Mislav

Even 3-4 (heh) years ago, they literally had unsubs based on 17 different unsubs that had previously appeared on the show. http://criminalminds.wikia.com/wiki/Michael_Peterson http://criminalminds.wikia.com/wiki/Justin_Leu

You know the show has really gone downhill when nobody opens the episode thread until the day after it aired, and then nobody seems interested enough to comment on it.

That was kind of the main issue with your previous replies.

You seem to have misunderstood me. My point was that the number of seasons doesn't equal quality. So saying "Erica can't be a bad showrunner because the show has been on the air for over seven years since she took over" (which is what you pointed out in your previous reply) doesn't prove much. The show can be on the air for years and still be bad. And nobody here complained about the show coming to an end. Most of the negative comments were about the current quality (or a lack of thereof) of the show; and Erica is the showrunner. And yes, the quality of Criminal Minds is subjective; but nobody claimed that it wasn't. If it is all subjective anyway, why even bother bringing up an actual fact (that the show has been on the air for over seven years since Erica took over) and use it as an argument? For comparison, books like "50 Shades of Grey" are crap, and they still sold 100 million copies. Yes, that claim-description ("crap"), too, is subjective. Just a personal opinion. But you'd be hard pressed to find any literature major, professor, critic, or anyone actually experienced in what the book is supposed to be about (BDSM) that has anything good to say about that book (and its sequels). And, at the end of the day, it is pretty difficult to determine how many of the people who bought and read the book actually liked it, rather than just wanting to see what all the hype was about, and hating it once they read it (or even just wanting to see was it really that bad). Which ties into my final argument: just because the show still has sufficient ratings, doesn't mean that it isn't bad (especially when compared to earlier seasons... and I'm not just talking about seasons 1-4, I'd go as far as to say seasons 8 and 9 too). Yes, that is still my opinion, but your reply doesn't really address any points that I have made. And nobody is required to agree that viewers who still like "Criminal Minds" are correct in their own way, or that they have a good taste. That defeats the whole purpose of personal opinion. One can hardly both dislike the show, and think that viewers who still enjoy it are completely right all the same.

I mean, there are literal soap operas that can last up 15-20+ seasons... that is not a very good argument... Do you also think that "50 Shades of Grey" is a good book because it sold over 100 million copies? Or that "Firefly" is bad because it got canceled after one season? And the show did start declining in quality after season five, but I personally still enjoyed it up until season ten (many might not feel that way, but I do), so no, it wasn't a disaster as soon as Erica took over, but that doesn't mean that she didn't screw things up later on, or that her showrunning, currently, almost five years since the last decent season, isn't pretty damn bad. But some flaws were evident in her early days as a showrunner, they just got really prominent later on. And it is hard to give up on characters that you've followed, and enjoyed, for almost a decade, so some probably watch out of pure hope that things might get better. At the very least, most of the long-time viewers would like to see the series finale and get some closure (even if chances are that it will be... disapointing), so they do have to stay in the loop. Also, there are still good episodes (such as "Nelson's Sparrow" and "Entropy")... but once in a blue moon. So some viewers may tune in thinking "Will this be the episodes where writers get it right?" Which you can't really know unless you watch it (or at least a half of it), and if the episodes turns out to be crap (like most of them are), it is even more disappointing. And if you want to see bunch of people currently watching, and liking, "Criminal Minds" for low-bar, superficial reasons that would even make 13-year-old girls cringe, just take a look at some of the YouTube comments on Criminal Minds videos, or even some Reddit comments on r/criminalminds. Maybe Erica is now pandering to them? That way, she can attract a sufficient number of viewers without putting up much effort. And saying "Let's focus on 300th episode and our "Criminal Minds" family", in response to sexual assault allegations against the crew member, is... dumb. I am all for due process and innocent until proven guilty, but Erica didn't even deny anything (including the alleged cover-up on the showrunners' side), sent the alleged abusee "home for a few days" (instead of, you know, putting him on a leave during the investigation) and just said "Let's focus on the show, everyone". I'm cringing so fucking hard right now. At the very least, this shows that she can be really immature and self-centered; even about serious legal matters. Not going into how appaling that attitude is all around, especially towards the victims, which is pretty clear... does such a person sound like a good showrunner for a serious, crime/mystery TV show? I kind of see your point, but I think you're reaching and that "the show is still on the air" doesn't prove anything.

My reply to K42, regarding her latest reply in "300" thread: I liked all the new characters, up to and including Alex Blake. Yes, even Ashley Seaver; even though a part of that is probably due to Rachel Nichols being cute as hell ?But Alex Blake was the last new character that I liked. Tara Lewis is OK, she had some really good parts in season eleven, but the writers haven't done much with her since. Many people seem to forget that Emily and Rossi were new characters at one point too. I wonder, is there some kind of statue of limitations on that, so to say? Like, if the character is introduced as a new character in season 2 or 3 of the show, and 10+ years later the show is still on the air, and those characters are still on it, then almost all the viewers, especially long-term ones, no longer really consider them to ever had been new characters, and it feels like they were a part of the show from the beginning.

K42, I will reply to you in "Criminal Minds Analysis" thread, because it would probably be off topic on the episode thread. Just to let you know.

Between a bunch of new characters being brought in, Rossi finding out he had a daughter and a grandson the whole time, bunch of serial killers breaking out of prison, Spencer being framed for murder (and ending up in prison instead of, you know, jail), and, most recently, a cult targeting the BAU (resulting in Spencer and Garcia getting abducted), the last few seasons of "Criminal Minds" read like a really bad fanfic. Considering all that, Erica Messer really baffles me. The way she addressed the recent sexual assault allegations against the crew member was terrible. It is like she lives in her own "reality". Maybe that explains the focus on new characters such as Matt and Luke, as well as on overused characters like JJ, and a lack of any development or new, interesting storylines regarding Spencer and Rossi (no, I don't like the whole ex-wives bs). Erica keeps pushing the uninteresting new characters down our throats because she identifies with them. They reflect her: bland, shallow, uninspired and pandering. It is like they made a 13-year-old girl the showrunner. And what's all that with "Criminal Minds family"? This used to be an interesting, gritty, thought provoking crime-mystery show where FBI agents used (relatively realistic) psychological profiling in order to catch serial killers, spree killers, serial rapists, abductors, mass murderers, terrorists... experts trying to think like monsters in order to catch them. How on Earth has it become some sort of over the top family-friendly soap opera/action show? A parody of itself. How does anyone mess up so badly?

She is delusional.

Another (relatively original) episode idea that I've had: The unsub tortures and murders young women all over New York (or some other big city). At first, it appears that the victims have nothing in common. But it is eventually discovered the unsub went to great lengths to destroy some of the victims' personal items, and even deleted data from their phones and computers. Also, there are no signs of forced entry on any crime scenes, and no defense wounds on any of the bodies: victims let him in, and felt comfortable around him. Also, the second victim's sister was also murdered, and it appears like she had walked in on the unsub and was a collateral victim, but the team eventually uncovers evidence that the unsub lured her to the crime scene. That, combined with the personal nature of the crimes, leads the team to conclude that all the victims dated the same man at some point in their lives. The unsub is killing all of his ex-girlfriends! In the final arc, the unsub's motivation is revealed and explained. A year ago, he was happily engaged, soon to be married. One night, while getting off work, he received a phone call from his apartment. A muffled voice said: "We were meant to be together. You broke my heart. I am not going to kill you. But I'm gonna make you wish you were dead. As a matter of fact, it's already done. Come and see." He rushed back to his apartment, only to find his fiancee brutally murdered. Soon afterwards, he suffered a mental breakdown and spent some time in a mental institution. Soon after being released, he went after his ex-girlfriends, believing one of them to be responsible (due to the nature of the phone call). He'd gain access to their homes, subdue them, torture them and search their homes, trying to get them to confess, and searching for any evidence of their guilt. When that wouldn't work, he'd snap and murder them, then remove all the evidence that he ever dated them in order to cover his tracks, including killing the second victim's sister (who knew about their relationship). In the end, it turns out that none of the unsub's ex-girlfriends murdered his fiancee; it was his neighbor, a young mentally disturbed woman who was in love with him, and snapped when she learned that his wedding date was approaching. She believed they were destined to be together, even though he barely even spoke to her (which is why he never suspected her). Soon after the murder, she attempted suicide and was institutionalized, and she actually received treatment that helped her. All the murders were for nothing.

I mean, idea #2 wouldn't be a case that was previously featured on the show, only to be revisited, like with the most recent episode and season four's "Minimal Loss". Just a cold case that the team has to reopen for some reason, though hasn't been mentioned before (not that contrived, since the BAU can't be investigating all the serial killer/mass murders/spree killers cases happening throughout the USA anyway). It would feature a (reopened) cold case, but it wouldn't be a recycled/revisited case. Another idea for an episode: the team has to split in two, in order to investigate two seemingly unrelated serial killer cases, active at the same time (maybe taking place in the same city, or taking place in neighboring cities/states). The first case is a series of vigilante killings. All the victims are registered sex offenders. The second case is a series of brutal murders, where all the victims are young women; seemingly low-risk victims with nothing in common. The investigation eventually reveals that all the female victims were previously victims of some kind of sex crime (attempted rape, stalking, molestation, harassment), though none of them were raped, because they managed to fight the attacker off and/or contact the authorities in time. It eventually turns out that the cases are connected; the work of the same unsub, the victim of a rape. She is murdering registered sex offenders because they are surrogates for the man who raped her; but she is also murdering those women because she is jealous that they, unlike her, managed to fight off their attackers before they managed to rape them (since she tried to run away and then fight back, but failed).

Have they ever featured a female serial rapist? That could make for an interesting, original-and disturbing-case. Or maybe they have to re-open an... unique cold case: the only school shooting that has remained unsolved?

I think detective Joe Bookman should appear on SVU. https://youtube.com/watch?v=D9tP9fI2zbE

My God... I have no words... "Criminal Minds is bringing back several familiar faces for its special 300th episode — including Luke Perry. Perry appeared in the long running series back in season 4 as cult leader Benjamin Cyrus. Longtime fans will remember that Perry's character died in the episode "Minimal Loss" — but executive producer Erica Messer told Entertainment Weekly not to worry about that detail. "The plot will make sense," she said, adding that several others will be brought back for the episode." https://popculture.com/tv-shows/2018/09/10/criminal-minds-luke-perry-season-14-premiere/

Nah... I honestly don't care anymore. I'd really like to add some new ideas and some optimism, but it simply isn't there. I've done my best to make a change. I've made my opinion and ideas very clear on this forum, for years now. I've sent numerous respectful emails and letters to the CM producers and writers. I knew that they couldn't take on unlicensed scripts and episode ideas, but I liked to think that they would at least consider some reasonable suggestions (more profiling, more realistic cases, actually giving Reid something to do and making him happy for once). I am not a licensed writer, I don't currently live in the USA, and I have other responsibilities, so I could have simply given up right on the start, but I like to think that I've done my best. However, it is quite clear that the writers are never going to get it, and that we are extremely unlikely to get a satisfying series finale, let alone a happy (well, "good") ending for Reid, my favorite character. As far as I'm concerned, "Criminal Minds" ended with season 9. Everything else is just milking a dead cow and borderline insulting the audience while inexplicably making millions.

Fuck that.

Sometimes, I wonder will the writers eventually "reveal" that Spencer has actually dated, multiple times, but was just very private about it. Of course, that may not be very... convincing, but not many things about "Criminal Minds" are, by this point. I kinda turned that ridiculous idea into a fanfic: https://fanfiction.net/s/13021156/1/Unexpected-Support

I appreciate the interest, and yes, the primary target shouldn't be a final victim. But just to clarify, in my idea, the episode wouldn't feature a woman getting revenge on her rapist; I apologize if it came off that way in my post. It would actually feature mother and wife taking revenge on people who accused their son/husband of rape. Basically, the guy gets accused of rape, isn't convicted but he loses his job and gets his name smeared due to the accusation, he and his wife have to move away, and sometime later, mother-in-law and daughter-in-law (basically, the rapist's mother and the rapist's wife) start killing people who "wronged" him. That would make the case even more disturbing, because the unsubs would be murdering innocent people (though the question of son's guilt could be left ambiguous). It would also show how the family can be passing on evil and violence from generation to generation. [After being accused of rape and losing his job, the son might have had to move back in with his mother, which could have eventually led to the mother-in-law and daughter-in-law connecting and plotting the revenge together. Of course, the daughter-in-law should have already had violent tendencies for that to happen. Maybe, before being accused of rape, the son had been convicted of assaulting his ex-girlfriend, while his future wife had been convicted of assaulting a prostitute. They both had to attend anger-management counseling as a term of their probation, happened to be in the same group, met there, started dating and eventually got married.] Of course, the unsubs would also go after the random victims, in order to cover their tracks. They could start by murdering a registered sex offender unrelated to the case; they are easy to track down due to a registry, and probably have plenty of enemies. Plus, the unsubs would probably think that the authorities wouldn't figure out their true motive, if they brutally murdered someone actually guilty of a sex crime. Then, after a few weeks, the unsubs murder a young married couple in their home. They could also burglarize the victims' homes killing them, as a forensic countermeasure, in order to conceal their true motive even further. Eventually, the unsubs start going after the real targets, and they murder the woman who accused their son/husband of rape, as well as the victim's older brother, who supported her and beat up the alleged rapist (though that was never positively proven). [Also, maybe the victim was underage when she filed the charges, and several years passed between the rape allegation and murder, so the records of it got sealed or her name was blackened/censored in the police reports, and she and her older brother later moved to a different neighborhood or even a different city. That would explain why the authorities didn't find out about it while running a background check on the victims, and why they didn't investigate the alleged rapist and his family immediately after the fourth and fifth murder.] Anyway, those murders (murder #4 and #5) lead to the BAU being called in. While the BAU is investigating the murders, the mother-in-law/daughter-in-law killing team murders the son's/husband's former boss, who fired him following the rape allegation. They eventually go after the lead detective on the rape case (who arrested the son/husband based on the circumstancial evidence, and pushed for the case to go to trial, though it ultimately didn't), as a final victim, but the BAU tracks them down and arrests them before they can kill her. Throughout the episodes, it could also be revealed that the mother-in-law used to be a serial killer and rapist herself, the first victim being her own mother, but she managed to get her urges under control and stop killing after sensing that the police was closing in on her. Years later, after her son got accused of rape and got his life turned upside down, it all started up again, and she turned her daughter-in-law (the son's wife) into her protege. In all the murders, the unsubs would gain access to the victims' homes at night, via a ruse (similar to "Children of the Dark"), quickly establish control over them using a gun, force them to undress, tie them up and gag them, torture them by beating them and cutting lacerations over their bodies, rape them with an object, and garrote them to death. Afterwards, they would burn the victims' clothing, scrub the bodies with bleach and burglarize the victims' homes before fleeing. The dominant unsub (the mother-in-law) would also mutilate the female victims' face, breasts and genitals post-mortem, as well as cut off their hair and remove their makeup, in order to "destroy their femininity" and "humiliate them even more; even in death". That specific ritual/signature could lead to the BAU linking these murders to the old series of murders, from over twenty years ago, that the mommy dearest was solely responsible for (by running the info through ViCAP). Looking into that cold case could help them discover additional clues, needed to identify the unsubs. [Of course, in later murders, while going after their actual targets, the unsubs would have to wear disguises while lying their way into the victims' homes, so the victims wouldn't recognize them.] Also, I've been thinking about the casting. The mother-in-law could be portrayed by Sela Ward or Catherine Bell. Maybe Jodi Lyn O'Keefe, but she is probably too young. The daughter-in-law could be portrayed by Sara Rue or Dani Kind, maybe Felicia Day or Laura Spencer.

Most of the speculation and discussion so far seems to be about the resolution of season thirteen cliffhanger, which is understandable, but I've been thinking about the cases of the week as well. For season fourteen, I would like to see them do an episode featuring a mother-in-law/daughter-in-law killing team. Maybe the son gets accused of rape; he is either incarcerated, or never convicted due to a lack of evidence, but his name is still dragged through the mud, he loses his job, and he and his wife have to move away (maybe move back in with his mother?). Eventually, his mother and his wife plot their revenge, and start murdering people involved in the son's/husband's case, via home invasion/homicide (the accuser, the prosecutor, the lead detective etc). They could also be murdering random victims along the way, as a forensic countermeasure, a way to conceal their motive. It could eventually be revealed that the mother was a serial killer and rapist herself when she was younger, but she eventually managed to stop and keep her urges under control, until her soon was accused of rape and she felt a need for vengeance. Her daughter-in-law, also seeking revenge, and already harboring violent tendencies, thus became her protege. That could be an interesting case with a new, intriguing unsub-team dynamic, with maybe even some dark humor along the way. Tone and plot vise, it could be something similar to a combo between "Children of the Dark" and "Remembrance of Things Past".

I personally think Alex fit in quite well. Also, better numbers aside, season 10 was arguably the season when the show started going downhill fast. Most of the nostalgia most likely comes from the fact that Derek and Hotch were still on the show then, and Spencer wasn't being absent as often, so it was the last season that fully featured the team that most of the fans consider their favorite, intact (well, minus Emily). And it now appears much better in comparison to seasons 11, 12 and 13. I am not immune to that effect myself. Also, lots of episodes were pretty campy. But it was not a good omen, so to say. It is the season when the writers seemingly gave up for good, or were finally heading to that point. Other than the significant lack of profiling and an increasing number of over the top cases, continuity has gone to hell too (for example, the guy that almost killed Reid in season nine finale being exexuted a few months after his conviction; Derek casually joking about his scars in season ten premiere with Reid, who had been SHOT IN THE NECK AND ALMOST DIED in season nine finale, present; Hotch breaking up with Beth off-screen; Rossi finding out he has had a daughter AND a grandson all along; JJ's PTSD storyline that was there one episode and then nothing; Spencer's grief over Gideon's death only being explored one or two episodes since "Nelson's Sparrow"). Basically, whatever storyline writers come up with, it will happen, regardless of real life, character development, or the previous character and show history. And most of those storylines felt more like filler than actual character arcs or drama. They really started scrapping the bottom of the barrel that season, and it has only been downhill from there. Season ten is why we have... this now. A monster in disguise.

A young woman comes forward, claiming that her friend raped her... a month before she decided to report the crime to the police. Of course, there is no forensic evidence of that anymore. Our detectives promise her to look into it. They bring the guy in for interrogation; with Olivia leading the way, of course. Per usual, they immediately act like he is totally guilty, but he denies any involvement and they can't charge him with anything due to a lack of evidence, so they have to let him go. Olivia continues looking into every aspect of his life, questioning his ex-girlfriends, friends and family members, and even following him around, hoping to find any kind of evidence proving his guilt. Having accomplished nothing, she eventually brings him in for interrogation again, and gets him to "confess" to the rape by claiming that the forensics have found solid evidence against him (they didn't, but police officers/detectives are legally allowed to lie about that kind of stuff as an "interrogation technique"), and telling him how he will spend the rest of his life in prison, probably getting gang-raped by other prisoners, unless he "confesses and shows some remorse". Peter Stone is suspicious of the confession (the only "evidence", except for the victim's testimony), but Olivia, of course, convinces him to pursue the case anyway. The guy is charged with rape... and then it is revealed that he and his "victim" are both independent journalists who set the whole thing up in order to prove how much Olivia Benson sucks at her job. Maybe that could be a series finale...

Season eight actually isn't that bad. Sure, it had some crappy episodes like 8x2 "The Pact", 8x4 "The God Complex", 8x5 "The Good Earth", 8x10 "The Lesson" and 8x13 "Magnum Opus", but great episodes like 8x1 "The Silencer", 8x3 "Through the Looking Glass", 8x11 "Perennials", 8x14 "All That Remains", 8x15 "Carbon Copy", 8x17 "Gathering", 8x20 "Alchemy", 8x21 "Nanny Dearest", and 8x22 "#6" kind of make up for it. Seasons 10, 11, 12 and 13 all had 3-5 good episodes the most, and the ones that were bad were really bad. The resolution to the Replicator arc could have been better, but I don't think it was all awful either. Season nine was kind of similar: it had an awful two-part premiere, and terrible episodes like 9x12 "Black Queen", 9x14 "200", 9x20 "Blood Relations" and 9x21 "What Happens in Mecklinburg", but it also had 9x3 "Final Shot", 9x6 "In the Blood", 9x7 "Gatekeeper", 9x8 "The Return", 9x10 "The Caller", 9x17 "Gabby" and 9x19 "The Edge of Winter". Two-part season finale was decent, but it could have been better. Plus, Alex Blake is probably the last new character that I liked, and I loved the way she was introduced; she immediately got a chance to use her set of skills, and she put Garcia in her place in a delicate, polite, intellectual way. As if she was telling her: "I want us two get a long, but you really need to bring it down a notch. Give me a chance. And mind your own business." Also, losing Maeve was arguably the second to last believable tragedy Reid has gone through; everything after that (his mother developing Alzheimer's, being framed for murder), except for the murder of Jason Gideon (which affected everyone except Kate Callahan, not only Spencer) seems like an overkill, no pun intended, and it isn't realistic or believable at all. I actually didn't mind them killing off Maeve too much... it was sad, but sad in a good way, I guess? I appreciated that the episode delivered such an emotional impact; but again, the writing actually made that arc believable and engaging, and I figured that was the last time they'd torture Reid and that such a loss will eventually lead to something. I guess I was wrong.

A young lesbian couple is found shot to death in their Manhattan apartment. They were also both sexually mutilated post-mortem, and their infant daughter is missing. One victim worked as a social worker, while the other worked as a reporter. Their apartment is ransacked, but only their laptops and phones appear to be missing, as well as some baby supplies. No signs of forced entry. Our detectives start out by looking into registered sex offenders living in the area. When they go to question one of the convinced child molesters on the list, they find him dead in his home, also shot to death and sexually mutilated post-mortem. He has been dead for over a week. His apartment, too, is ransacked, but no valuables appear to be missing. No signs of forced entry. Ballistics link the two cases. Forensics also discover shoe prints and traces of gasoline on both crime scenes. They eventually link that evidence to five unsolved arsons that took place in Manhattan and Brooklyn over the last two months; two of them planted at private abortion clinics, the next two planted in mosques, and the last one planted in a big and successful, albeit controversial cosmetic company, which had been suspected of testing its products on animals and illegally disposing of the toxic waste multiple times, but they always managed to avoid prosecution. Our detectives now suspect that they are dealing with the case of domestic terrorism; religiously and politically motivated crimes. A prominent Manhattan DA, who has prosecuted several high-profile cases of domestic terrorism, and is apparently a good friend of Olivia's and an acquaintance of Peter Stone, soon inquires about the investigation, amd offerschis assistance. He mentions that, in "this day and age", "those guys" often start out by spreading their ideology online. Detectives search for suspicious essays and manifestos recently posted online, as well as shady Internet comments about the crimes. They find several comments, under the same penname, making semi-supportive comments about the arsons. Their techs trace the email and IP address to a young Catholic couple living in Manhattan; they own a bakery, and also run a soup kitchen together. Techs also discover that an anonymous anti-abortion essay was published online under the same email and IP address, a few months before the crimes started. A background check on the couple reveals that the husband was charged with assaulting a gay teenager in 2014, but ultimately never convicted due to a lack of evidence, and because the victim refused to testify. Detectives interrogate the couple, who deny any involvement, but can't provide an alibi. The husband also claims that his arrest and charge were bogus; he beat up the teenager because he attempted to mug him, and some "overly ambitious young ADA" tried to spin it around and get a conviction, but ultimately dropped the charges when it became obvious that they wouldn't stick. The couple refuses to let the detectives search their home, and eventually ask them to leave. There isn't enough circumstancial evidence for a warrant. Detectives put the couple under a police surveillance, but the couple soon spots the cops, confronts them and tells them to leave, threatening to sue the NYPD if they "keep this up". The surveillance is called off. Soon, detectives receive a taunting phone call from somebody claiming responsibility for the arsons and murders (obviously using a voice changer), revealing the details only a guilty party would know, detailing his ideology and goals, and announcing more attacks. Techs trace the phone call to an isolated parking lot in Brooklyn. By the time the detectives get there, the perpetrators are long gone. They only find a cab, and a dead cab driver inside. The victim is twenty five years old Afghan immigrant, and a muslim, shot two times in the back of the head. No genital mutilation this time. A religious slur was written on the windshield, in the victim's blood. Nothing appears to be stolen. His phone is found under the back seat; after murdering the driver, the killer(s) used his phone to make a taunting phone call to the authorities. Forensics find fresh traces of flour and baker's yeast on the back seat, as well as some boiled corn drops. Detectives remember that the couple they investigated owns a bakery, and also runs a soup kitchen. Soon, the missing baby turns up alive and well; somebody left her in a Manhattan Catholic church, that the suspicious couple often goes to. GPS records show that the last victim's cab last took off from the cab stand located close to that church. That is enough circumstantial evidence for an arrest warrant, and a search warrant. The couple is arrested, and their house, car and workplace are searched. Detectives find gasoline, canisters and cloths, matching to the ones used in the arsons, though they don't find the shoes matching to the shoe prints found on the crime scenes. They also find a scrap book, consisting of the news articles about the crimes. Forensics match the flour, baker's yeast and corn found in the suspects' possession to the traces find on the back seat of the cab; though those are all very common brands. No gun or amunition is found on the premises, though a murder weapon, an unlicensed .45 caliber gun, is found in a lake near their home, along with the laptops and phones stolen from the second and third victim (ruined beyond repair), and a knife used to sexually mutilate the first three victims. Although Peter Stone thinks that the evidence isn't very strong, he eventually charges both the husband and wife with five counts of vandalism and arson, four counts of murder in the second degree, hate crimes and terrorism. They both plead not guilty. The trial attracts huge media attention. During the trial, the aforementioned Manhattan DA keeps asking questions about the court proceedings, and keep showing up at the trial. Peter Stone grows suspicious of the DA's involvement, and with Fin's help, he looks into him. The two of them soon learn of the rumors that the DA might have been molesting young girls and boys, linked to numerous cases that he had been prosecuting, some of the victims being prepubescent, and that he was also recently suspected of embezzlement and fraud. Most of the alleged victims came from troubled backgrounds, making them unlikely to come forward with the accusations against a prominent DA. Many of the suspected victims ended up committing suicide. A further investigation also shows that the DAs car received a parking ticket near the apartment belonging to the young lesbian couple who was murdered, on the day and the approximate time of the murder. Peter and Fin they remember that one of the victims in question worked as a social worker, while her wife was a reporter. They also note that their apartment was ransacked, and their laptops and phones were missing, but not anything else. Next, they also discover that, at the time of his arrest back in 2008, the first murder victim (a convicted child molester) lived close to the shady DA. His apartment too, was ransacked, but nothing appeared to be missing. They start suspecting that the DA committed those arsons and murdered those people in order to cover up his crimes, and then framed the Catholic couple who lived in the area and had a small criminal record. But there is no forensic evidence against him, and the media is up in arms about addressing and "taking care of" the issues of domestic terrorism and religious extremism. Olivia also refuses to believe that a prominent Manhattan DA, not to mention her friend, is behind all that, causing tension between her and Stone. Who is right? And how much does the media, and the "court of public opinion", color the one's perception of the suspects, and influence the court proceedings?

A young woman is beaten and raped in her home. Our detectives quiclly track down and arrest a young man in suspicion of the crime. He soon confesses to the rape, but the case turns complicated when he claims that he raped the woman in question as a revenge, because she had raped him five years prior, when he was a teenager. The case turns even more complicated when the victim admits that she was a chronic alcoholic back when the alleged "first" rape took place, and she'd often suffer from blackouts, so she doesn't even remember some entire days from that time period, and can't tell for sure that she didn't rape him.

Yes, she did.