rgu-29744 This show was pure entertainment from the start. Good story with a twist, good acting, a few surprises and well worth watching.

jk-692-236394 So I was left a bit confused. He murdered the 2nd fellow and he got away with that too? So is he the murdering justice lawyer? I think it is a ripe set up for another series. Ala Dexter. But obviously not as gory. Still there is satisfaction to be gained from seeing the criminals get theirs. I have never seen James Purefoy in anything and I thought he was quite good, and the actress who played his wife. I never understood what the young guy was in jail for. That whole story confused me. I googled it to try to see if any reviews explained it, but the first two episodes were so slow I did FF'ed through some of it so I may of missed that part. I was glad the mean cop got murdered. He was dreadful.

John Raymond Peterson To best convince you that this is a great series, short as it is, I'll be spoiling most of the plot. That's how convinced I am that a spoiler can also be a seller. William Travers, played by James Purefoy is an extremely successful barrister; we see him in action right from the start and so have little difficulty with the sometimes references to his reputation as a formidable lawyer. What we also learn midway the short five sequels episodes, is that he's prepared to risk his license by walking away from a case if he loses trust in his client; defending innocent people is his sole mission and he does not accept cases if he has doubts about a prospect client's innocence.Unlike TV series which themes deal with justice, the law and police investigations, this series is more like five a part movie about a uncommon defence lawyer. He spares no effort turning every stone and considering any detail that might help prove all his clients' innocence; an hour TV episode or a two hour regular movie would usually feature an "eureka" moment but not "INJUSTICE". No 'Cracker Jack' storyline here to meet a production deadline.We rout for Travers with each small piece of information he and his team manage to gather for their case. The case in play here is a murder trial where the accused is an old friend; Travers had previously sworn never to work murder cases after the mental breakdown he suffered following what should have been his last successful murder case. We are confronted by bits and pieces relating to that former case; we are made to understand that a young boy was killed by the blast of a bomb and that the man responsible, an extremist animal rights activist had fooled Travers in believing in his innocence. Episode after episode show glimpses of Travers, flashes of memory, assassinating his former client out of a sense of justice, but this culmination of his mental breakdown only heightens our doubt about his current case. We slowly develop doubts and questions for which we cannot form simple answers. Might he be falling into another similar trap? Developments point to his current client's innocence while the case also becomes more and more difficult for his client; the more challenging it gets, the more we lean on the side of his innocence. Travers mental state has not been remedied despite what all around him perceive. The more predictable it should become, the less it in fact does.To make matters more interesting to the audience, the most despicable detective inspector on the force, DS Mark Wenborn (played superbly by Charlie Creed-Miles), is making slow but clearly cumulative progress that he hopes will result in charging Travers with the murder of his former client, a prospect which unleashes Wenborn into all sorts of abuses of authority toward his goal. It's personal for Wenborn. He might have only stumbled on small clues at first, but his resentment of Travers fuels his vile ambitions.Five episodes allow us to get to know the main characters in their personal lives, not just as officers of the law or of the court; we follow them with their families and colleagues and so we can relate to them as ordinary persons. Sympathy, empathy, support builds for barrister Travers, while we loathe Wenborn. We get emotionally interested in the characters. Something European productions are far better at incorporating in their scripts; the resulting production is richer and has thus more depth. I'm abstaining for revealing more; there are indeed more, even intertwined sub-plots that had me addicted to watch "INJUSTICE". Few have taken the time to write reviews and or to vote, but the weighted average rating of 8.2 supports my conclusion that this is well worth watching and I hesitate not in recommending it.

Corky1984 Injustice is exactly the kind of well-written drama series that ITV should be making more of. The plot centres on a seemingly high-flying lawyer, William Travers, who enjoys the trappings of wealth and is known for his success in court. The 5 episodes, however, show that his life is far more complex. Feeling guilty that one of his clients was acquitted of murder but later confessed privately to him that he had actually killed a young boy, Travers kills the man. We then follow the police investigation, as the moody and emotionally unstable DS Wenborn begins to track the killer. Worlds are about to collide, but Wenborn's life unravels more dramatically than could be expected. Travers, back in London defending an old university friend from a charge of murder, has deja vu when it emerges that his 'friend' is really a sick killer...the show finishes with Travers seemingly let off the hook.