Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Telly addicts

Related: Film discussion forum.

Original poster

Lost Honour Christopher Jefferies

130 replies

We3KingyofOblomovAre · 10/12/2014 22:28

Is there another thread?
I searched.
God, I could barely watch, it was too awful. my heart bled for the poor man.

OP posts:
limitedperiodonly · 13/12/2014 22:29

ChippyMinton I do feel a great deal of sympathy towards Christopher Jefferies even though I suspect I wouldn't like him.

His treatment was revolting.

Someone asked me if I knew him. I don't, but I do know Steve Coogan who appeared in the programme and was treated brusquey by the fictional Christopher Jefferies.

Coogan is not what I'd describe as my favourite person. But if that really happened, I don't think he deserved it.

IsChippyMintonExDirectory · 13/12/2014 22:35

[brain melts into cheese]

limited I'm confused as upthread you said this:

If it is an accurate portrayal I am not terribly sympathetic towards Christopher Jefferies and I do not understand why people feel sympathetic towards him

now you say it's because he was a bit short with Steve Coogan...who you don't like either? Confused

limitedperiodonly · 13/12/2014 22:43

You think its creditworthy to feel sorry for him because you don't think he's likeable?

Mrsstarlord I don't think it should be to my credit that I should feel sympathy. It's an interesting device in a television drama.

This is Telly Addicts. And it was a biopic.

AWholeLottaNosy · 13/12/2014 22:44

Firstly, the exchange with Steve Coogan was entirely fictitious, it was just to make a point about CJ's un. worldliness. Secondly, the writer actually met up with CJ to talk about he was going to be portrayed and that it was important that he wasn't going to be portrayed as a totally likeable character, which CJ agreed with, again, to give a reason as to why the press portrayed him as they did.

Icimoi · 13/12/2014 22:54

As portrayed, Steve Coogan wasn't in the least bothered by the way the film version of Christopher Jefferies spoke to him. He was glad Jefferies was prepared to give evidence - and I don't think that bit was fictional. I must say, limited, I don't get how you can work up so much dislike of a person you don't know that you wouldn't feel a lot of sympathy for what he went through.

limitedperiodonly · 13/12/2014 23:01

If it is an accurate portrayal I am not terribly sympathetic towards Christopher Jefferies and I do not understand why people feel sympathetic towards him^

chippy I said that Christopher Jefferies didn't strike me as a lovely person. But he might be to his loved ones.

In the play he was short, bordering cunty with Steve Coogan, which is ironic seeing as Coogan is short, bordering cunty too.

limitedperiodonly · 13/12/2014 23:09

Icimoi Whatever I think these people personally, what they've done in terms of Leveson is admirable.

Can you point to where I haven't said that?

Or do you want to take it back?

SinisterBuggyMonth · 13/12/2014 23:12

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

limitedperiodonly · 13/12/2014 23:13

And I do have a great deal of sympathy for what Christopher Jefferies went through.

If you can't read that, it's not my fault.

IsChippyMintonExDirectory · 13/12/2014 23:42

linited it's not that we can't read that it's that you said the very opposite of just that. It's in black and white upthread! Can u see our confusion? Or since that post have you changed your mind on the sympathy front?

limitedperiodonly · 13/12/2014 23:57

Christopher Jefferies does not seem a sympathetic person to me. But that doesn't mean he doesn't deserve my sympathy.

And he gets it.

That's all I can say.

Icimoi · 14/12/2014 00:43

limited, I don't understand how you derive from my post any implication that I was accusing you of devaluing what either Jefferies or Coogan did in relation to Leveson. So there's nothing to take back.

I think the difficulty with your posts is that what many of us see as Jefferies' social awkwardness and possibly a social communication disorder, you interpret as deliberate rudeness.

Pagwatch · 14/12/2014 03:39

Nope, I'm not getting the weird nuances you are placing on this - he is not sympathic, I don't understand how people can feel sympathy for him, but that doesn't mean he does not deserve my sympathy.

do you keep using sympathetic in the context of how you feel about his personality as well as how you feel about what happened to him because 'sympathetic' is the only word you can use which avoids simply saying you don't care much because you didn't like him?

'hes not sympathetic and i don't have sympathy for him but I have sympathy for the injustice he suffered' is immensely confusing.

'I don't like him but I have sympathy for the injustice he suffered'. Is that what you mean?

Pagwatch · 14/12/2014 03:56

Are you using 'he is not sympathic' because that blames him for how you feel about him whereas 'I don't like him' makes you the person who has chosen to view him negatively?

Mrsstarlord · 14/12/2014 07:22

Therefore I think that the fact that I feel sympathy towards him is to my credit.

You said this last night - I took the words directly from you. Can you understand why people are finding it challenging to follow your logic?

limitedperiodonly · 14/12/2014 09:34

Whether I like him or not, and whether he is deliberately rude or can't help it, doesn't change the way I feel about the treatment he received. And it shouldn't for anyone.

He did not deserve it and I am pleased that he got some redress.

I don't know how many more times I have to say that.

Original poster
We3KingyofOblomovAre · 14/12/2014 15:34

Thank you to mrsstar and pag for your posts.

OP posts:
limitedperiodonly · 14/12/2014 16:14

So do you have to like someone before you can sympathise with their situation or in order to do that at all?

Pagwatch · 14/12/2014 16:52

Limited , can I just say that it might be worth contemplating that as a swathe of posters on here, ones who usually find it quite a simple thing to follow the broad thrust of an argument, have found your posts on here baffling and contradictory.

So maybe , rather than expressing frustration that you have to repeat yourself, you could consider that perhaps people are confused because you have been less than clear and unusually inarticulate.

It's just a thought. You are blaming everyone else for the fact that your posts are muddled and contradictory.

limitedperiodonly · 14/12/2014 17:11

pagwatch you and your swathe and I will have to agree to disagree.

butterflymacqueen · 14/12/2014 17:34

Who is the lady that waved through the window ( as Mr Jeffries was returning home) ?

AWholeLottaNosy · 14/12/2014 17:44

That was him imagining the murdered girl.

butterflymacqueen · 14/12/2014 17:46

OK.

carabos · 14/12/2014 18:16

I think the programme was very good in all respects. There is a danger that we might confuse the portrayed CJ with the real person who we don't know at all. His "weirdness " will no doubt have been exaggerated for dramatic effect and the fact that he has good and loyal friends who went to great lengths to support and protect him says much about his character.

It seemed preposterous at the time that such a man would be the main suspect in what was clearly a sex crime and it's very worrying that at no point did common sense kick in on the part of the police and press.

It would be interesting to have seen more from the police side- how did experienced officers manage to persuade themselves that CJ was their man?

One thing is clear from this case and others, these terrible crimes have ripples that are very far reaching for many many people, including some on the periphery, who are dragged in unwittingly.

Pagwatch · 14/12/2014 18:27

Well I don't actually have a swathe but fair enough.

I didn't understand your post and then you clarified and I thanked you. Then you posted again in a confusing way and I was not the only one baffled.

I was trying to suggest that you could try and recognise that your posts are genuinely baffling rather than blaming those who are baffled. But if you would rather feel aggrieved then fair enough.

Christopher Jeffries would probably sympathise with your plight.
< dies of irony>