S04.E16: Missing

[thewhiteowl]

Bull represents a woman who kidnapped her niece years ago to prevent abuse.

[Ellee]

Does rescuing a child from abuse change the fact the child was kidnapped?  Just thinking I would have read something like this in real true crimes.
 

I  would do anything to protect a child.  We all should but this line of thinking would open up doors for people that should have doors slammed in their faces. 
 

ETA: How would someone even look this kind of thing up?

Edited March 10, 2020 by Ellee

[JessDVD]

Generally this would have been more interesting if it had turned out that the dad wasn't an abusive SOB and it was all a misunderstanding. THAT would have been a compelling finish. But since we all knew it was a slow slide to Danny finding someone to testify that the dad was violent, it wasn't all that interest-holding. (Although that may have also been us waiting impatiently for the press conference in Michigan at ELEVEN last night but whatever) Name me one person who was surprised to see the kid come around from behind the mom showing signs of injury. I also felt like the ADA taking the tack of "This is just hearsay" was kind of dumb, because aren't abuse allegations entirely based on hearsay? There's nothing keeping anyone from falsely denying that they've been abusive, likewise nothing keeping anyone from falsely accusing others of being abusive. That it's hearsay is irrelevant; unless the abuser happens to lay hands on the abused in the actual courtroom in front of the jury, any case involving abuse allegations is based on hearsay. And taking this back to my first sentence, I really do think it would have been more interesting to see a jury consider if the aunt should be convicted of kidnapping due to her legitimate concern about the kid being abused, that turned out to be incorrect, as well as see the aunt grapple with, I was wrong and what do I do now. That scenario is that murky gray of legality that is soooo much more intriguing than a "Welp, we finally found someone who would testify that he actually is an abusive SOB so you're clear. Hurrah!"

All that said, I don't envy the work of CPS workers, trying to divine from inconclusive physical evidence and conflicting, unreliable witness testimony or lack thereof, if a child is actually in danger.

In conclusion - if you're going to kidnap your niece and pretend she's your daughter (I thought that part was weird too, wouldn't it have been an easier lie to include the truth that her mom was dead, and then tack on the lie part about her dad being a war hero? In the department of the best lies are mostly true?), make sure she knows that once she's a teenager, to never commit petty crimes that might cause law enforcers to look up her real identity.

Edited March 13, 2020 by JessDVD
spelling is hard

[LuvMyShows]

A few thoughts:

• No way would Bull have been so casual about the daughter missing the coaching session with Chunk...but it had to go that plot-wise so we could have the surprise of her showing up for the prosecution.  Also, doesn't the prosecution have to declare their witnesses, so Bull and Co. would have known?  They didn't object to it being a surprise, unknown, last-minute witness like they've done at other times.
• A girl that age would have definitely wanted to look up all about her war-hero dad on the Internet, exposing the fake story, and also at some point a birth certificate would have been needed in the daughter's life.
• It took me a few minutes to realize that the CPS case worker was Jan Brady (Eve Plumb)!
• When the daughter was being questioned by the ADA, she asked the daughter whether she believed something the mother had told her.  Benny objected that that was speculation.  Then when he got up to cross-examine her, his very first question was speculation, but of course that was fine.

On 3/13/2020 at 1:36 PM, JessDVD said:

I also felt like the ADA taking the tack of "This is just hearsay" was kind of dumb, because aren't abuse allegations entirely based on hearsay? There's nothing keeping anyone from falsely denying that they've been abusive, likewise nothing keeping anyone from falsely accusing others of being abusive. 

Yep.  But not as stupid as when the ADA tried to paint the abused wife as a liar because she hadn't told the truth at the hospital about the nature of her injuries, so the ADA suggested that the wounds were self-inflicted...and any 6-year old would have realized that won't fly given that the wounds included a bitten ear and kick to the privates area.

On 3/10/2020 at 6:49 AM, Ellee said:

Does rescuing a child from abuse change the fact the child was kidnapped?  

So remember how throughout, Benny kept saying that the aunt did it, so how can we actually defend against the charge?  Bull had his approach about saying that she rescued the daughter.  But at the end, we never saw inside the courtroom for what the actual legal ending was to the trial...we only saw the aunt free outside the courthouse building.  What was the actual legal resolution? 

Also, Benny's point made no sense, since in at least 1/3 of their cases, the person they defend did actually do it, but Bull and Co. find some clever thing or hidden truth to get them off, just like this one.

[Mama No Life]

I was actually quasi interested in this one, which I haven't said in a while.  If they could just get rid of those stupid Marissa/Bull over the headset conversations this show would improve so much. They're just awful, awful, awful.

Fun fact, Bull's 2 week old has the strongest neck in history.  Another fun fact, you can burp children by patting their butts. No wonder she farted instead.

[SunnyBeBe]

I’ve only caught a couple of episodes this season. Is Bull caring for his daughter alone? Where is the mother?