By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
I'll go for not guilty too as I think that's the 'social point' the script is trying to make, hence all the stuff about the ethics of press naming to get others to come forward. They will be trying to show that there might be smoke without fire for when the next w*nked out DJ gets picked up and the real police and political criminals walk away (thank you line of duty for already doing that one so well.)
I'll go for not guilty too as I think that's the 'social point' the script is trying to make, hence all the stuff about the ethics of press naming to get others to come forward. They will be trying to show that there might be smoke without fire for when the next w*nked out DJ gets picked up and the real police and political criminals walk away (thank you line of duty for already doing that one so well.)
Then again he might be guilty as fack.
The ending will be ambiguous. It's all building towards letting the viewer make up their own mind. They've established that he's dodgy as f*ck and made the points you've outlined about the questionable ethics involved in investigating these cases. But I doubt there'll be a firm conclusion as to whether he's a rapist and/or nonce.