7/10
Trial & Retribution I - Part Two
24 June 2021
Warning: Spoilers
The second part is not entirely courtroom based. The police follow other avenues regarding the death of Julie Harris. Her stepfather is not out of the picture.

Michael Dunn's solicitor Belinda Sinclair believes that there is no actual evidence the prosecution has. A highly regarded criminal barrister Robert Rylands (Corin Redgrave) is employed by the defence.

At the trial, it emerges that some of the prosecution evidence is tainted. Planted by a disturbed police officer.

The police believe that they have found some last minute evidence that links the dead girl with Dunn. Not sure that I found that entirely plausible.

Nothing is entirely cut and dried in the second part. The split screen might even act as a false narrator giving a contrary point of view.

Trial & Retribution does show that law and order can be messy. Julie's mum for example lied at court knowing that her girl's doll was not missing for example.

Dunn might be devious, unhinged or a drunk. There is some doubt left whether he is the actual killer.

The second part was more gripping because other character were behaving suspiciously leaving some uncertainty.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed