How much can we trust our justice system? A landmark experiment follows the restaging of a real-life murder trial in front of two juries of ordinary people

Netflix may be the home of true crime documentaries these days (barely a week goes by without a new one being launched on the streaming service), but Channel 4 has found an intriguing twist on the genre – a new four-part series, being broadcast on consecutive nights, in which a real murder trial will be recreated before our very eyes for the first time on TV, using the original transcripts. But where such events usually take place in front of only one batch of a dozen people, this one will feature two.

The idea is to highlight how different juries can view and interpret the evidence put before them; research suggests that up to a quarter of juries’ verdicts may be susceptible to inaccuracies influenced by a range of factors beyond objective evidence, and that most jurors – ordinary people who are often in court for the first time – do not understand some of the points of law they are have been asked to pass judgement on.

The fact that those involved are not allowed to share the reasons behind their decisions means that nobody can check how sound their reasoning is.

“This fascinating and ground-breaking programme asks profound questions about the justice system,” claims Alf Lawrie, Channel 4’s Head of Factual Entertainment. “Lifting the lid on what most people know little about, this revealing show could be described as putting the jury system itself on trial.”

Ed Kellie, Creative Director at production company Screendog, adds: “We wanted to be inside the jury room of a real and complex murder case – and to explore how a jury works and if jury verdicts really are as reliable as we are led to believe.”

Filming took place over the course of 10 days and focuses on the case of a man who admits he killed his wife, but argues he can’t be found guilty of murder because it wasn’t a pre-meditated attack – it was done during a moment in which he’d lost control.

Actors play the parts of the accused, the legal teams and the judge, with each jury unaware of the other, looking on from special compartments constructed in a former courthouse in Essex.

But how will each of them judge what happened and will they reach the same verdict? Have all concerned fully understood the complex laws surrounding loss of control, and will they see eye-to-eye on the issue at hand?

And, perhaps most importantly, how will those watching at home view the British legal system after seeing it being put to the test? All will be revealed…