The Trial Of A Time Lord (1986) Accusation

"Today, prudence shall be our watchword. Tomorrow,
I shall soak the land in blood!"
Said JNT.

My fellow Doctor Who fans, we're gathered here today to judge the fate of the classic series' 23rd season, the 14-part final outing of the tenure of Colin Baker. The serial known as The Trial Of A Time Lord.

After the Sixth Doctor failed to endear himself to audiences in season 22(after completely botching his introduction in The Twin Dilemma), Michael Grade summarily placed the show on hiatus and cut the next season in half, giving them a chance to return with a bigger focus on comedy like in the childfriendly Williams era stories.

With the next season under Grade's watchful eyes, producer John-Nathan Turner and script editor Eric Saward retooled the show into a parable of A Christmas Carol, judging the Doctor based on evidence from the past, present and future.

It allowed the show to survive a few more years... just. But Doctor Who's reputation was tainted, its lead actor fired and replaced with a clown in all but name, the ratings dropped and to top it all off, it was without script editor due to Eric Saward's spiteful retirement after suffering through years of mismanagement from his boss.

There was also the matter of Robert Holmes' death, which left the show's finale to be rather cobbled together by Pip and Jane Baker, and the ongoing conflict between Saward and Turner that resulted in situations like the one where Colin had to demand why his character had suddenly turned traitor and being given no answer.

Now, the question that lays before us is... was The Trial Of A Time Lord a noble, creative attempt to prove that Doctor Who was still a fine show by literally having the Doctor defend it onscreen, or a ghastly mess of a production that proved Doctor Who no longer had a place apart from being a BBC schedule filler?

This is the trial of The Trial Of A Time Lord.

Click here for the Prosecution.
Click here for the Defense.
Click here for the Final Verdict.