YOU DECIDE THE VERDICT IN THIS INTERACTIVE COURTROOM DRAMA

By Tanya Howard | Founder, The Live Review London · @glamglitzlondon ⭐⭐⭐ | Press Invite

There’s something instantly quite gripping about the concept behind The Jury Experience: Death on the Port Side at Shaw Theatre. You’re not just sitting there watching a story unfold; you’re actively part of it. From the moment you arrive, you’re told that as the audience, you are the jury, and ultimately the responsibility of deciding someone’s fate sits with you. It’s a strong hook, and one that immediately makes you pay attention in a way that traditional theatre sometimes doesn’t.

The story itself centres around four friends who head out on a speedboat, with the night ending in a devastating accident that leaves one dead and two in comas. The only person we actually see on stage from that group is Dylan, who is on trial for the murder of Parker, and the show builds its case around whether this was a tragic accident or something far more intentional. The structure is clean and focused, with just four actors taking on the roles of Dylan, the prosecution, the defence, and the judge. And the narrative is driven through testimonies and evidence presented directly to us as the jury.

VOTING, VERDICTS AND BEING PART OF THE STORY

What really makes the show stand out is the level of audience interaction woven throughout. Before the trial even properly begins, a member of the audience is selected as the foreman and brought on stage to represent everyone, opening and closing the case with the final verdict. Throughout the performance, you’re asked to vote at key moments using QR codes displayed on a large screen above the stage, whether that’s your initial thoughts on Dylan’s guilt, which pieces of evidence should be shown, or ultimately whether he should be found guilty or not guilty. It breaks the show up nicely, especially as there’s no interval, and it does genuinely make you feel involved in the process rather than just passively watching.

That said, the interactive element is also where some of the frustrations start to creep in. During the evidence sections, you’re often given multiple options to choose from, but only one actually gets shown, which feels like a bit of a missed opportunity. The show is only around an hour long, and it easily could have stretched slightly to include more of these moments. There were times where the option I wanted didn’t win and I was left wondering what I’d missed.

It also would have been interesting to see the voting percentages in real time, just to add a bit more transparency. The results were brought on stage by a member of the crew in a case file folder jacket, keeping with the theme. However, they came back very quickly and did make me question how closely they actually reflected what the audience had selected.

A LACK OF CONNECTION WHERE IT MATTERS MOST

In terms of staging, it’s fairly minimal, with desks set up for the prosecution, defence, defendant, and judge. As well as a large screen used for displaying evidence and handling the interactive elements. It works for what it needs to do, but there are a few areas where the execution lets things down slightly. There were noticeable sound issues throughout, with Dylan’s mic dropping at points and the backing audio overpowering the prosecutor early on, making it difficult to follow what was being said. There were also a couple of moments where lines were fluffed, which didn’t completely take you out of it, but were definitely noticeable.

Some of the evidence itself also felt a bit uneven. A key moment involves a 999 call from Adelaide, one of the friends involved in the accident. And while it’s meant to feel frantic and emotional, the clarity just wasn’t there, making it hard to actually understand what she was saying. Subtitles would have made a huge difference here and would have helped the audience engage more with what should have been a really impactful piece of evidence.

Adelaide appears again later as an off-stage voice during a hospital interview, but it didn’t quite land in the same way. Partly because it didn’t sound like the same person, and partly because the questioning felt quite leading. This made it harder to fully trust what we were being told and took away the connection you would feel with an actor on stage or on screen.

AN ENDING THAT LEAVES TOO MUCH UNSAID

There’s also a reliance on AI-generated images for the people involved in the case, including Parker. This felt like a strange choice given that she is the emotional crux of the experience. It’s not that I wanted anything graphic, but an image of a real person would have added a layer of humanity. For me, I need this emotional connection to truly connect with a story and what’s happening. Instead, it did leave me feeling slightly detached.

The show builds towards the final vote, with the audience deciding the verdict before the foreman returns to announce the result on stage, and then it ends. Quite abruptly. With no real confirmation of what actually happened. And while I don’t mind leaving a show with questions, this felt more like being left with too many unanswered points rather than something intentionally thought-provoking. It does spark conversation afterwards, which is clearly part of the aim. But it also leaves a slightly frustrating feeling, as though you’re missing key pieces of the puzzle that you’ll never actually get.

That said, the concept itself is strong, and the interaction does genuinely add something different to the theatre experience. It’s engaging, it keeps you thinking, and it’s nice to feel included rather than just observing.

Overall, The Jury Experience: Death on the Port Side is an interesting and engaging concept that doesn’t quite reach its full potential but still offers something a bit different for a night out. If you enjoy interactive theatre and like the idea of being part of the decision-making process, it’s definitely worth a go. Just be prepared to leave with more questions than answers.

WEBSITE

⭐⭐⭐

Photo Credit: Fever