".

Rumpole and the Show Folk

[Prismark10 · 6/10 · 22 August 2019]

Rumpole comes up north to defend an actress Maggie Hartley who has shot her husband, an actor fond of the drink and with a wandering eye for the ladies.

It looks like a clear cut case. A theater employee heard her apparently admit her guilt.

Senior Counsel wants Maggie to take a plea for manslaughter. Rumpole as junior counsel wants to put up a fight, 10 years for manslaughter is not much different than 10 years for murder. After all it really depends on how the words were said.

Rumpole finds himself as leading counsel when Maggie fires her QC. Rumpole resists all attempts for her client to find a new QC. After all he was the counsel on the Penge Bungalow Murders.

The interesting part of the story is Rumpole's rather dim view of the northern circuit. The disparaging remarks they make of actors as the judge and barristers are robing up themselves ready to play their part in the justice system.

Rumpole is also not impressed by the advocacy standards of prosecuting counsel although he might be left doubting just how innocent the defendant is.

This is Rumpole away from his chambers although he has been called up by his former clerk, now working for a solicitor's firm.

The episode has a fruity performance from John Wells who Rumpole encounters in the theatre when he goes to the see the scene of the crime.