All language subtitles for Deceit.S01E04.WEBRip.x264 - 4659 - m

When we talked before,

I only should you
one photograph, didn't I?

This photograph.

No comment.

You can't see
Rachel's injuries.

Can you?

No comment.

So, how did you
get knowledge of Rachel's injuries?

No comment.

How did you know that
her hands were in that...

...particular position?

No comment.

How could you know that unless you'd
been there and seen Rachel?

No comment.

You couldn't possibly know these
details, could you, Colin?

No comment.

Do you know a woman
called Lizzie James?

No comment.

You do know Lizzie James,
don't you, Colin?

Do you remember
the first time we met...

...and you handed me
an envelope?

And in that letter,

you enclosed a fantasy
where you talked about knives.

Do you remember that?

No comment.

♪ She stepped away from me

♪ And she moved through the fair

♪ And fondly I watched her

♪ Move here and move there

♪ And she went her way homeward

♪ With one star awake

♪ As the swans in the evening

♪ Move over the lake. ♪

"A man goes over to you and produces
some string and a knife."

You wrote that, didn't you?

Cos up until this point,

I have never mentioned
a fantasy... with a knife.

♪ The people were singing

♪ And she moved through the fair

♪ And fondly I watched her

♪ Move here and move there

There are similarities between
what you wrote in that fantasy

and what happened to Rachel,
aren't there?

No comment.

Did you stab her?

Did you kill Rachel?

You told me that the
police had shown you

a photograph
of Rachel Nickell's body

at the time when she was murdered.
Do you remember that?

And you, in fact,
lay in the position,

you lay down like a baby.

Like this, wasn't it?
You were, erm...

...curled,
and you had your hands like this.

And you told me that she had her
head tilted slightly back like this.

Do you remember that?

No comment.

Is there anything that you want to
say to me, Colin? Anything at all?

Leave it.

Leave it!

Not ill.

No.

Not frightened, me.

Do it!

OK.

OK.

OK.

Colin Francis Stagg,
you are charged that,

on July 15th, 1992,
on Wimbledon Common,

you murdered Richard Nickell.

Yes, yes, yes, yes.

Nonce!

You're
smiling at me, willing me to do it.

And you got the cup,
and I filled it with her blood,

and we drank it.

- I took the knife in my hand.
- There she is.

And then I slit her throat.
Lizzie James.

I can still hear...

...asking me to tell you all my
secrets.

I am placing
all my trust in you.

Go away.

Hmm, OK, yeah, tomorrow.

Cheers for getting him here in one
piece, Keith.

Er, Mickey Banks.

It's a pleasure to meet you,
Mr Banks.

Likewise.
We really need your expertise.

I'll stick around
if there's no objections.

It'd be fascinating to watch him
process the case.

Professor...

She looks very similar to
Rachel Nickell, doesn't she, sir?

But we're not getting
the press that you got.

Only the negative sort.

Single mum, council flat,

wrong side of the tracks.

But that doesn't sell papers,
does it?

No.

I guess not.

*DECEIT*
Season 01 Episode 04

It's weird.

I, uh...

...I keep seeing him.

Stagg.

I don't know, it's like I can't...

...close the door on him.

Look...

Look, they've asked a lot of you.

You know?

Yeah.

And they're going to want more.

This...

...this trial's going to be huge.

You're going to need to face Stagg
again.

Maybe that's why you can't get
him out of your head.

It's perfectly normal.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Mm.

So, what was it like?

Have you ever seen the photo

of the Jack The Ripper victim,
Mary Jane Kelly?

Yeah.

There's nothing that links the,
um...

...the killer with Rachel's murder?

Nothing.

Are you certain?

Entirely different locations.

One outdoors, one inside.

Entirely different injuries.

Rachel was stabbed,
whereas Samantha was...

...Samantha was eviscerated.

Mutilated.

What about the children?

I mean, that's...

...that's fairly unusual.

Rachel Nickell's killer chose to
spare her child...

...whereas Samantha Bisset's
killer...

...did not.

Jazmine was sexually assaulted.

In my mind, that's the single
biggest difference

between the two crimes.

The demons driving Rachel Nickell's
killer, and Samantha Bisset's...

...are entirely different.

First case this month is
shocking and distressing.

It's a double-murder.

Samantha Bisset and
her daughter, Jazmine,

lived in Plumstead in South London.

Samantha probably died
from a single knife wound.

After death, her body was then
moved and systematically cut.

There was no evidence
of robbery or rape.

Jazmine had been suffocated
in her bed.

The police, working with a
clinical psychologist,

fear that the man who did it
might have killed before

and might do it again.

Well, to give you some idea,

we're also able to tell you,
for the first time tonight,

something of the background,
the profile of this man.

He's thought to be over 25.
He's likely to have used contact ads.

Maybe you've met him through one.

He would have been unlikely
to sustain stable relationships

and indeed probably has
been violent to women,

but on the surface, he'll
probably appear quite normal.

He's likely to have a normal job.

He is, though, likely to reoffend.

Paul Britton's a clinical
psychologist.

H... how much are you...

You've studied this
man in some detail,

as much as you can, how much
do you think you know him?

I think we know quite well
what was going through his mind

at the time of the offence.

But I would like him to tell me how
he got started on the path...

"..mean the world to me..."

Is that story awful?

About slitting the woman's throat?

Yeah.

"I hope you're not offended by..."

Thing is, I mean...

- ...you don't want that now, do you?
- "I've written this story..."

- "I'm not a Satanist..."
- No. No.

I have my own beliefs.

It doesn't involve human sacrifices.

"..What I feel you are into.

"Or a weirdo, as people believe I
am.

"I felt I am a very...

"" Have I got it right now, Lizzie?

I love you.

That's for Rachel.

Fucking scumbag.

"I don't owe in evidence..."

Few more things to sign.

Fun and games.

Did you see Crimewatch last night?

Terrible.

The professor's profile
of the Bisset killer

is very similar to Rachel's killer.

Well...

...seeing as Stagg was locked up
in Wanno at the time,

I think we can safely say
he wasn't responsible.

That's not what I meant.

It's quite unusual, isn't it?

A man that targets women
when they're with their kids.

I asked the same question.
The professor was very clear.

The demons driving the killers
of Samantha and Rachel

are entirely different.

But the kids.

Alex was spared.

Jazmine wasn't.

Britton called that the single
biggest different.

No, no, no, he spared the boy
and he killed the girl.

Don't you think the FBI profilers

might have something to say
about that?

They didn't see the knives
in Stagg's flat.

They didn't speak to the witnesses

who put him on the Common
at the time of the murder.

How did Stagg know the position
of Rachel's hands?

Or that her head was back?

We have the right man, Sadie.

And when the jury hear evidence
in a few weeks' time...

...they'll be convinced of it, too.

Ricky?

Those prints you had
rechecked at Samantha's flat.

There is a match.

Plumstead have him on record.

His name came up in connection
with a series of rapes.

Really nasty.

Robert Clive Napper.

Are you not going home?

Police! Stay where you are!

Colin, you understand that
it's my job to prepare a report

for the court on your mental state?

Yeah.

I may need to ask you very
personal questions.

I've got nothing to hide.

Have you ever had any treatment
or therapy of any kind

for depression?

Or any other mental health issue?

No.

The therapy referred to other areas.

We used to have a father.

Now we're finding ourselves
in another area with problems.

The government repeated
certain years, which...

...held him back in school.

And... how would you say
you've been coping

these past months?

I've been a bit down.

Lonely and that.

But I'm not mental.

The spirits...

...are attracted to the steroids
they put in solutions like Optrex.

It is possible...

...the haunted potentials have
controlled him in the past, but...

...the Official Secrets Act means
he can't talk about that.

I miss my dog.

He's getting on and he's not well,
you know?

What if I never see him again?

Fuckin' did it, girl.

Stagg in the docks.

You know what?
Stagg in jail.

No, fuck it.
Stagg getting life.

"Animal Nitrate
by Suede" plays...

Once the trial's over
it'll be easier to move on.

You can put Lizzie James
behind you for good.

See for just one night, can
you... just talk about anything else?

Please.

Relax. Breathe.

It's OK. No, it's not OK.

It's fucking not OK.
It's not OK.

You know, he used to look at me
like I was his whole world

and I used to think
he was this fucking monster.

But what if he wasn't?

Excuse me!

My Lord, it is the defence's case
that the police operation

was a sophisticated sting

with the sole purpose of tricking
a confession out of Colin Stagg.

To take advantage of a lonely
and vulnerable young man's

desperate desire to form
a relationship with a woman.

Lizzie James called the shots.

Effectively telling Colin
what she wanted him to write

in his fantasy letters.

She portrayed herself
as sexually experienced,

ready and willing,

knowing full well that Mr Stagg was
desperate to lose his virginity.

He was encouraged,
blackmailed and bribed

into incriminating himself to fit
Professor Britton's profile

of Rachel Nickell's killer.

Of course, there is
Mr Stagg's detailed description

of how Rachel's body was lying.

It could not possibly have
been derived

from the only photograph shown
to him by the police.

In particular, he illustrated how
her hands were positioned -

palm to palm.

Such a detail could only
have been known by the assailant.

And this pointed to a confession.

My Lord, Lizzie James
sent Colin a letter

containing the most
hardcore pornography imaginable.

It is frankly a disgrace.

It's... it's the
most extraordinary document

for a serving police officer
to be sending a suspect.

She subjected Stagg to quite
deliberate manipulation,

designed to get him
to incriminate himself.

And this material
amounts to trickery

and in the interest of fair play

should never be put before a jury.

Months of work
and they take a snippet from here,

an inference from there and they
quote it out of fucking context.

There's been a development.

What?

Justice Ognall
isn't swearing in the jury

until he makes a judgment
on whether or not

your evidence is admissible.

My evidence?

So this is all on me now?

You're our star witness, Sadie.

Go home.

The ruling won't be
till Wednesday.

Hi, Mum.

Yeah, I know. I'm sorry
I didn't get home for your birthday.

You had a good day? Good.
Good.

You got my card?

Good.

Yeah, no. Work's going good.
Yeah. They're...

...all really pleased with me here.

No, I can't. I can't talk about it.
You know I can't.

I wish I could.

Yeah, of course I'm happy.

Why wouldn't I be? Yeah.

I wouldn't do the job if I wasn't.

Mum, I'm fine. I'm always fine.

It's just...

It's just been a really long year.

Mum, actually,
there's someone at the door here,

so can I...
Can I call you another time?

Yes. No. I promise I will this time.

OK.

Yep. Please do. Tell Dad I miss him.

OK.

Mum...

I love you.

Nothing like this has ever
really happened to me before,

you know?

No-one's ever really shown
an interest.

And how these fantasies,
you're the man who did it.

I love you.

The things in my letters,
that's me.

I could have said that I done it
just to please you.

I'm not going to lose you,
am I, Lizzie?

Yeah, but I want more than just
fucking fantasies, Colin.

I want to go there.

It's not me, is it?

It's not me.

All rise.

Before I embark on this ruling,
I wish it to be clearly understood

that, until its conclusion,
nobody is to leave the court.

A careful appraisal of the material

demonstrates a skilful
and sustained enterprise

to manipulate the accused...

...sometimes subtly,
sometimes blatantly,

and designed by deception to
manoeuvre and seduce him

to reveal fantasies
of an incriminating nature...

...and to wholly unsuccessfully
admit the offence.

I would be the first to
acknowledge the great pressure

on officers in pursuit of
this grave enquiry.

But I'm afraid that this behaviour
betrays not merely

an excess of zeal but a substantial
attempt to incriminate

a suspect by positive and deceptive
conduct of the grossest kind.

During the second police interview
with Mr Stagg,

Lizzie James re-enacted a
demonstration given by the accused

indicating that the victim's hands
were as if in prayer -

palm to palm.

But, as soon as one examines
photograph KP15,

a discrepancy emerges.

The hands of the victim are not
palm to palm at all.

The arms are, in fact,
crossed at the wrist

so that the hands barely touch.

This is not a minor difference

but a discrepancy which completely
undermines the whole thesis,

and I am not satisfied that this one
very small piece of evidence

amounts to incriminating material
of the character of a confession.

I believe the police entrapped
Colin Stagg in a honey trap,

using deceptive conduct
of the grossest kind.

Therefore, I uphold the defence
submissions

that the Lizzie James material
will not go before a jury.

As the Crown offers no more
evidence against the defendant,

and the defendant has
pleaded not guilty,

a verdict of not guilty
will be entered,

under Section 17 of the
Criminal Justice Act, 1967.

Colin Stagg,

you are free to go.

Yesterday's hearing was
widely anticipated to lead to

the trial of the decade, but after
his sensational acquittal,

Colin Stagg made a defiant
statement to the waiting press.

My life has been ruined by a mixture
of half-baked psychological

theories and some stories written
to satisfy the strange sexual

requests of an undercover
police officer.

The judge recognised that there
was never any evidence against me.

I now intend to take
proceedings against the police

and the psychologist Mr Paul Britton
for the anguish

and indescribable distress that I
have suffered

during the last 19 months in prison.

No, please don't turn
it off on my account, Da Costa.

You know, you've never done
anything nice for me before,

so if you start now,
I'll know I'm totally fucked.

Is it true?

What the judge said.

Sade.

Sadie.

DCI's waiting for you.

Better not keep him waiting.

Sadie...

You know what? I followed orders,
I did what I was asked to do,

and every one of them
up at the Yard signed off on it.

What aren't you telling me, mate?

You know, whatever mistake
that I have made,

I'm not afraid to face it.

But I'm not the only one
who has to answer for this.

They want to see me
at the Yard first thing.

Hey...

Are you all right?

Palm to palm, wrist to wrist.

What's the difference?

And he's out there,
free to kill again.

Wicker, top brass are here.

What?

They'll be after our case files.

They get hold of this,
they'll erase the name

of every senior officer who
signed off on the Lizzie op.

We go down, they go down with us.

Case files are on the desk.

Into next week, then, the winds
are set to swing south-westerly,

drawing in slightly milder air,

then fog and low cloud on
southwestern coasts,

causing visibility issues.

A man with a history of violent
attacks on women has today

pleaded guilty to killing
Rachel Nickell on Wimbledon Common

16 years ago.

The murder of a young mother
in broad daylight

caused public outrage.

Schizophrenic Robert Napper was
convicted of manslaughter

on the grounds of diminished
responsibility,

bringing to a close the enquiry
into one of the most notorious

killings in modern British
criminal history.

42-year-old Napper
is already detained

at Broadmoor Special Hospital after
his conviction for the murders

of Samantha Bisset and her
four-year-old daughter, Jazmine.

...a nice, long walk,
aren't we? Eh?

Subtitles by Red Bee Media