One of the criticisms of Judge John Deed is its lack of realism, but look, Judge John Deed isn't a documentary. It's entertainment of course but all credit to creator G.F. Newman for using the series to explore social issues, and the power of the government, as well as corruption and cronyism amongst the elite.It's a show where not all the good guys win, but some of the bad guys do unfortunately. Sure Judge Deed has some flaws in his relationships and love life but that doesn't stop him from seeking justice for the underprivileged and those who don't have the money and power to have a voice to stand up for themselves.One thing that fascinated me was the guest house that Judge John Deed lodged in when hearing cases. I'd like to know more about the staff working in the lodge - the cooks, the cleaners, etc. These are the people who keep the guest house in order and keep their honors comfortable.

I have watched the series for the third or fourth time, however this last time including the episodes withdrawn by the BBC. I therefore write this review having finally seen the show in its entirety. I enjoy courtroom based films (Rumpole, 12 Angry Men (2 versions), The Verdict, The Wrong Man, Judgement at Nuremburg, To Kill a Mockingbird).Each episode (except the last series) is 1.5 hours long (quite long). Each episode has three main plot threads - Deeds cases, Deeds personal life and Deed's relationship with the powers that be. The basic ideas running through the episodes is that Deed tries to get to the truth in the cases before him, he is a (mostly) radical judge, he is incorruptible, has appalling judgement in his personal life and has an excellent knowledge of the law and the operation of the courts and frequently uses it to his advantage.Authenticity is one of the strengths of the series (up to five legal advisers are listed in the credits), although the legal system portrayed is fictionalised and the legal argument is often simplified. Initially his brother judges, the Lord Chancellor's Department (LCD), the Attorney General and the Home Secretary plot to remove Deed but are constantly out manoeuvred. Eventually his brother judges are supportive of Deed.The series attracts criticism with Deed having his on again-off again girlfriend and daughter appearing before him, using influence to get his daughter off charges, his womanising and the over the top portrayal (for example Deed has 3 assassination attempts made against him over the course of the series).However, in my view the series is well acted, high quality and is extremely funny in places. For example Deed locks up his ex-wife for contempt on two occasions. While sometimes over the top, the series is at its best portraying an honest judge, battling against corruption and government interference. Other highlights are Deed having a habit of taking over the questioning of the witnesses from the prosecution and defence, using various methods to get certain cases in his court, refusing to give up cases once he has started them and fighting a continuing battle with the LCD, who are constantly dreaming up ways of removing Deed.The 2 episodes banned by the BBC relate to the Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) vaccine and one other episode also attracted controversy (TETRA phone towers causing motor neurone disease). This arose because the series targets populist/minority issues. The MMR vaccine episodes were based on controversy about use of the vaccine in the British Health system. Unfortunately the episodes were based on data that had been faked. It is a pity, as one of the banned episodes was titled One Angry Man and was based on the movie(s) 12 Angry Men.

Judge John Deed is a series about a High Court Judge, seen in both his private life (mostly: sleeping with the women he meets in court) and in his court life. The protagonist is nicely played by Martin Shaw, whose pronunciation of English is a wonder to behold, but most of the other characters are one-dimensional cardboard types.Even more, a court presided by a judge where his ex-wife, his daughter and his mistress plead, accompanied by sinister government schemes in every episode is wholly unrealistic, alas. The earlier seasons where a bit better in this review, but season five and six are horrible. Perhaps the writers ran out of stories.

There have been two series so far of this programme. It seems deliberately to set out to contradict the impression of the British legal system portrayed by the excellent "Rumpole of the Bailey", of senile judges and smug arch-conservative barristers.Here, the main character has radical leanings, a messy private life and a very active libido. Much of the sub-plot is involved with side-swipes at the (Labour) government of the day, although the implication is that power corrupts; the political complexion of the office holders doesn't affect their greed or ambition.The one common factor with other screen portrayals of the British legal system is the very precise diction and grammar used by barristers and judges. The courtroom scenes are well worth watching.Some elements of the plot rather strain belief, but the series is quite enjoyable.