The Capture (BBC One)

[unique1986]

Tonight 9pm
Looks good!
Holliday Grainger is such a good actress.

@AvillageinProvence
Exactly. Eli is also totally fuked or dead, the dog is dead, the stunt man has a headache ...
Agree that old school cop is likely to reappear doin straight up old school coppin stuff

"Unfortunately Eli slipped up with his cover somehow (not sure exactly how) and the Americans found Hannah and killed her. I'm not sure that Silver Fox and Grey Haired Female Cop know this although they are clearly in on the rest."

Yes, I wondered how Frank guessed about Eli. Was it that Eli hadn't immediately told Frank that Shaun was in Hannah's flat ("I was just about to tell you, honest"); or did he just seem 'shifty'? Frank can tell when someone is telling the truth, you see.

Yes, I agree Charlie and hannah had probably only taken on Shaun as a client as part of the plan - terrible terrible ethics. And Charlie 'oh I'd have willingly volunteered' - yes of course you would dear.

I think DSup and silver fox-ex do know that Frank's people killed Hannah - he suggested it in the cemetery and they tried to persuade him not to, so on any view he is the likely candidate!

The flashbacks got me really confused.
But assume the footage that Shaun saw of his mate having his fingers cut off was actually Eli being tortured and then it was "corrected" but friends face

Good call about the torture footage.

I think Eli's slip ups were minor but enough to arouse suspicion. He was uneasy and "guilty" and his clear discomfort at being asked whether he'd security checked himself confirmed it. There didn't seem to be one thing in particular.

Interesting - I thought the timeline was that Frank showed Shaun the torture footage, then Shaun attacked Frank, then Frank left for the cemetery meeting, and after that (or possibly at the same time) the two men had captured Eli.

I agree Eli did seem 'wrong' with Frank - he wasn't hiding his unease well. Not really surprising that Frank cottoned on.

I'm convinced Shaun was innocent in Afghanistan. But I think unfortunately he's now had the seeds of doubt planted (although to be fair Charlie was adamant that the Afghanistan footage really was out of sync), and he'll always doubt himself now. (Just as he started to think he might have abducted Hannah.)

The timelines in that last episode are so mixed up it's hard to tell.

Someone must have been the torture victim though so Eli makes sense.

Yes Eli s taken after the torture footage was shown to Shaun

I suppose the torture footage could have been fabricated in advance for such situations - then you just add an appropriate head, provided the body is roughly similar. (Can't remember if Mat's clothes matched what he was really wearing)? Exactly the same way that Hannah/Charlie did - interesting subplot that they were adopting the very methods they opposed, to stitch up Shaun (even if they planned to get him released later. Their plan didn't make sense either - all they would have proved was that the Shaun footage had been 'corrected' - not that the CIA/police did it (as they didn't!) or indeed ever do the same thing. Faisal worked the flaw in the cunning plan and Hannah's reply was unconvincing).

Though (contradicting myself about the preprepared version), didn't Eli say to Frank 'that was some of our finest work' - I assumed he was referring to the torture footage, which suggests it was created for this occasion.

But the police cia whoever they are did correct the CCTV for the sycamore I thought that was the whole point of this?

Oh yes absolutely, police/CIA doctored the Sycamore footage - but proving that Shaun's footage was doctored would not have proved that (especially as it wasn't even the CIA who doctored the Shaun footage)

The Sycamore footage was the only proof they had so proving that it is "easy" to fake it would have made the conviction unsound I think.

In the same way that by simply adjusting how the audio synchronised with the visual on Shaun's Afghanistan video meant he got off. They didn't seem to have to prove that there was a delay, just get an expert to say it.

Ah yes, so that was what Hannah's reply 'a whole new world' or something like that meant - the logical conclusion is that if cctv footage can be doctored, none of it can be relied on in court.

But don't we already know that it's possible to edit any film? I suppose the difference is that Hannah/Charlie are showing that you can hack in and alter cctv 'real-time' (or apparently 'real-time).

It was interesting - when one of the women on the Hannah/Charlie team expressed slight sympathy for Shaun, one of the men replied in a way that suggested he assumed Shaun had deliberately shot the unarmed man. Assuming guilt in the same way that Frank does (in Frank's case on the basis of inadmissible evidence). Loved the way Shaun responded to Charlie that he (Charlie) and Hannah didn't know anything about him, they just saw a squaddie. It is thoughtful, this series!

'Cmon team Rach and baldy beard
Loved that humansympathique
Great reading this thread, think Gemma detective will stop USA guy somehow, think she realises what he's capable of.

The whole thing has had more twists than a particularly twisty game of Twister but they do actually make sense - this isn't always the case with TV Dramas. It seems to be a very carefully constructed programme.

@soup you explain better then me but that’s the gist I got

They set up SHAUN to prove it can be done ‘corrected’ and that’s what happened to their clients

It probably does broadly hold together conceptually and narrative wise, but the group's plan was so convoluted and open to a million things going wrong to render it stupid - to me anyway.
Re poor eli. Frank knew there must be a rat. Im guessing there was a v small pool of ppl who fitted the bill and the rest was not too taxing on frank's skillset. How eli and the group met & colluded and whether a guy in eli's situation wd take that sort of al in risk seems dubios to me. I wonder what fate awaits frank?

My spelling is better than typing btw

Interesting thoughts avillage. Abominable as frank's actions are, i see a difference between what he knows and what some jumped up solicitor and personal agenda friends know about guilt. Shaun might or might not have killed beyond protocol on the battleground - even he might not be sure. Frank knows from the wiretaps etc what the fitted up suspects have done. His agenda is more objective.
I know in real life the power of the state means it must be kept in check and held to a higher standard and all that liberal stuff

What do you mean Frank knows from the wiretaps what the fitted up suspects have done?

I think it was when frank was interrogating hannah in the farm house, it was made pretty clear that surveillance has established evidence against the suspects - i took this to mean in many cases but could specifically have been sycamore - but evidence not legally admissable in court. Wiretaps are mentioned. So they have to concoct evidence strong enough to gain conviction.
On the terms of the drama, & risking revealing my inner bad self i take franks full knowledge over a sister wanting to get her brother off on legal technicality

Oh so these suspects who are in jail are actually guilty but there just wasn't the evidence to get them convicted?
I thought they must be innocent and that's why they're not happy they've been set up

If they are guilty why can't they use this wiretap to get them convicted?

I have no particular legal knowledge but i believe covertly recorded phne calls are illegal in uk and illegal stuff can not be used in court. Thats kinda where the lawyers group are on dodgy grounds what with breaking the law themselves

What frank & co are doing could obvs be used to frame innocent ppl, but my take is that this is not what is presented here ... others may see it differently

think Gemma detective will stop USA guy somehow, think she realises what he's capable of.

Aha, you think Gemma's nod at the end was fake - perhaps Hannah's death was her red line and she'll try to stop Frank now. Though she's known about that for the past few hours but has carried on helping Frank (or appearing to) - but maybe the thought of bringing a child into it will be too much for her.

It hardly needs saying but the Charlie/Hannah 'plan' was so unethical - oh you'd only have been in prison a short time Shaun. So many things could have gone wrong - he could have been attacked, or self-harmed, in prison, for one thing. If you want to pull a stunt like that, find a willing volunteer. I don't like Charlie and Hannah at all now - and yet as Charlie said, they did get Shaun off the previous charge. Moral ambiguity!