Silent Witness

BBC1, Series 10 July-August 2006

I'm not a fan of this programme, but I have seen occasional episodes. I am quite interested in the current series which has lost Amanda Burton. This is a positive move I think, since Ms Burton's mannered performances were threatening to overwhelm the show. I guess I'm particularly interested in the way the programme attempts to respond to the more populist appeal of the three CSI series.

'Terminus' in the current series seemed to offer several ways in which the challenge of CSI is being addressed (as well as a rare appearance for the wonderful Cassie McFarlane, star of Burnin' An Illusion in 1981). First, the show (2 x 1 hour double episodes per week) has moved into the multiple story format with four stories running in this particular episode. The title refers to a story about a diabetic dying on a bus after failing to eat at the right time. Two other mysteries involved tragic accidents, one involving plastic surgery and the other a desperate insurance scam. Running throughout the two parts was a narrative about a hit and run accident, involving a young footballer in another 'human interest' type story, rather than a criminal act.

Overall, the four stories added up to an entertaining and intriguing programme, although at 2 hours it seemed rather spun out compared to the efficient job CSI: NY manages with two similarly intriguing cases solved in 42 mins. As in CSI, Silent Witness does seem to have gone down the 'more explicit autopsy' route and the team have their hands quite literally on vital organs quite a lot of the time. For a squeamish viewer, the progression is noticeable and may be off-putting. My impression is that there are also attempts to emulate some aspects of CSI's use of camera effects and editing, but only intermittently.

The biggest difference between Silent Witness and CSI (and also the Waking the Dead team) is that there are just the three scientists. Each are paired with police officers investigating the unusual deaths, but although some of these officers may reappear in other episodes, there is no sense of them being part of the team. This throws the burden on the trio and I'm not sure they are that interesting (or different from each other) to carry the show. The two men are physically different. Harry (Tom Ward, left in the picture above) is the edgier character. Leo (William Gaminara, right) is the more stolid character. Harry is the junior partner and Nikki (Emilia Fox) is the apprentice. I'm only a casual viewer, but I have found it difficult to get interested in the three as characters. For a genre show, there is little that I can see to give clues as to how the three might be expected to act. The trio offer the possibilities of narratives structured around gender, professionalism and probably age, but beyond that? Perhaps this is not a typical episode?