Review: TRIAL AND ERROR at Baxter Theatre Centre Explores Law as Theatre

TRIAL AND ERROR follows 19-year-old Amari Davids (played by Mamello Makhetha) of Georgia, who stands trial for negligence and manslaughter (culpable homicide in South Africa), after being involved in a car accident that leaves two people dead.

The show seats the audience as members of the jury at Amari’s trial. We observe the opening and closing arguments of the Prosecutor (played by Sage van Niekerk) as well as those of the defence lawyer (played by Kayla van Tonder). We also see the examination and cross-examination of witnesses, such as Dr Susan Reynolds, Amari’s psychiatrist (played by Luella Holland), and Officer Lance Williams, one of the policeman present at the scene of the accident (played by Daniel Stromin). Interestingly, the judge is an omnipotent-seeing, god-like figure who remains unseen. We only hear his voice.

The actors all provide sound performances. Makhetha is excellent as Amari. She brings us into the character’s world and her monologues provide some of my favourite parts of the show. Makheta’s performance is authentic and complex and I hope to see more of her.

Van Niekerk makes for a superb Prosecutor: slimy and endowed with the ‘gift of the gab’, he plays the part of a ruthless legal professional with aplomb. Likewise, van Tonder does a great job of playing the righteous if idealistic Defence Lawyer. Her performance is compelling: soft and gentle, yet full of conviction.

Stromin as Officer Williams is everything you’d imagine a corrupt police officer to be: arrogant, apathetic, and obviously in the prosecution’s pocket. Stromin also provides some good laughs. Holland as Dr Reynolds plays her character convincingly: clinical, efficient, and factual, she makes for a credible witness.

Lastly, Ethan Saunders plays Simon O’Neal, the son of the couple killed in the car accident. Saunders’ performance is natural and he delivers a layered performance of a grieving, somewhat entitled character. He must just be careful not to swallow words – sometimes I lost his.

I really enjoyed that each character wore a touch of orange: whether a tie, a pocket square, a bracelet, a dress, a blouse, or a prison uniform, I really liked this costume decision. To me it signifies that we are all culpable in one way or another, to differing degree, and depending on whose viewpoint we harness.

Since we are the jury, the legal practitioners speak directly to us and we are involved in the action. In this way, the audience too is implicated not only in the story but in the social commentary made by the production. Where do we stand on issues like racial bias and corruption in the justice system/police force? The lighting is harsh but effective – we cannot run away from the role we play in maintaining a broken system. Thus, we are not an audience escaping reality in the safe darkness of the theatre, but participants confronted by the (in?)justice within out broader society.

However, for a ‘trial by jury’ production to succeed, the question posed to the audience must be an actual dilemma. The audience should genuinely have to struggle (or at least grapple) with the stance to take when voting. There is only one answer to the question posed in this show and it’s a no-brainer. I would be truly shocked if one audience during the run garners an outcome different to the one that resulted on the night I watched. This is because the audience is provided with far too much backstory, subjectivity, and commentary for there to be another answer to the question posed.

There is no inherent problem with the provided backstory, subjectivity etc. On the contrary – this is a beautiful story, poignantly told. As I said above, many of my favourite moments lie in the subjective  character-building and plot-building. However, one must then forego the ‘choose your own adventure’ element. It lacks the desired force and weight that it would contain if the there was any real chance of the audience making a choice – there is none to make.

Likewise, I found the construction of the villains of the show a little on the nose at times – we know the evils of the ‘justice’ system but those evils are subtle and systemic. We don’t need a racist police officer to wink at a prosecutor to expose his prejudice. We don’t need a prosecutor to laugh in an accused’s face to tell us that the ‘right’ side of the law does not always equal ‘good’ and the ‘wrong’ side of the law does not always equal ‘bad’. Here, I think that we need to have faith in audiences to appreciate the subtleties and nuances of these complex societal issues – not everything has to be obvious and overt. Trust audiences to read between the lines of a text.

Let me be clear: the standard of this show is high. I found the accents consistent and strong and the acting is excellent. Emma Amber has created a tight and slick production and it is certainly worth seeing. My issue lies only with the effectiveness of posing a question to the audience that is answered for us almost immediately after the play begins. There’s a trial here, but the audience is not given the opportunity for error.

TRIAL AND ERROR runs from 4 to 14 September at the Masambe Theatre at the Baxter Theatre Centre. Tickets range between R100 and R170 and are available on Webtickets.

To post a comment, you must register and login.