So it's something of a novelty to encounter a show where this trend is reversed and the performance is not worthy of the writing.

Tom Williams has written a terrific show but his delivery so often lapses into the hurried and garbled that you could be forgiven for failing to notice the excellence of his script.

This show examines a court case through several key characters including the sketch artist; the defendant; the prosecutor and the defence barrister, the best of the lot. As depicted by Williams, Andrew Jelfrey is an unwilling maverick. After accidentally assaulting one of his university tutors, Jelfrey established his reputation for unorthodoxy and is stuck with it. But inside he longs to abide by the rules. Williams mines a rich comic seam from this conceit and, for a while, the gap between the writing and the performance is narrowed. Indeed, when he plays Jelfrey in 'maverick' mode, you could almost be watching Rik Mayall's marvellous Lord Flashheart.

Other characters are not quite so successful. Alan da Vinci, the court's sketch artist, is played as a gravelly veteran, but an interesting idea is reduced to cliché by a performance that eliminates any nuance.

Williams employs a neat device for his scene changes with recordings spoofig Radio One and its ilk. They are well-crafted and offer further proof that Williams has been meticulous in his preparation for the Fringe.

The other part of the show that worked particularly well was a protest song in the style of Billy Bragg, in which he campaigns for the release of the Redhill One, as defendant Colin Watkins has come to be known.

The guitar appears to boost Williams's confidence and he slows the pace to a much more acceptable level while performing his songs. Williams recruits a member of the audience to act out the role of a witness and, despite his apparent unease on stage, proves surprisingly adept at banter and manages to conjure some decent comedy from the interaction.

It's hard to avoid the conclusion that there is better show within this idea. Given how much of the performance felt rushed, it may well be that as simple edit to fit the allocated slot is all that’s needed. But that might be being generous to a performance that consistently fell short of what the excellent script deserved.

Review date: 20 Aug 2010
Reviewed by: Jason Stone