Danielg342

There were cameras in the 1970s and 1980s...I'm not sure if they were as prevalent as they are now, but they existed. I'm not sure it would have mattered, though. Bundy didn't have one vehicle and one form of an alter-ego- he had several, changing them constantly. Regardless, I don't think he cared too much if he was seen- as Bundy himself pointed out at his trial, prosecutors had a hard time connecting him to the actual crimes because they had very little physical evidence. (I am aware that Bundy ran from the officer trying to arrest him...but, again, that officer did something- check Bundy's license plates- that Bundy didn't think he'd do) Yeah, someone who copies Bundy's methods today would likely get caught, and get caught quickly, but that's because law enforcement and security organizations have learned from what Bundy did and adapted their strategies (for example, in Bundy's time police departments wouldn't share intelligence. Now they do it all the time). However, I don't think it would follow that Bundy would, necessarily, be easier to catch if he operated today. Bundy would simply alter his tactics, understanding what the police do now and exploiting their weaknesses, like he did in his real time. For all the advancements the police have made, their clearance rate isn't even close to 100%, so I don't think Bundy would fail any more than he actually did if he operated today. Arthur Leigh Allen, who died in 1991, was the only person ever named by police as a suspect in the Zodiac killings. A lot of circumstantial evidence links him to the crimes, but nothing concrete or tangible (none of the DNA on the letters Zodiac sent matched Allen's DNA, for example). I think what it really boils down to is the Hollywood archetype of "the perfect criminal", the diabolical mastermind who taunts the police at every turn and seeks to become famous via crime, isn't even that common of a criminal. Truth is, the vast majority of criminals are criminals of opportunity or criminals by necessity. Teens from dysfunctional families get into gangs because the gangs are more of a "family" to them than their actual families are. People get into the drug trade because their families are poor and they need the money. A lot of serial killers do what they do because they want to enact fantasies they have. Then you've got your jilted lovers, the revenge killers, the counterfeiters, all the way up to the terrorists. For about as many reasons- good-intentioned reasons, even- that you can think of for why someone might commit a crime, there's a criminal who has actually done it. It's those kinds of things that I wish TV would explore a bit more. I mean, I get it- a criminal who, say, has stolen a rare diamond because he's knee deep in gambling debts is much harder to define as a "bad guy" than someone who is like The Joker or The Riddler, but it's more realistic. Plus, with TV exploring more police officers whose own moralities are pretty grey, shouldn't it be time to have some criminals who fit the same moralities?

Heh. There are many others you could list there too. There's The Reaper and The Replicator on Criminal Minds, Christopher Pelant on Bones, Saint on S.W.A.T., Theo Galavan on Gotham, any number of baddies from The Blacklist...heck, The Mentalist would score another one in Tommy Volker. ...but...yeah...the poster child for how not to write a an overarching baddie is Red John. Plain and simple. I'm with @DoctorAtomic that the Red John storyline should have ended with Bradley Whitford's character shot in the mall cafe at the end of S3, because that moment was too perfect and it was too well-built up. Nothing the show could have done afterward could have topped that. (For the record, Whitford's character was revealed to be a Red John minion named Timothy Carter who held a woman prisoner in his basement) I could go on a rant about Red John but I'm not sure how on topic it would be, so I'll just mention the most salient point: Bruno Heller has actually admitted he didn't know who Red John even was until halfway into Season Four. Which meant we got three and half years of clues that were based upon someone who didn't yet exist. Which is really Hollywood's big problem with its overarching mysterious criminals (and its overarching mysteries in general- like Lost or the "Mombatross" of Castle). Too often a writer or a producer (more likely a producer, methinks) falls in love with the idea of their show having this "mystery" that they introduce it, give it some bare bones but never develop it any further. Eventually you get a character or a concept that falls flat because they have all these things tacked on to it without a concern about if they actually work together, leading to a mishmash the writers try valiantly to put together at the last moment only for them to realize by that point they're in way over their heads. To get this back on topic, I do want to say that smart criminals do exist. Ted Bundy is probably the smartest of any criminal of recent vintage, as Bundy used his knowledge about police procedures and forensics to thwart police attempts to catch him. Bundy committed his crimes in different jurisdictions, because he knew that (at the time) the police in those jurisdictions wouldn't share information and not realize they were investigating the same criminal. This worked extremely well for Bundy since the only real evidence at trial was bite marks he left on one of his victims' bodies. Bundy used blunt instruments for his attacks because they'd be harder for a forensic analyst to trace back to him. Bundy varied his ruses and his appearances, so that when reports of the crimes would surface, they'd look like different criminals when they weren't. When you look at what Bundy did and what he was able to accomplish, it shouldn't be surprising that he had a criminal career that actually spanned decades. Heck, if he didn't deal with a police officer who went over and above what he had to do in that moment, Bundy might never have been caught (Bundy was pulled over for a simple traffic violation, which, at the time, didn't require the officer to run the vehicle's license plates in a database of stolen vehicles. The officer decided to do that anyway which was how Bundy was eventually caught). Then there's The Zodiac Killer who was never actually caught and sent letters to newspapers taunting the police for their inability to catch him. So it's not, actually, unrealistic to have smart criminals on TV and to even have smart criminals who taunt the police. I just think Hollywood gets too wrapped up in creating a "grand" criminal that they don't ground them in reality. They worry too much about ratings, about having a criminal that escapes at the right moments and gets caught at the right moment (i.e., the season/series finale) that they don't think about the details that would make the criminal human or believable. In short, the producers love the idea of the mystery- they just never put in the work to make it work...and their show suffers because of it.

Depending on how far along a corpse has been dead for, the body can get quite messy with all the liquids seeping out, the depressed skin, the stiffening body, insects, etc. ...but, my main point (or, rather, the "Forensics for Dummies" author's main point) is that a dead body isn't pretty. Unfortunately the author didn't specify how he would like Hollywood to dress up their corpses so they're more realistic, and I would agree that there's only so much you can do with an actor that is still alive. I think TV shows should utilize closed body bags and camera angles more often instead of using dead bodies, then doing what they can when they need to show them. From a writer's standpoint, a smart criminal is more of a threat in a story because it presents more of a challenge to hero. That said, the lengths Hollywood can go to present just how smart these criminal masterminds are can be quite ridiculous, giving them resources and insights and abilities they shouldn't have.

There's also the "unknown" factor too. Yeah, most people might give up the search after a year or two because there are more pressing cases and the likelihood of finding someone gets harder as time moves on, but all it takes is someone deciding to make your case a passion project and, while it's not a slam dunk that the police will find you after reviving your case, just the fact that can happen means that you're never really "in the clear" when you're on the run. Which makes me wonder how many times those "fugitive finding"/unsolved cases shows ever deal with failure. Because I imagine people working in unsolved cases have a high degree of failure, given the nature of their work. The worst are dead people. "Forensics for Dummies" said it best when the author boldly declared that dead people "don't have eyelids that flutter and look relaxed and peaceful. They look dead." Of course, the author also states the obvious when outlining the reasoning behind these "pretty dead people"- it's easier for an audience to sympathize with the dead person if they still look like a person instead of the garbled mess that actually is a dead person, plus I can't imagine there are too many within a viewing audience that would actually want to see an authentic-looking dead person. Realistic as it may be, it's still not a pleasant sight.

If you're a fugitive, you would risk someone spotting you. As far as the likelihood that someone passing by might hear something compromising and report it- I've already admitted the chance of that happening is low. I'm not sure what the actual odds would be, but it's definitely not 100% foolproof. Which may ease my mind as a (supposedly) normal guy, but would it ease the mind of a super-paranoid super-spy? I should mention the TV show where I'm most familiar with using this trope is The Blacklist, and they constantly had wanted criminals- supposedly ones high up the chain on the FBI's wanted list- meeting in public parks. Now, Red had immunity so maybe he didn't care, but many of the people he met with should presumably know better than to meet out in the open like that.

I agree it's a good spot for a meeting, but is it a good spot for a secret meeting? One where one- or both, or all- of the attendees risk capture or serious harm if they're seen visibly in public? Is it also a great place to discuss sensitive trade or state secrets, when others in the park could potentially hear what is being said? I mean, I suppose if the entire purpose of the meeting is for two characters to meet and someone gives the other a folder of sensitive material before leaving, then it might not be so bad. However, sitting and talking about the contents of that folder, especially at length? Sure, the chances of someone hearing what is being said may be low, but it's not zero. If I had really sensitive information to share, I'd want to go somewhere- like my own safehouse- where the odds no one will hear what I'm saying will be higher. Now, I also grant Whitey Bulger supposedly spent a lot of time on the Santa Monica Pier and out in public even during his final years on the run, but he was old by that point and maybe decided he'd rather enjoy life and take whatever days he had left instead of trying to hide all the time. Would a younger person, and/or someone still running their criminal empire, make that same calculation?

This sign came up on my Twitter X feed (created by the user "Michael1979", who specializes in these funny signs) and it got me thinking about another common sighting on TV- people getting together to conduct "secret business" by sitting together on a park bench. I've personally never understood this. On one hand, I get that it's likely more visually appealing to see two people talk to each other (and easier on logistics) than to have them communicate by letter, phone or (in today's age) online. I also get that it's a common safety tip to meet someone you don't know in a public place first before going anywhere else, and production crews would save on time and space filming one scene at the bench instead of filming a scene at the bench and a scene somewhere else. On the other hand...revealing secrets on a bench, where the public could hear it, is incredibly risky and reckless. I'd imagine real spies (who are, likely, nothing at all like James Bond) don't conduct "business" out in the open. They'll go to safe houses or homes or at least talk in places that are more private than a park.

I'd love it if Bode and Gabriella realized they're better off as friends and the show crafted a great story about platonic love between a man and a woman because Hollywood never seems to go that route (or at least stick to it). Of course, I realize it's a pipe dream, but if the show wanted to really be different, that's one direction they could take. Fair, but I will give the show writers credit for not having it happen in this episode. Considering that Hollywood loves to have its "shocking twists" in season finales- or, at least, the tease of one come the fall- the fact that the writers resisted the urge for Gabby to do something "shocking" is commendable. Yeah, there's a good chance all that gets undone with a "shocking" S3 premiere and I know mileage varies on this, but I feel the writing in this episode gives me hope that perhaps the writers are actually learning from their mistakes.

Well...ok, let's start with the positives. For once, I felt that no one did anything stupid. The writers actually let the characters guide the story, they played the beats they were supposed to and resisted the urge to do something crazy or shocking for the sake of the plot. It was actually an enjoyable hour where the episode and the show were allowed to breathe, and it was so much better for it. Which I think is great because this show, far too often, forces things and makes characters be stupid just to advance plots the writers want to advance, even if that plotline is abjectly stupid and drags the whole show down with it. ...but then I thought, "I'm praising the show for doing the absolute bare minimum." I mean, great that Bode didn't do something stupid and wind up back in jail. Great that Gabriella didn't run away from the aisle and ruin her wedding. Great that Manny decided to show up to the wedding and accepted his fate. Oh, and finally, great that the person the show was setting up to be this season's Sleeper turned out to be the exact opposite. (It was also great that W. Tre Davis came back as Freddy and that Eve is sticking around as Three Rock captain, but those are side points) All of it was great work...all of it. A great show of restraint and a great sense of letting things be and be organic as well as a great job of keeping things simple. ...but, while it's commendable, it's really only a start. Episodes like this are the episodes for which you form the basis for developing the story later, taking what you can build from and going from there. If the show is treating this episode like a second pilot, well, it did the job. However, the real test is taking what they have here and building upon it. Which is a straightforward task but it's one the writers have already shown they're not capable of doing, if S1 was any example. About the only positive- and the only hope that maybe things will be different- is that this was the kind of episode that could have went 600 different ways sideways and it didn't go any of those ways, so maybe the writers are learning. The only question will be can the writers keep up this momentum, or will the urge to be "shocking" make them slip up? Only time will tell, but at least I can say- with a lot of reservations and a healthy dose of "show me what you got"- that I'm actually looking forward to next season.

Well, there were some heartwarming moments in the end between Hondo Jr. and Senior, Deacon deciding to stay (and Annie letting him stay) and Alfaro and Tan patching things up. I'm also left wondering just, exactly, what was re-shot and how this episode would have wound up if it really was the series finale. Does Deacon decide to stay retired? Does 20-Squad implode because of the Tan-Alfaro rift? Does Hondo die on top of that tanker? Lots of questions, but they, thankfully, don't have to be answered. The only lingering thread- the hook for next season- will be what 20-Squad will look like come the fall. Even though Tan and Alfaro patched things up, there's no guarantee that everyone will return. Even if they do, Hicks told Hondo that there's a sixth spot where Hondo can pick "whomever he likes". I wonder if that spot will be reserved for whom I suspect will be the cast newcomer the show decides to hire in order to "freshen up" the series. Lots to digest over the summer, a summer we didn't think we'd see after last summer, but, here we are. As for this Season 7 finale...well, it was bleh, like the rest of the season. Diplomatically, the best I can say is that it was "there"...aside from Hondo's cool stunt, did any of it really register? A good part of it was that the acting by those playing the villains was sub-par, as was the writing. Saying they were "going through the motions" is being kind. Hopefully, now that the writers know they have a whole season to work with and one that may not even likely be the last one, they'll up their game and do better than this uneven season where the writing staff seemed largely disinterested. Hondo was told to up his game...well, now Shemar Moore, you gotta get the writers to up theirs, if you all want to see the show go to S9, S10 and beyond.

I'm not sure disco ever really "died"- it, like other forms of music, just morphed into something else. Lots of the dance and electronic music genres today owe their debt to disco. Heck, a lot of modern pop music has clear disco influences. I just think that dance music- in general- tends to go through a bit deeper "boom and bust" cycles than most other kinds of music. You get periods where it gets immensely popular- like in the '90s or the EDM craze from the last decade- and periods where you just get one or two hits per year, if that. My guess is that it's because dance never really has shied away from its reputation for being "simple, fun music"- which has its place in the music marketplace but it's not something with a lot of staying power. To tie it back to the thread, I don't know if I could ever say that a disco scene is truly "out of place". The music and the fashions might be out of place, but the mentality is the same. Every generation seems to have some kind of cheesy dance music fandom- be it the boy bands of yore or the EDM bros of today- to make fun of. That, I'm sure, will never go away.

Coheed and Cambria want to tell you be careful what you wish for. Me neither. I always thought that Bode would be more of an assistant at Three Rock than the person completely in charge. Bode becoming a captain seems like an "end of series" kind of thing, though I guess- who knows- that maybe the show thinks Bode's trajectory is replacing his father and mother at the top of the Cal Fire food chain. Which I know is patently unbelievable...but when has this show made sense?

Not to belabour the Harvey Weinstein discussion, but I once knew a man who claimed that women who wore baggy sweaters and pants were being "sexual" because of "what they were hiding". Which I think only further proves the point that clothing is meaningless to a predator.

Looks like we're getting Vasquez again and, at the very least, Deacon's agreed to suit back up officially this one time. I wonder if the top photo will come at the end of the episode.

A note about pressing charges: With the understanding that the show's writers may not realize this either, technically speaking, the decision to press charges has absolutely nothing to do with the victim's wishes- that decision rests solely and entirely with the prosecutor. Now, usually, the prosecution won't bother pressing charges if the victim won't co-operate because it can be very hard to secure a conviction, but it's not an ironclad rule. In Manny's case, he did get into a fight with Luke in front of a lot of people. With the Governor of California- and, more than likely, the California Attorney General- in attendance. The prosecution could likely say they have enough witnesses to support charges, even though Luke (maybe) has said he isn't co-operating.

Well, that's an ending. Good for Bode, and I hope they stick the landing. I'm also hoping that maybe Bode comes back as Eve's assistant and/or has some kind of supervisory role at Three Rock because one of the main problems with this series is that it's supposed main character does little more than stand around and mope. So I hope, now that Bode is free, he actually gets to start doing things instead of just being there. Maybe Manny's trajectory is to go back to Three Rock. Bode being Manny's guide for rehabilitation is one way for both characters to go full circle, and it could be interesting to watch. I also like that Vince was honest with himself and at least his health "secret" is finally out with his family (not that he ever should have kept that secret). There may be some dangling loose ends, but it looks like Vince may be on the mend and the worst is behind him. I know Billy Burke said an interview that he hopes Vince can find some peace and solace in S3, so here's hoping next week is the start of that. Hey, now that the family back together, I think they need some happy times. Stephanie Arcilla did really well playing with Gabby's conflicting emotions. Her strange dance with Bode is a "whatever", really...sometimes I wish Hollywood would stop insisting on "will they or won't they?" storylines, but Gabby/Bode is what it is, I guess. As for the rest of the episode...it was really just "there". Aside from the ending, there's not much here for casual fans to watch. All I'll do is repost this meme: Switch the ballcap and the glasses with "goggles" for the characters in this episode and you'll get my point.

I guess the plan for next season is to literally blow everything up and start anew. At this stage, apart from Hondo, likely Hicks and Nichelle, who knows who will come back? Alfaro dug his own grave, but it also looks like Powell and Tan might join him for stabbing him in the back. The "who stays and who goes?" drama might be interesting if it didn't also come with some trepidation with how this will play out with the casting for next season. I know this episode was likely shot without knowledge of the renewal, and I know that, no matter what happens with the cast, we're sure to have a new cast member to "liven" the series. Likely, when the writer wrote the "blow up 20-Squad" story", it was with the knowledge that the series would be over. However, knowing that Season 8 will be a soft reboot means that the showrunners don't have to hit a soft "reset" for next season either, and that's a dangerous game. People come and go, yes, but S.W.A.T. has lost two regular cast members already, could lose a third and, potentially, lose a fourth and a fifth. How much turnover is OK? They might as well start a new show if they're going to go with an almost completely brand new cast. So I'll just close this thought by saying that the showrunners have to tread carefully and be like Hondo- find the right mix of regulars and newcomers to keep this show afloat in S8 and beyond. The rest of the episode itself was uneven. The Hondo drama was a gut punch, though it really lacked depth. The damsel in distress storyline was also similarly shallow, doing little more than being a race against time and featuring baddies who had capabilities a bit beyond being believable. Then Deacon showed up again, and, unlike the press release, really only hinted about coming back. Honestly, this feels like there could have been three episodes written out of it, but they were all needlessly jammed into one. As a result, none of the storylines really worked. Still, it was a watchable hour, and the fact this episode was personal for the characters gave it some meaning. They just need to figure out, "where do we go from here?"

I have a feeling we weren't supposed to like her, and that we were supposed to get a sense as to why her and Manny didn't work out. I will say Paola Nunez seemed to have a lot of fun playing the character. For that reason alone I want to see her again.

This show likes talking about bringing the fire... ...well... Manny really brought the fire. So did Paola Nunez, Gabriella's mother Roberta. I could totally buy they were once young, passionate lovers whose love fizzled out because they were both impulsive, pushy, intense and awfully stubborn. The kind of people who'd fall in love with each other instantly and go all-in, only for that spark to fizzle out when they realize they both drive each other nuts. It was fun, all of it, and I think I'd be down for more of it. I also want Luke vs. Manny in Hell in a Cell. Make it happen, WWE... The rest of the episode was rather uneven. I mean, it was great seeing everyone- especially Gabriella, Roberta and Sharon- dressed to the nines, though I wonder why the Three Rock inmates couldn't have been given some nice threads so they don't look out of place in their jumpsuits. Alix West Lefler did great as Genevieve, and Jordan Calloway sold Jake's awkwardness. They also have a cute handshake. We also got some rousing speeches from you-know-who...I have to wonder if a speech really would sway a Governor, but this is Hollywood, after all. The big letdown was Vince. OK, Vince has his reasons...they're actually good reasons in that tremors and a heart condition would be the end of Vince's firefighting career. ...but...gosh...it still felt like Vince was being stupid for the sake of the plot. I know there's stubbornness...but this is next-level stuff. Stupid stuff. Vince could have died, and playing with the heart is no joke. It's extremely risky of Vince to say "just shock me and I'll be OK", because there really is no guarantee that he will be. Again, I understand that Vince was worried about his job if he went to the hospital, so his actions still made sense...but that doesn't mean he still wasn't acting incredibly stupid and being reckless with his life. I also don't buy that whatever heart condition Vince has that Sharon wouldn't know about it. They've been married for too long...even if Vince is undiagnosed, he said the tremors and the arrhythmia happened before, so I doubt Sharon would never have noticed it before. Regardless, it's Vince's turn to be stupidly hiding something from his wife, just like Sharon stupidly hid something from her husband. Full circle, but... Episodes like this display the frustration with this show- they can make some real magic sometimes, especially when they let the characters drive the story (as what Roberta did tonight). They just fail to find it, mostly because they force it too many times.

The Hicks/Buck/Mumford fight did produce a touching moment. Emily Alabi also did well as Olivia. I'm glad she's decided to stay...and judging by the muscles she's got...Olivia should join SWAT. I also thought Zoe Powell was a bit more likeable in this episode than she usually is. Maybe Anna Enger Ritch is cut out for the main cast after all. Nichelle and Hondo also displayed some great teamwork too, though a home break-in will be tough to overcome in one night. Walter Fauntleroy did pretty well as the unhinged Bruce too. That's about it for the positives. It was a pretty rote case, and it succumbed to several cliches, like the British bad guy and the first guy to die was the black guy. I also have to ask questions about why important newspaper material was kept at a vault in the same place that hosts a swanky ball. We also had S.W.A.T.'s usual quick pace in its usual attempt to establish urgency...oh, and bad guys who are dangerous who will stop at nothing and kill whomever is in their way to get what they want. I've heard of shows having formulas but...this is over the top. No Deacon in this episode. Two more episodes to go...

The other part of that is what Harvey Weinstein would consider "Hollywood hot" is not what someone else would consider "Hollywood hot". Some may want Kaley Cuoco. Others will want Amy Farrah Fowler. Others will target someone else entirely. There's no "foolproof" look. Looking at those who have accused Weinstein of at least some kind of impropriety and I don't really see a "type". There's brunettes. There are blondes. There are people who are not what you would consider "Hollywood hot" on that list. There's young actresses and old actresses. Most are, admittedly, white but you still have Latinas (like Lina Esco) and you have Rowena Chiu and Lupita Nyong'o. If that doesn't reinforce the idea that predators are opportunistic and will target anyone if the mood suits them then I don't know what will.

Did Southern California Edison change management recently? I ask because I understand your company did have to settle numerous lawsuits related to allegations SCE equipment caused forest fires. Maybe it's due to my own cynicism having worked for a big company in the past that was completely profit driven, but my guess is that SCE only really started caring about safety once they realized negligence is going to cost them, literally, a lot of money.

It's common on police procedurals to portray the departments the heroes don't work for as nothing but obstructionists who do what's needed to hinder the heroes in their plot (think pushy FBI guys, procedure-obsessed bureaucrats, lawyers...etc.). So it doesn't surprise me that Fire Country resorts to the same storytelling tactic. I didn't have too much of a problem with how the electricity was portrayed in the episode, aside from the air of "things are happening because the writer needs them to happen that way for the plot". Of course, I don't know that much about electricity in the first place, so I likely missed some of the details. My guess is that the electricity storyline was written by someone who didn't have any knowledge about how it worked and simply read some things about it, applying what little they learned. It's understandable given the time constraints surrounding a typical Hollywood season, but it's also on the showrunner to better organize the writing so episodes are not left to writers who don't know what they're writing about.

Yeah, it doesn't matter what time of day or where they are or what condition they're supposed to be in...in Hollywood, everyone is always dolled up, especially the women. Step by Step kind of parodied this in an episode. Carol spots one of her kids (I believe it was Karen) going back into her room after she had just snuck out of the house. Carol asks Karen what she was doing, and Karen tries to fool her mother by saying she was just using the bathroom. Carol then asks rhetorically, "you put on mascara and all this makeup just to use the bathroom?" Karen seemed to understand her fate by asking how long she'd be grounded for and I forget what Carol responded with but Karen sure was benched for a while.

Criminal Minds is pretty bad with this too, as often the agents will work deep into the night and forgo sleeping just to catch their killer. Now, the agents of CM were supposed to deal with really "dangerous" killers who were almost always at risk of "devolving" into spree killers (which also doesn't make any sense, as that's now how real serial killers act) so you could justify the sleepless nights in order to catch the killer, but the show wasn't always consistent with the need to forgo sleep (the need for rest was even a plot point in S5) and I sometimes wonder if the stakes were really that high many times. Sure, the town might be on edge because they're dealing with an active serial killer, but it's not like the killer was always operating- there would have been times the agents could have slept. LOL. Well, Jack Bauer not sleeping isn't totally inaccurate- lots of people go without sleep, especially special operatives. What gets me about Bauer is that we never see him having to use the toilet or eating or drinking. He's in a highly stressful situation, he fights off sleep, he routinely exerts himself physically...that makes me hungry thinking about it. How Bauer doesn't need to eat despite all that is beyond me. Besides, they could have easily filmed him having a breakthrough while having his lunch or sitting on the toilet. I can do a lot of good thinking during those times, and Bauer could have too.