All language subtitles for The.Jury.Murder.Trial.S01E01.The.Crime

This programme contains strong
language and discussions of murder

Can you tell me how Helen is,
please?

All I can say is that
she is in a serious condition.

I never wanted anything bad
to happen to her.

There's some stuff I don't entirely
understand about

how this did happen today. But I'll
explain as much as I possibly can.

I didn't plan for any of this
to happen, quite the opposite.

Can we trust our justice system?

To find out, we're re-enacting
an entire real murder trial...

You chose to use this hammer. Yes.

..word for word, with actors.

To aim the shots
and basically bash her brains in.

She's still shouting, and I go to
put my hand over her mouth,

but I don't know, I don't know why,

I put my hands
round her throat instead.

But just as in a real court,
the jurors are ordinary people.

God, I just feel so sorry for her.

I believe that there are two sides
to every story.

I don't care what she said.

And in this ground-breaking
experiment,

there is a key difference.

There isn't just one jury.
There's two.

Both unaware of each other.

I wanted to give him a hug.
Is it crocodile tears or not?

I don't want to do this any more!

They'll watch the same trial,

but will they reach
the same verdict?

Do you find the defendant guilty
or not guilty of murder?

A real-life murder trial is about
to be restaged in full by actors,

in front of two different juries.

This experiment is so important.

I've never seen what goes on behind

closed doors in a jury, no-one has.

The jury system is the corner stone
of our justice system.

But I think we need to have

a conversation about whether or not

the jury is fit

for the 21st century.

12 random people are kind of
thrown together

and you're reliant on those 12
people to make the right decision.

I think I'm quite logical
rather than emotional.

One would like to think that
a juror would bring common sense

but not everybody
has got common sense, so.

We are completely different,
men and women, in emotions.

We're made up differently,
let's say.

The restaged trial will take place

in this former courthouse
in Chelmsford.

The Ministry of Justice
found that 70% of jurors

could not remember key points of law

that they had been instructed on.

That's problematic.

If we didn't have punishment,

we would live
in a very different world.

When you do something wrong,

there has to be a price paid.

It is mad cos you could be sending
an innocent person to prison.

You have to be really, really sure

cos that is someone's life
in your hands.

Hi. Hi, you all right?
I'm fine, thank you.

I'm Emily, nice to meet you.
I'm Kelly, nice to meet you, Emily.

The jurors are local to the area.

Hello. How are you?
Hello, darling, all right? Hi.

And in an extraordinary experiment
in justice...

Richard, yeah. Nice to meet you.

..they are randomly split
into two different juries.

Morning, all.
One is the Red Jury.

What's your name? Gary.
Emily, nice to meet you.

Hello, Emily. Don't expect me to
remember all your names, though.

And on the other side
of the building -

the Blue Jury.

So, have you got children?
I do, I have a daughter.

Aw! Yeah.

Neither jury knows
the other exists,

to stop them
influencing each other.

I always think that in
any case, how do you ever

100% know what happened?
Yeah. No-one says,

"Yeah, you got that right,
well done." No, no, exactly.

Will these two
different juries

ultimately see this case
the same way?

To remain hidden from each other...

Is it all the way down?

..each jury has their own staircase.

And entrance to the courtroom.

They will observe the trial

from specially designed
soundproof boxes...

You got enough room? Yeah.

..entirely unaware of who
is on the other side of the divide.

Who's that man there? Someone there.

Right, good morning, everybody.

The jurors will sit, over six days,

through the original trial
word for word.

Before we start,
can you all look towards the dock?

You will find the defendant,

who's called Mr John Reisdale,

and he is the man whose case
you will be trying.

Only names, dates and locations have
been changed, to anonymise the case.

The defendant stands charged
on this indictment with murder.

To this indictment
he has pleaded not guilty,

and it is your duty,
having heard the evidence,

to decide whether
he is guilty or not.

OK. I'll pass it over to you.

May it please Your Honour,

Mr Reisdale is charged with

the murder of his wife, Helen.

As with the real case, the jury
are given bundles of evidence

including photos and reports.

I'm going to ask you
to have a look at those now.

Photograph 007 is significant,
ladies and gentlemen,

because that shows the state
of the room in general.

That's blood, I think, is it? Yeah.

There's, like,
things all over the place,

so they must have been having
a proper fight. Bloody hell.

So, on Monday the 11th of July
of last year,

in the dining room of the house
they shared together,

the defendant attempted to strangle
his wife of just two months,

and thereafter repeatedly struck
her in the face/head area

three times
with an industrial-sized hammer.

I'll ask the usher if they can

kindly hand it around
to the jury now.

That's heavy.

It weighs about 1.4kg.

A hammer that caused catastrophic
and fatal head injuries

resulting in her death some two days
later whilst in hospital.

The defendant later told the police
that he had "just snapped."

He does not deny
that he caused his wife's death.

He does, however,
deny murdering her.

Hence that is the issue
for you to decide.

The ultimate question
for these juries

is whether the defendant is guilty
of murder or manslaughter.

Murder means an automatic
life sentence.

Manslaughter could mean as little
as two years in prison.

Ladies and gentlemen, we'll break
off now and digest what's going on.

Bloody hell.

OK. So, what do you think
about that, guys? Jesus, like,

ah, man, it's horrible, innit?
Yeah. Just imagine, like,

holding the hammer as it smashes
someone's skull, like, fuck.

The dents in the picture, like,
I couldn't stop thinking about that.

She must have went through
so much pain.

Hit her in the head three times,
like, that is brutal, proper brutal.

He just looks like an ordinary guy,
but then what does someone look like

who's going to hit someone over
the head with a massive hammer?

Like, I just can't help
but feel sorry for her.

I think I'm just in a little bit of
shock about the ferocity of the
hammer attack, if I'm honest.

Cos let's face it, I don't
understand how you couldn't

pick that up and not know what
damage you were going to do with it.

You know, what led this man
to get to this point

that he felt it was acceptable
to strangle her

and then that didn't work,
kill her?

They have only been married
actually a couple of months.

Only married for two months? Yeah.

Should still be
a honeymoon period, shouldn't it?

What is it drives them
to kill the one person

they are supposed to love more than
anybody? What are the conditions?

I am fascinated by what drives
people to do it.

Some people get married cos they
think it's going to solve the
problem. Absolutely, yeah.

There is no way
that was manslaughter. Yeah.

Did you see the dents in her head
and, like, the bruises?

Was she provoking him?
We don't know.

I just want to know
exactly what was said.

I don't care what she said!

Murder... He went and got a hammer

and hit her in the head three times.

Cos of something she said.
Yeah, but if she said something...

That is not unprovoked.

..and he hit her once, fair enough.
But we don't what she said.

But remember he strangled her first
and then hit her in the head.

Yeah, people have strong opinions.

Sonia's reaction
was not what I expected.

I feel like there was definitely
something that triggered emotions.

You have to be careful, yeah.

I have been in a relationship where
other people would have run away.

There's a lot of women
that behind closed doors

they're suffering
mental or physical abuse.

The most charming of men
can be the worst kind of man.

I have been in a situation where

my life could have easily
gone south.

This was extreme, because he feared
that he was going to lose me.

And he thought
"Well, if I can't have you,

"nobody else is going to have you."

So he was literally trying
to throw me over a balcony.

It was a mad thing.

You are accountable
for every action you take.

People can't just go around
killing people

and there's no consequences.

You know, cos if he had of
thrown me off that balcony,

then people would have been at
my court case. It could have been.

Welcome back. We'll get straight on
with the case now.

A real-life murder trial
is being restaged with actors,

in front of two juries,
who are both unaware of each other.

As I indicated earlier,

the defendant does not deny
that he unlawfully killed his wife.

He is therefore saying,

"Well, I accept I'm guilty
of manslaughter.

"But I dispute that
I'm guilty of murder."

Now, you may think, on the basis
of what's been said so far,

that that's unlikely
to be in dispute,

but the law does provide
what's known as a

partial defence to murder. Which
is described as loss of control.

The defence are likely to argue

that loss of control does apply.

It is my role to satisfy to you
that it DOESN'T apply.

When you are considering
loss of control,

it's somebody who literally
is not in control

of their body at that time,
who is just...

Goes into this other place,

who really just doesn't
actually function, you know,

with sound mind, and loses it.

You can kind of oppose that
to being very, very, very angry,

and being in control
of what you're doing.

I'm sure some people would say
that loss of control

should not be available
to any defendant.

But some circumstances
you can imagine loss of control

could be a reasonable verdict.
Something that is momentary,

that is done
under enormous pressure.

It's losing the ability
to control yourself.

It doesn't happen very often,
and I'd say it's a high bar,

but it's possible and it should
therefore be available in law

to a defendant who might find
themselves in that very situation.

What is loss of control?
Rage, innit? Losing your head.

Bet he just probably snapped
like that, and that was it.

Many years ago, I had a temper,

and I've smashed crockery,
I've thrown it at my wife.

Wait, have you actually lobbed,
like, something at a wall?

Yeah, I've thrown
a whole cup of coffee at her.

Oh, bloody hell.
Yeah, and plates.

And then I apologised to her.
I felt guilty.

I could fly off
for something simple,

I think in my mind
I used to cause an argument

just for the sake of it,
just to sort of get rid of built up

not anger...uh, energy inside.

But then have you used a hammer?
That's the difference, innit?

No. I'm placid now.

I have smashed a coffee cup,
but not, like, at someone,

but, like, smashed it in the sink
cos I've been a bit mad.

I have smashed something
or I'm punching the air,

or something, kicking a door maybe,
I don't know.

But I've never actually blacked out
and I don't know what I'm doing.

It's your rage, it's your rage.

You have to be accountable
for your own actions,

like, regardless
of what you've done,

you have to be held accountable
for what you have done.

You've heard the red mist situation,
people that get to a point

where they actually don't know
what they are doing.

I've never had anything like that,
I've got angry and I can understand

why you'd want to hurt someone who's
done wrong to you or your family

and I can imagine I would then
go into a red mist.

I mean, I see red and that's it,

then I go into an action, and that's
not something I can control.

I have a foul temper.
For me to get angry,

I'm at the point where I see
a red mist and I can't stop,

that's, to me, angry. Ten years ago,

I actually wouldn't be able to stop

because I wouldn't know
what I was actually doing.

I mean, I haven't been like that
for a long time,

but there's been other people that
have stopped the situation,

and without that, I don't know
what the extent would be.

You'll be able to put yourself
in his position.

I know what I was like,
and I hate myself for it.

And now I believe that there are
two sides to every story.

What led him to go the next step?
That's what I am interested in.

A bit about Helen Reisdale.

At the time of her death,

she was 34-year-old mother of three.

She'd had previous relationships
and at the time of the killing,

her three children in fact
lived with their respective fathers,

although they regularly visited her
at her home.

The defendant, at the time,

a 39-year-old father of two
from a previous relationship.

His two children
lived with their mother

but used to stay with the defendant
each weekend.

As part of
the prosecution's evidence,

witness statements
are read out in court.

Ladies and gentlemen, Joan Romford,

a retired lady, at page five
of your bundle, says this.

"I provide this statement
to the police in relation to

"an incident at a neighbour's house
in Bixley Farm Cottages.

"I've known John since he moved
in..." ..about 15 years.

He's always been a nice,
friendly neighbour.

He's self-employed, works from
a workshop in the back garden.

I believe he makes sculptures.

He's got a furnace in the workshop.

Helen moved in with John
just before Christmas last year.

As far as I'm aware,
the two of them always seemed happy.

Today, I've been home all day.

About quarter past three I was
standing outside my kitchen porch

when I heard what sounded like
a glass smashing

outside in the back garden. Seconds
later, I heard a louder crash.

Between the two smashes,

I heard someone making a dull "Oh"
sound as if someone was in pain.

I shouted across to her,
"Are you all right, Helen?"

No reply.

I didn't hear anything else, but the
furnace was on and is fairly loud.

Your Honour, I next propose
to call Mr Tor Nilson.

Tor Nilson worked for John,

helping to make
metalwork sculptures.

He witnessed the aftermath
of the killing.

The bulk of your work was with, or
was at the time, with John Reisdale?

That's correct. Did you speak
to John about his relationships,

about personal matters at all? Yes.

I was aware that there were,
at some points,

difficulties in their relationship,

that it was, well, difficulties.

And what did John tell you,
if anything,

that he was doing to...deal
or cope with these difficulties?

I think he told me
that he loved her very deeply

and that they somehow
would come through it.

I believe also they were
taking steps

to seek professional help
and guidance.

Can I go straight then
to the 11th of July?

That's a Monday morning.

What did you do that morning,
please?

We were preparing to melt iron
to pour iron for some moulds.

How would you describe that work?

It is potentially dangerous
and also uncomfortably hot.

It's stressful.

Any problems with John,
anything unusual at that time?

The day started normal, normally,

but as it went on, I was aware

that he seemed to be
under even more,

more pressure than he normally
would have been in, on such a day.

And I did at some point ask him
and he said that

there were problems in the house
regarding him and Helen.

They were having some discussion.

I believe they were talking
in the house,

but I don't know,
I wasn't... I wasn't there.

I was standing in the doorway
facing the entrance door

to the caravan and John came in

and he placed a hammer
on the bench in front of me...

..and he said, uh...
"That's it, I've killed her."

Describe what you could see.

It had blood and also
some black hair on it and, um,

I was left very confused.

And I thought that this was
all some kind of a joke,

but slowly came to the realisation

that what he told me was the truth.

I believe that the first thing
I said to John was that,

"You realise
that I have to call the police."

How would you describe John
at this point?

He was very, very pale. There were
beads of sweat on his brow.

Do you remember John saying anything
to you then concerning Helen?

He said that...

I believe it was on the way
into the house that he said,

"I don't want her to live."

Bloody hell.

On the hammer there was actual
pieces of flesh,

you would have to hit so hard

for, you know what I mean? Yeah.
For it to stick on to it.

And he said,
"I don't want her to live."

Yeah, there you go, there you go,
that's very condemning.

But is that against her
or is it for her?

What, you saying,
because she was so wounded...

Could have been an act of sympathy,
do you know what I'm saying?

"I don't want her to live."

It could be some sort of

a sympathetic thing
for whatever reason.

You can say one thing, not...

I can't see it being said
from that. But we don't know.

I am not going to jump
to conclusions like the others.

We have to listen to all of
the evidence before we can decide.

There's having a moment and then
bashing someone's head in,

that's murder. You haven't heard
what she's done. That's what I mean,

I just don't really care
what she's done to him.

Yeah, but you have to.

What happens if what she did
is the reason why he flipped?

We're just all not really agreeing.

We're all entitled
to our own thoughts and opinions.

You know, it's a jury,

there's meant to be debate
but Aaron is trying to, like,

almost sugar-coat it a little bit,
in my opinion.

John said, "I don't want her
to live." I think it's murder.

The act itself is a violent act.
Exactly.

So as far as I am concerned,
he murdered her.

I think a few in the jury,
they heard "hammer" and "head"

and they just assumed murder
straight away without even,

you know, hearing any evidence.

He's got kids. To kill someone,

you've basically now will not be
able to see your kids,

or only see your kids
for a certain amount of time.

Something very traumatic
had to have happened.

It's not the same circumstances

but the break-up with my ex

and not seeing my child for years,
you know, plays a big part

in how I judge people.

Different people are going to relate
to different parts of the case.

Some people might relate more
to Helen,

others might relate more to John.

Swings and roundabouts, you know.

Guys, I'll see you guys tomorrow.

See you tomorrow, bye.

The end of the first day
of the trial.

Time to go home, innit?
I'm knackered. Yeah, done.

Dying for a beer.

Both juries have been released.
Bye.

First day, interesting the fact
that a human could actually do that

to someone else. I'm definitely,
like, heavily invested now.

I did not feel I'd be going home

and, like, thinking about this
so much. Like, it's quite intense.

There's some funny old shit
goes on in people's houses,

behind the front door. Seeing John,
like, he's made no eye contact.

He's, like, his head down, like.

I just don't think he's holding
himself very well. But, yeah,

there's a lot for me to go home
and think about tonight. Like,

it's this whole loss of control
element that I'm struggling with.

That's what I've got to mull over.

It's literally over this bridge.

It's been very interesting.

Hello, mate, can I have
a pint of shandy, please?

Did he lose control,
from a legal perspective?

That's crucial for me.

Cheers, fella. There you are.
Thanks mate, cheers, thank you.

My dad was very temperamental.

He came from a military background.

Very strict, very regime. You know,

I think I learnt how to polish
my shoes by the age of about four.

I just felt I was living on the edge

and just not understanding why

someone would be like that to me.

I'm their child, I'm their son,
why would you treat me like that?

And I think a lot of that
was frustration.

Frustration of his own upbringing,
his dad was an alcoholic,

he'd quite often be woken up six,
seven in the morning,

being beaten by his dad
who had come in drunk.

I believe people become
who they are

through the series of life.

So, I'm interested in it
from John's perspective.

Why... Why did he do what he did

to someone that he alleged
that he loved?

For me I need to find that out.

There has to be a why.
There has to be a why.

The magic of the jury system
is it's extremely democratic.

The problem about the jury system,
though, is, of course,

an element of chance in all of this.
There's no getting away from it.

I always think, when I see
a jury filing into court,

"Well, this is spinning the wheel
of justice."

And you might get lucky
or you might not.

Hi. Hi! You OK? Yeah, you?

I got loads of things
I was thinking of last night.

Morning, all.

I'll never forget a story I read
about an Italian man

who murdered his wife

because she could never get the
spaghetti al dente. There you go.

There was a case recently
about that, 78-year-old guy

killed his wife.

Got to the point where he'd just
had enough of her moaning.

Have you not heard of divorce?

It's day two of the trial.

How old was John?
I didn't get how old John was.

Helen was 34-year-old
with three kids.

Overnight, the jurors have been
reflecting on details they saw

and heard on day one.

The state of the gaff
was a bit mad, weren't it?

I kind of expect a farmhouse
to look like that. I don't.

Could it be that he is sick
to death of living in this shithole

and she is not doing anything
about it?

Is that why he's all of a sudden
lost his temper and thought,

"I can't cope with this no more"?
Yeah, yeah.

We don't actually know much
about Helen, though, do we?

Her children didn't live with her.

They lived with their
retrospective dads.

Three children by different dads.

All I know is she don't
keep her legs shut very often.

Yeah, she's had a few geezers,
hasn't she?

Been round the roundabout
a few times.

They're talking about her
sleeping with men,

that's really pissing me off.

There's certain people on the jury
that I wouldn't gravitate to

on, like, a normal day, like
day to day life. I just wouldn't.

How are you sitting there
blaming the victim?

Like, you don't even know
the full story yet.

And I just don't agree with that.

People have said very sexist things
here, and I haven't retaliated

because everyone's grouped up
and said...

And I thought there's not really
a point in saying...

I kept on going a bit quiet as well
cos there was things I was like...

I didn't think being part of a jury
would be as difficult as it is,

and that everyone would have
so many different opinions and

I just can't see
where they're coming from.

It's not respectful and, yeah,

I'm quite shocked by that, actually.

Regardless, it doesn't matter...
It doesn't matter.

It doesn't make a difference
whether it's murder or manslaughter.

Fingers crossed it doesn't.

Back in the courtroom,

Tor's testimony resumes
with the aftermath of John's attack.

So, John puts the hammer down.

He's standing at the doorway,

or just coming into caravan,
and said,

"That's it, I've killed her," yes?
Yes.

You followed John into the house.
Yeah.

Describe what you were able to see
within the house.

There was disorder everywhere

with crushed crockery
all around the kitchen

and on the floor
and everywhere, really.

And, um...

And...I soon saw Helen.

And what condition was she in?

There was a hole
in the side of her head and then,

when John felt her neck,

she made a sort of intake of breath

and a rasping breath
and gurgling noise.

And, uh...at that point
I realised that she was still alive.

I think then that you go out of the
house to make the call, the 999?

Yes. Prior to the police arriving,

did you have any further
conversation with John?

I believe I asked him at some point,
"Why?"

Did he reply? His reply was,
I suppose, in comprehending,

he didn't understand why,
and he...he made hand movements

as to suggest
that he had, um...blackened.

Police Constable Hilton, please.

You entered through the back gate.
Where was the defendant, please?

As I'm walking up the garden path,
he was waiting by the caravan.

And please describe how he appeared
when you first approached him.

When I first saw him,
he was very calm.

Uh, he was very still and at
that point he wasn't moving at all.

And as he was standing so still
and so calm

and he weren't displaying
any warning or danger signs,

I decided, as he'd seen me
and he was fully aware I was there,

to walk up to him
and introduce myself.

I said, "What's happened?"
And he said,

"I've done something really bad.
I've hit my wife with the hammer.

"Can you see if she's all right?
I won't run away."

I've opened the door
and in the middle room

I've seen the victim
laying on the floor.

You see blood leading up
from the floor, up to the wall,

is that right?
That's right, yes.

Above her head and there was some
behind her head as well.

HE SOBS

Thank you, Officer.

I believe my learned friend
has some further questions for you.

Thank you so much. OK. Now, just
a few questions, please, Officer.

It was plain to you in your judgment

he posed no threat to you whatsoever

and so you approached him
and introduced yourself?

Yes. You described him as

"appearing to be calm and still,"

but he also looked upset, didn't he?
Yes.

He was fully compliant with
the instructions that you gave him,

is that right? That's right, yes.

And you could see of your
observations of him

that he still seemed to be
genuinely concerned for her? Yes.

At the police station,
he was again perfectly cooperative

and compliant with you? Yes.

No hostility or... No.
..aggression being shown? No, no.

OK. Thank you very much indeed,
Officer.

He's putting on the waterworks,
can you see him in there, crying?

What did you make of that? I was
trying to look at his body language.

He looked very sad.
Yeah, very sad, and he was crying.

He might be remorseful
that he got caught, though.

And he knows he's going to prison.

That's exactly it, is it crocodile
tears or not? Exactly.

The police officer said
he was all calm, like a psycho.

Tor said he was calm, everyone is
saying that he was calm, you know.

Something must have snapped.

For you to pick up a hammer
and hit somebody,

and then just be normal,
something has snapped in the head.

It doesn't justify what he's done,
as far as I'm concerned. What would?

What would justify it?
Yeah, out of interest. Nothing.

There's nothing would justify it.

I believe you can be provoked
into murder.

I like to think if I was in
that position, I would walk away.

But things can just escalate.
Next thing you know,

someone's got hurt.

If somebody said something
to me regarding my daughter,

and it was something so horrible,
who knows how I'd react?

You don't know
what you're capable of.

Any bit of information could sway it
back and forth. Exactly.

I want to hear his voice.

I just don't want to jump
into conclusions about him.

I want to understand him as
a character, is he easily triggered?

I want to know,
why would he want to kill her?

Tell me a little bit
about yourself.

I'm a bronze sculptor and my main
income comes from making artwork.

John Reisdale was interviewed a
total of four times by the police.

The transcripts are read out word
for word for the jurors in court.

And I live in a little cottage
in the countryside

just outside Chelmsford and I've got
a big garden and I grow vegetables

and I work in a small workshop
in the back garden.

And at different times I've had,
like, different people help me

who were working for me.

And the vegetables that I grow
in the garden,

I make food for everybody
every lunchtime. We all sit down,

almost like a family.
GLASSES CLINK

I found that the more I gave
to people in that way,

the more productive they were,
we found a way that really works.

It was kind of a magical
kind of way of working for us all,

that we found we looked forward to
going into work in the morning,

it wasn't something anybody
resented,

we worked together
as a really good team.

And the more we did that,
the more productive we were,

produced really high quality work
all very respected.

Never had to advertise,
had some very prestigious jobs,

money was kind of coming in good,
it was all good.

Lots of people were saying,
"Oh, it is kind of great

"the way you live it's, like,
really idyllic. We were...

Kind of created this kind of dream.

I think that appealed to Helen.

She wanted to be part of that,
I think.

Ladies and gentlemen, we're about
to start the defendant's evidence.

I call, please, John Reisdale.

The burden of proving this case

is on the prosecution,

but the reality is that Mr Reisdale

admits he has killed somebody,

and so, he has to
explain that to you,

and you obviously
need to listen very, very carefully

because it's a very, very
serious matter indeed.

Right, are you happy
to start right away?

Yes, of course.

Mr Reisdale, you're rather quietly
spoken so you're going to have

to just bear with me

as I keep encouraging you
to speak up. All right? OK.

You are 39 years old.
Yes, I am.

This is a first for you, isn't it,
giving evidence in a Crown Court?

Absolutely, yes.

Never been arrested by
the police before? No.

Or prosecuted or charged
with any matter at all?

No, never.

I want to ask you a little about
your interpersonal relationships.

Jo Flixton is your former partner.
That's correct.

With whom you have two children,
Max and Daisy.

That's right.

And did you live together?

Yes, we did.

And in broad terms,
was that a happy relationship?

Definitely. Very much so.

Was there any violence
within that relationship?

No... No.

Did you have any particular

difficulties with
other relationships?

No. Broadly, they were
good relationships.

Um...
SHE CLEARS HER THROAT

I, um, became friends
with John in 2016.

We started a romantic
relationship in November 2017.

We fell in love and we moved in
together the following year.

John was incredibly thoughtful,

pensive,

and kindness emanates from him.

His sense of integrity makes him
an incredibly conscientious man,

which can be seen in his
working life,

his amazing vegetable garden.

Um, his friendships.

I'd like to say that I never
witnessed any violence from John.

And what has happened has deeply
shocked and saddened me.

The picture
that's being painted of John,

is like a very caring,
calm, family man.

You know, his ex basically didn't
have a bad word to say.

So, it's then hard to picture him

hitting Helen three times
in the head with a hammer.

Eventually, you met Helen.
That's right.

Now, did you, at that stage,

find Helen an attractive person?

Yes, very much so, yes.

And exciting, interesting, funny...

HE SIGHS
Intelligent.

She rang me quite frequently
to talk about art things.

We had a mutual interest in...

She was also of an artistic
temperament? Very much so.

Right. Did she attract you
in a physical sense?

Yes, she was...

..extremely attractive.

Extremely attractive.

In the very early stages,
it was very innocent,

but quite quickly, it became
extremely intense, and I...

I think that it would be fair to say
that my feelings developed

and in a way that
I'd never experienced before

in any other relationship.

He comes across like he wouldn't
touch a fly.

But you can be generally nice
and give nice vibes to people

and be also an angry person.

Do you feel like maybe he's making
sure he comes across as that?

Yeah, he knows what he's doing,
doesn't he?

His body language was
completely composed.

It was interesting
to see John today.

I'm quite a good judge of character

and I genuinely
felt like everything he said,

he sounded genuine.

A man deeply in love.

But I feel like, everybody else,

they're much too quick to judge,
and it's not fair.

It's definitely murder.
Murder for me.

HE EXHALES
Scary.

I feel... I feel desperately sorry
for him.

I do. I really do,
I wanted to give him a hug.

I don't think he had any intention
of killing his wife.

He loved her to death,

and I think there was extenuating

circumstances that
made that man tick.

When you actually see

the body language
and the tone of voice.

That sort of adds a bit of meat
to the bone.

He's gone from a calm, kind,

loving, attentive person,

and over a period of time,
his demeanour changed.

So, something caused
that demeanour to change.

I think the defence
was quite clever asking him

to speak up and saying that he was
quite softly spoken.

And I think that that automatically
makes some people think

that somebody is nice or kind
because they're not as forceful

and outspoken as other people.

So, I don't know whether that's
having some kind of impact.

There was no history from
the neighbours

of any arguing or abuse,
or anything like that.

Today, sort of hearing
that statement,

I still don't agree with
the way he behaved

but I'm definitely,
definitely swaying.

A lot of opinions have changed

since seeing him on the stand.

You could just tell that
he loved her.

Yeah, it's just sad.

I had a really bad view
of John yesterday.

That was why I think his testimony
was really important

because the more I hear
of this today,

I just feel really sorry for him.

He looks like butter wouldn't melt,
so, yeah.

I think there was definitely,
like, an interesting shift.

But it's confusing.

We definitely have the potential to
make the wrong decision, for sure.

Normal person,

but maybe vicious murderer.

It's a big responsibility,

deciding whether someone goes
to prison for life...or not.

It's a huge responsibility
that bears down on people

who have no training for this.

It's extremely
worrying to think about

the number of miscarriages
of justice that we might have,

but will never know about,

because we can never actually
see the reasons for their verdicts,

and what's actually going
on behind closed doors.

It's about making sure
that justice is served.

12 people who are coming
with no experience,

making a decision,

and that is worrying.

I think every jury has the
potential to make a mistake.

Helen was capable of being violent.

In my opinion she suffers
from a personality disorder.

The defence makes their case.

She became...wild.

The more it went on, the more it
was just me in that box.

I never would have believed
I was capable of doing this!

I actually feel very sorry for him.

I do, as well.
I'm actually so pissed off.

She just went and got killed
because of her problems,

and that's what it sounds like!
That's so unfair.