Broadchurch Series 2 Episode 3 Review.

I’m calling it now, the missing girl in the Sandbrook murders killed her cousin and Lee Ashworth or his wife helped cover it up. And if I’m right about that, it’s going to be even more disappointing than the true identities of River Song and Missy put together.

So “everyone’s got something to hide” is the tag line for this series and as the new dynamic has been set up in episode 1 and the tone set in episode 2, we can now get down to business.

To delve into the legal side (briefly this time) the writers seem to have recruited a legal consultant between scripts as this week they know that witnesses aren’t supposed to be sitting around watching each others testimony. Ellie is forced to deal with the stress of being excluded from the courtroom, as her testimony may be needed. That’s all very well, but what happens when they want to inevitably cross examine Mark, who’s had the opportunity to see watch his wife’s testimony and line up his story with that?

The cliffhanger from last week’s B-story resolves itself pretty quickly. I don’t know about other people, but from my perspective Hardy is rapidly losing the high ground. Miller asked him in episode 1, why he was so sure the Ashworth killed the two girls from his previous case. He didn’t have an answer. We find out in this episode that Ashworth has been investigating the case himself and points out all the things that Hardy overlooked. He’s pretty well written; the way he goes about using official channels to make Hardy apologise to him is good way of quickly developing his character. This also gives an indication of how Hardy may have mistaken him for a killer, if this is the way he conducts himself. This kind of petty behaviour (ie “the policeman is bullying me”) is a character trait that could have caused a personal dislike from Hardy during the Sandbrook case.

Knight’s secrets are coming out, to the audience that is. It seems despite being such a good QC that she can prosecute on a murder trial without being appointed, she doesn’t have enough money to pay her mother’s care home bills. To add to that there’s something in her past that makes her fear tailgaters.

For the purpose of dramatic juxtaposition, Bishop is revealed to have a son in prison. This is the source of the rift between her and Knight. Did Knight throw the case while defending her son? Special props should go to Marianne Jean-Baptiste for this episode. She moves seamlessly from a sympathetic mother to merciless cross-examiner. This is a pretty accurate portrayal of her vocation. Too often in drama, barristers are treated like secondary villains. Bishop is a person; she might seem to be a nasty person when she’s doing her job, but that’s part of her job.

Overall, it’s going well, but I’ll be really pissed off if I’ve guessed the ending to the B-story already.