Witness for the Prosecution

County Hall, (31/10/24)

Credit: Tristram Kenton

Final rating: ★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆

You can't beat an Agatha Christie story sometimes, and when it's staged in the chamber of an actual County Hall, there's lots to look forward to. What this play boils down to is the defence and prosecution arguing about whether Leonard Vole, referred to frequently as just "the prisoner", is guilty of murder. And there's an added quirk to this - one section of the audience actually sit on the jury, and they confer during the break whether they believe the prisoner is or isn't guilty. Their outcome determines the ending.

Leonard Vole, we're told, has befriended an old rich woman, who just days before she dies writes him into her will leaving him most of her fortune. The circumstances are ominous, but he of course pleads his innocence. I particularly enjoyed the performance from his representation, Sir Wilfrid Robarts (Dugald Bruce-Lockhart), who delivered a charismatic and energetic performance both in the scenes in his office and of course, during his legal defence of his client. Less can be said of his partner, Mr Mayhew (Kriss Dosanjh), who delivered a faltering and stilted performance.

The story had signs of being overwritten or perhaps just simply too long-winded at times, and it felt a little stuffy as we were taken back through every detail of the run up to the widow's murder. It also felt a bit too long. And that, I think, wasn't helped by the length of scene changes and transitions that took place. It felt like an eternity passed as we watched two Warders roll out carpet in a strangely choreographed routine.

There were at points also some issues with diction - and I struggled to actually make out what was being said, particularly in the alleyway scene in which Leonard Vole's wife, Romaine, takes up a disguise to release incriminating letters to Sir Wilfrid. I felt bad for my girlfriend (who is Canadian and is still acclimatising to the British accent!) - because if I struggled to make sense of what was being said, she had no chance!

Plus, I felt a bit disappointed by the ending. Now I'm not sure whether the two endings are drastically different based on the verdict the jury delivers, but the entire plot and framing of the evidence is presumably meant to lead the jury to deliver a Not Guilty verdict. The twist, of course, is that Leonard Vole is in fact, pretty guilty. But then minutes before the end, his wife takes a knife - used as evidence during the cross-examinations - and stabs him to death. Then a blackout. What? That felt so unbelievable and random that it almost detracted from the 2hr20 we'd just witnessed unfold.

Overall, some great elements to it and certainly a different experience to your conventional night out at the theatre, but I wouldn't say it was a groundbreaking must-see bit of theatre. For me, the jury isn't out on that one.