Disappointed it didn’t give more of the details around the trial, which is arguably worth a big budget documentary budget if its own. Or even a drama being made. Must have been incredible to be involved with. There’s something inherently grim about the upper echelons of much of the criminal bar.
Also if it’s for a wider audience, they should have explained the rest of the marterial narrative around the hoax tapes. Definitely an oversight not to.
Otherwise, it was decent enough. 7/10.
A bit late to the party, but I'm glad I watched it. Thought it had two strengths. One was that, with four 50 minute instalments, they had the time to include a lot of contemporary archive footage, which did really give a flavour of what that time and place were like. The second is that it fairly comprehensively demolished the impression that much coverage down the years has either perpetuated or at least not challenged in terms of Sutcliffe fundamentally being a killer of sex workers.
The latter being so, I agree that it really would have been worth investigating that the Attorney General first accepted a manslaughter plea on the grounds of diminished responsibility based on opinions from three very eminent expert doctors. Surely it would have been worth examining how such experts came to hold the view they did and why the trial judge insisted that the matter be put to the jury, but it wasn't even mentioned.
I also agree that the hoax should have been given greater prominence. They completely glossed over the letters that were sent prior to the tape, but the contents of the letters were pivotal in terms of the tape being treated as the voice of the killer.