Jump to content
×
×
  • Create New...

It could of been better especially in the last few series


notapoliceforum

Recommended Posts

notapoliceforum

Well one of its Executive producers is doing time. Was a poor series, no real understanding of how the police do their job, or powers or anything else. It could of been better.

A constable Gabriel kent the late 2004 episode reminded me of somebody in the news recently. Hmm

Sniper assassin. I saw a lttle of it at the time, I remember nothing of it now.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
XA84
7 hours ago, notapoliceforum said:

Well one of its Executive producers is doing time. Was a poor series, no real understanding of how the police do their job, or powers or anything else. It could of been better.

A constable Gabriel kent the late 2004 episode reminded me of somebody in the news recently. Hmm

Sniper assassin. I saw a lttle of it at the time, I remember nothing of it now.

 

 

And yet, it was regarded as one of the best police series of it's time. 

I think the key thing to remember here is that this is television and the crew need to make it both believable and watchable. I dare say if they started talking about the intricacies of PACE or bail management then viewers would have quickly turned it off. 

It needed to have the right blend of suspense (granted sometimes daft) and a bit of realism which I think it did well. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
notapoliceforum

Perhaps, but many episodes showed the fake constables searching a place, and rights are important. At least it would of helped about knowing to remain silent and or anything said would be used as evidence if a suspect ended up in a court, in the early years of the series and later.

And nobody would of kept thinking of the American system, as people would know what to expect, if they ever got into trouble or simply questioned somewhere.

People thinking lying is a problem, when it isn't, and or that they must give a name and an address, they need to question what a constable is after, not just submit easily. The Bill failed to teach and entertain the public, treated everybody like fools.

Well funny how PC kent was predicted, just a different set of events and position. How sad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BizzieBee
5 hours ago, notapoliceforum said:

Perhaps, but many episodes showed the fake constables searching a place, and rights are important. At least it would of helped about knowing to remain silent and or anything said would be used as evidence if a suspect ended up in a court, in the early years of the series and later.

And nobody would of kept thinking of the American system, as people would know what to expect, if they ever got into trouble or simply questioned somewhere.

People thinking lying is a problem, when it isn't, and or that they must give a name and an address, they need to question what a constable is after, not just submit easily. The Bill failed to teach and entertain the public, treated everybody like fools.

Well funny how PC kent was predicted, just a different set of events and position. How sad.

Good grief. It was a TV drama 😂😂

Have you really been burnt that badly and have the anti-Police rhetoric with so much vehemence that you’re mixing reality with entirely fictitious characters and script-writing 😳

Edited by BizzieBee
Link to post
Share on other sites
XA84

I  have to say that I fully agree with @BizzieBeeon this. 

7 hours ago, notapoliceforum said:

Perhaps, but many episodes showed the fake constables searching a place, and rights are important. At least it would of helped about knowing to remain silent and or anything said would be used as evidence if a suspect ended up in a court, in the early years of the series and later.

The 'fake' constables (what we call actors and actresses) were searching a place because that's what the script told them to do. When suspects in the show were arrested they were given the police caution which would have explained this "You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence." Granted occasionally they might have said 'you're nicked' which was wrong but still. I think the key thing to remember is that on any show that involves the law and policing they have to have a police advisor who reviews and advises the writers and directing staff to make sure that anything done is in a lawful sense and cannot be portrayed incorrectly. 

7 hours ago, notapoliceforum said:

People thinking lying is a problem, when it isn't, and or that they must give a name and an address, they need to question what a constable is after, not just submit easily. The Bill failed to teach and entertain the public, treated everybody like fools.

I suspect that this will be based on your own experiences hence the concerns with the show. There were times when the suspect 'actors and actresses' were scripted to do this, perhaps not as common as you'd like but it did happen.  

What you also need to remember is that the show ran from 1983 to 2010 for most if not all of that time people actually liked the police and felt they did a great job. People didn't feel the need to be obstructive to the police, it's only really within the last 10-15 years that things have changed for the worse in my opinion.  

Ultimately the show was loved and watched by a LOT of people, it was a staple for most people to get home and watch (myself included although it was bedtime after 🙂). Don't get me wrong their was times I thought it was a bit daft but I never questioned the legal or procedural sense of the writing as it was always so strong. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Billy Blue Tac
2 hours ago, XA84 said:

a police advisor who reviews and advises the writers and directing staff to make sure that anything done is in a lawful sense and cannot be portrayed incorrectly. 

I must be watching the wrong programmes, or I need my eyes fixing 😀

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Dirty harry

Could've! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Indiana Jones

So the OP is confused that acting isn't real life?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Wilts20
20 hours ago, notapoliceforum said:

Perhaps, but many episodes showed the fake constables searching a place, and rights are important. At least it would of helped about knowing to remain silent and or anything said would be used as evidence if a suspect ended up in a court, in the early years of the series and later.

And nobody would of kept thinking of the American system, as people would know what to expect, if they ever got into trouble or simply questioned somewhere.

People thinking lying is a problem, when it isn't, and or that they must give a name and an address, they need to question what a constable is after, not just submit easily. The Bill failed to teach and entertain the public, treated everybody like fools.

Well funny how PC kent was predicted, just a different set of events and position. How sad.

It’s a TV show...

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Police Community is a forum that is supported financially through advertisements. It is a breach of our standard use policy to use Adblock plugins/software on our site. 

In order to continue using our site you will need to disable Adblock across our site. Alternatively you can purchase a membership package from our online store to remove adverts as part of the membership subscription. 

https://police.community/remove-adverts/

Thank you for your support.

I have disabled Adblock