Season 15: Buh-Bye Rohmbot

[WendyCR72]

2 hours ago, illdoc said:

Actually, I always thought he started drinking because of the bad interaction with his daughter after all that time apart (having her think that the divorce was his fault because he was protecting the wife, the daughter still hating him for leaving, etc.).

That makes much more sense, although I'm not sure that's it since everyone else acting like morons was directly tied to the most horrible execution event all had ever witnessed. /s

But yeah, at least the motivation you point out makes actual sense. If Lennie had to fall off the wagon at all (and I'm not convinced he had to!), a much better time would have been after seeing his murdered daughter.

I always thought it ridiculous that he could start drinking because of a criminal stranger's execution and yet he held on to his sobriety when his child was murdered. That defied reality.

[Xeliou66]

4 minutes ago, WendyCR72 said:

That makes much more sense, although I'm not sure that's it since everyone else acting like morons was directly tied to the most horrible execution event all had ever witnessed. /s

But yeah, at least the motivation you point out makes actual sense. If Lennie had to fall off the wagon at all (and I'm not convinced he had to!), a much better time would have been after seeing his murdered daughter.

I always thought it ridiculous that he could start drinking because of a criminal stranger's execution and yet he held on to his sobriety when his child was murdered. That defied reality.

And even in season 6 Lennie had seen far worse than some scumbag killer’s execution - in the episode right before Aftershock, him and Curtis investigated a poisoned baby, and earlier in the season they dealt with the subway bombing in the episode Charm City and the serial killer case in Trophy, those come to mind as some disturbing cases Lennie worked on in season 6 and he didn’t come close to drinking during those, but suddenly he falls off the wagon after seeing a killer executed? That was so stupid.

[andromeda331]

That would make the most sense. Losing a child isn't easy, they had a difficult relationship and Lennie had supported her testifying against her drug dealer. I just can't see him falling off the wagon for any other reason.

[GHScorpiosRule]

What I hated was we never got to see Lennie's other daughter. He had two.

[Xeliou66]

Gunplay was just on, it’s one of the best season 15 episodes - good first half with the hunt for the perps who killed the 2 undercover detectives, and it was interesting seeing Green go undercover in the operation to nab the perps - it was a bit different and more intense than usual. It was a good twist that the lawyer was exposing the identities of undercover officers because of his anger - I thought he was about to hit the female cop during his cross of her at trial, he was enraged. The security guard who took the pictures of undercover cops for the lawyer for $500 was epically stupid, what did he think would happen? I loved Fontana calling him a “big dummy”. I also thought it was funny when they were talking about the website and Serena said to Branch “everybody serves the web, Arthur, everybody but you”. It’s a stellar episode in an uneven season.

Cut is on now - decent episode but very low key, especially compared to Gunplay, it was just a manslaughter/negligence case, still a decent one, there are plenty of cases like that. It was very coincidental that Fontana knew the family of the doctor’s assistant, that felt contrived. I did like the scene between McCoy/Fontana in the courthouse hall, that was the first time we saw them interact onscreen. It was interesting that Arthur was more intent on prosecuting the doctor for negligence while Jack wasn’t as eager. I liked Arthur’s passion when he emphatically stated that the office wouldn’t tolerate the doctor’s negligence. 

[andromeda331]

2 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

Gunplay was just on, it’s one of the best season 15 episodes - good first half with the hunt for the perps who killed the 2 undercover detectives, and it was interesting seeing Green go undercover in the operation to nab the perps - it was a bit different and more intense than usual. It was a good twist that the lawyer was exposing the identities of undercover officers because of his anger - I thought he was about to hit the female cop during his cross of her at trial, he was enraged. The security guard who took the pictures of undercover cops for the lawyer for $500 was epically stupid, what did he think would happen? I loved Fontana calling him a “big dummy”. I also thought it was funny when they were talking about the website and Serena said to Branch “everybody serves the web, Arthur, everybody but you”. It’s a stellar episode in an uneven season.

It was a good episode. I was really worried about Green when the SUV drove away with him. The lawyer was an idiot for getting the two officers killed because he blamed them for his stepson's death even though they had video that it clearly wasn't and even the accomplice agreed. But it's not uncommon for a parent or step parent to think that. I like that he tried to go after the woman undercover officer on the stand but she didn't budget. Definitely not a fan of reveal the identities of undercover cops being revealed. That's dangerous.

Quote

Cut is on now - decent episode but very low key, especially compared to Gunplay, it was just a manslaughter/negligence case, still a decent one, there are plenty of cases like that. It was very coincidental that Fontana knew the family of the doctor’s assistant, that felt contrived. I did like the scene between McCoy/Fontana in the courthouse hall, that was the first time we saw them interact onscreen. It was interesting that Arthur was more intent on prosecuting the doctor for negligence while Jack wasn’t as eager. I liked Arthur’s passion when he emphatically stated that the office wouldn’t tolerate the doctor’s negligence. 

Yeah it was really unlike Jack to not be the first to go after the doctor. He usually is and it's usually Adam or Arthur who are the ones that hesitate. 

 

 

[Xeliou66]

1 hour ago, andromeda331 said:

It was a good episode. I was really worried about Green when the SUV drove away with him. The lawyer was an idiot for getting the two officers killed because he blamed them for his stepson's death even though they had video that it clearly wasn't and even the accomplice agreed. But it's not uncommon for a parent or step parent to think that. I like that he tried to go after the woman undercover officer on the stand but she didn't budget. Definitely not a fan of reveal the identities of undercover cops being revealed. That's dangerous.

Yeah it was really unlike Jack to not be the first to go after the doctor. He usually is and it's usually Adam or Arthur who are the ones that hesitate. 

 

 

Yeah Gunplay was an intense episode, I liked seeing how Green was determined to apprehend the perps, and then it was an interesting twist that their identities had been exposed. The lawyer was filled with hate, I think he was in denial about his son’s death and wanted someone to blame, and I liked how the undercover cop didn’t back down when he was yelling at her. The security guard was so stupid, what did he think the lawyer was doing with the photos of undercover cops, and he was willing to risk their safety for $500. And then acted surprised that he was going to face consequences. What a moron.

In Cut it was an interesting role reversal that Arthur was the one pushing to nail the doctor while Jack was more hesitant - I liked seeing Arthur forcefully saying his office wouldn’t tolerate what the doctor was doing. I know Arthur is kind of polarizing but he certainly had a commanding presence and wasn’t afraid to exercise his authority. 

[WendyCR72]

I admit, Alex Borgia didn't bother me as much as she did others (that dubious honor goes to Serena Southerlyn and Paul Robinette V2.0 [loved 1.0, to be clear!]), but man, she is trying my last nerve while watching "In God We Trust" now on Sundance.

So, because the perp didn't mean to kill the firefighter and hasn't killed since, his finding religion should wipe the slate clean? No.

And his lawyer basically outright stating just that earns her a "shut up!", too.

Been ages since I watched this one, and all this is reminding me why.

[Xeliou66]

10 hours ago, WendyCR72 said:

I admit, Alex Borgia didn't bother me as much as she did others (that dubious honor goes to Serena Southerlyn and Paul Robinette V2.0 [loved 1.0, to be clear!]), but man, she is trying my last nerve while watching "In God We Trust" now on Sundance.

So, because the perp didn't mean to kill the firefighter and hasn't killed since, his finding religion should wipe the slate clean? No.

And his lawyer basically outright stating just that earns her a "shut up!", too.

Been ages since I watched this one, and all this is reminding me why.

In God We Trust is the main reason for my dislike of Borgia. Her acting like the defense motion to dismiss the case had merit and being sympathetic to their cause disgusted me, being religious and remorseful doesn’t earn someone a free pass for murder - Jack was spot on about it throughout the episode, and Borgia’s whole “forgiveness is a Christian ideal” stuff was irritating, I loved when Jack responded “and if you don’t believe in Christ you just have to do your time?”. It was absurd to act like the defendant should get a free pass for his crime. 

[WendyCR72]

4 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

In God We Trust is the main reason for my dislike of Borgia. Her acting like the defense motion to dismiss the case had merit and being sympathetic to their cause disgusted me, being religious and remorseful doesn’t earn someone a free pass for murder - Jack was spot on about it throughout the episode, and Borgia’s whole “forgiveness is a Christian ideal” stuff was irritating, I loved when Jack responded “and if you don’t believe in Christ you just have to do your time?”. It was absurd to act like the defendant should get a free pass for his crime. 

Yeah, so if I rob a bank and claim I found God, in Borgia's view, the debt is paid?

No, doesn't work like that.

[Xeliou66]

15 minutes ago, WendyCR72 said:

Yeah, so if I rob a bank and claim I found God, in Borgia's view, the debt is paid?

No, doesn't work like that.

Yeah, it was really stupid. She basically thought that people who became Christians after committing a crime had a valid defense for their criminal activity. It’s absurd on so many levels, for one it would allow anyone who committed a crime to just claim to have found god/Jesus and have a viable defense, and for another it would give special treatment to a group based on religion, which is blatantly unconstitutional.
I did believe the defendant was genuinely remorseful for what he had done in this episode, but being remorseful doesn’t give you a get out of jail free card, he committed a hate crime and deserved to go to prison for it. I think even the defendant realized this. His lawyer was just trying to make a statement for whatever reason, both her and Borgia pissed me off. Jack was great in this episode, he was right that the defense had no merits and his arguments were great. I also liked getting the perspectives of the victim’s father and the killer’s sister on the matter. But Borgia really pissed me off. In most episodes Borgia didn’t make much of an impact at all, but this episode is why she is the only second chair ADA besides Serena I’m not a fan of. 

[andromeda331]

12 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

In God We Trust is the main reason for my dislike of Borgia. Her acting like the defense motion to dismiss the case had merit and being sympathetic to their cause disgusted me, being religious and remorseful doesn’t earn someone a free pass for murder - Jack was spot on about it throughout the episode, and Borgia’s whole “forgiveness is a Christian ideal” stuff was irritating, I loved when Jack responded “and if you don’t believe in Christ you just have to do your time?”. It was absurd to act like the defendant should get a free pass for his crime. 

Same here. It's great that the defendent felt remorse but he still had to atone for his crime. He hadn't done that. I like when they call his sister and ask if she forgave him and said no. I'm glad he asked that because everyone had been all focused on the poor murderer especially his lawyer and Borgia. He still murdered a man. That man is the victim not the murderer. His life was taken.  He never got to go on and to have a life. His father lost his son. They believed in God too. They both deserve justice. The murderer deserves to serve time for it.

[Xeliou66]

11 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

Same here. It's great that the defendent felt remorse but he still had to atone for his crime. He hadn't done that. I like when they call his sister and ask if she forgave him and said no. I'm glad he asked that because everyone had been all focused on the poor murderer especially his lawyer and Borgia. He still murdered a man. That man is the victim not the murderer. His life was taken.  He never got to go on and to have a life. His father lost his son. They believed in God too. They both deserve justice. The murderer deserves to serve time for it.

Agreed 100%. Being sorry you committed a crime doesn’t give you a free pass for the crime. And giving a defendant special treatment because of their religion is unconstitutional and wrong. I liked hearing the perspectives of the victim’s father and the sister of the killer. This episode is the main reason why I’m not a fan of Borgia, her extreme sympathy for the killer and the bogus defense disgusted me. Usually Borgia didn’t make an impact at all - she was very dull, but this episode is the main reason she’s one of my least favorites. She only had one episode where she was strong IMO, and that’s Cost of Capital in season 16.  
In God We Trust is a good episode, and it’s the only Falco episode I like, I’m not a fan of the Falco character at all and him and Fontana together were just way too abrasive. But the case was good in this one and unique enough to make it a strong episode, even though Borgia was infuriating.    
The guy who set the fire at the start of the episode was a piece of garbage, and I wonder if his daughter would ever be okay, knowing that her scumbag dad almost killed her by trying to burn her mother alive. 

[andromeda331]

10 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

Agreed 100%. Being sorry you committed a crime doesn’t give you a free pass for the crime. And giving a defendant special treatment because of their religion is unconstitutional and wrong. I liked hearing the perspectives of the victim’s father and the sister of the killer. This episode is the main reason why I’m not a fan of Borgia, her extreme sympathy for the killer and the bogus defense disgusted me. Usually Borgia didn’t make an impact at all - she was very dull, but this episode is the main reason she’s one of my least favorites. She only had one episode where she was strong IMO, and that’s Cost of Capital in season 16.  

Yeah this is an episode I really disliked Borgia. Before she was mostly just there. I don't like her wanting to let a murderer get away with his crime because of his faith. It's wrong. He still needs to be held accountable and it's also problematic if all you have to do is claim to be a Christian and get away with a crime. All criminals would do that. If he had been Muslim or Hindi or Wicca would she say the same thing? Nope. 

Quote

In God We Trust is a good episode, and it’s the only Falco episode I like, I’m not a fan of the Falco character at all and him and Fontana together were just way too abrasive. But the case was good in this one and unique enough to make it a strong episode, even though Borgia was infuriating.    
The guy who set the fire at the start of the episode was a piece of garbage, and I wonder if his daughter would ever be okay, knowing that her scumbag dad almost killed her by trying to burn her mother alive. 

Falco is my least favorite detective he's tied with Curtis. He's just abrassive and a jerk most of the time. I couldn't wait for Green to come back.

[Xeliou66]

11 minutes ago, andromeda331 said:

Yeah this is an episode I really disliked Borgia. Before she was mostly just there. I don't like her wanting to let a murderer get away with his crime because of his faith. It's wrong. He still needs to be held accountable and it's also problematic if all you have to do is claim to be a Christian and get away with a crime. All criminals would do that. If he had been Muslim or Hindi or Wicca would she say the same thing? Nope. 

Falco is my least favorite detective he's tied with Curtis. He's just abrassive and a jerk most of the time. I couldn't wait for Green to come back.

Yeah Borgia was just there for the most part, but this episode made me dislike her - the defense was such bullshit and was offensive to me how it suggested some religious beliefs deserved preferential treatment - as Jack pointed out in his great line. I think even the defendant knew he belonged in prison, he was ready to plead guilty and eventually he put a stop to his lawyer’s crap and went against her advice to plead guilty and accept whatever punishment the court saw fit.

Falco was terrible and very abrasive, him and Fontana together were just unbearable given that Fontana was a jerk most of the time as well - it least Fontana was interesting enough to pull it off and paired with the smooth Green he was okay, but pairing him was Falco was just too much. Falco, Curtis and Beauty Queen Cassady are by far my least favorite detectives. After his first episode in season 21 I thought Cosgrove was going to join that list, but season 22 made him a much stronger, well rounded and more likable character and he’s actually become one of my favorites on the revival now. I think who a detective is paired with makes an impact on how strong or a character they are - like the Fontana example I gave, he was much better paired with Green than Falco, and on the revival Cosgrove is much better paired with Shaw than with Bernard. The exception is Rey Curtis, he was paired with the best detective in L&O history in the always awesome Lennie Briscoe and he still was a massive self righteous jackass who was infuriating to watch.

Edited October 29, 2023 by Xeliou66

[Spartan Girl]

@GHScorpiosRule brought up the memory of the 9/11 firefighter who dumped his wife for his dead best friend/fellow firefighter's widow in "Dead Wives Club" and hoo boy, those two deserve to be in the Asshole Victim Hall of Fame on this show. Let's not use trauma as an excuse to walk out on your family to "console" your best friend's widow/steal your best friend's husband. Not that it's an excuse for the ex-wife to murder her, mind you, but she still has my sympathy.

Which is why this is one of the few episodes where I was on Serena's side; I hated that Jack acted like the ex-wife was lying about her mental breakdown just because she didn't seek out professional help. Uh, Jack, the woman had to work a full-time job because the asshole didn't pay proper child support, and she didn't have much other support going on either, so she didn't have time or money to seek help--something which the jerkass had the nerve to use against her while using the excuse that the new wife didn't want to share her insurance money!

I felt so bad for both sets of kids, losing both their mothers because of his actions. I wouldn't blame the stepkids if they thought that if he died instead of their dad, they'd still have both their parents.

Edited December 6, 2023 by Spartan Girl

[Xeliou66]

I saw Fixed last night on WE and I’m still bugged by the continuity errors in this episode - they said the DA’s pleaded out Lowenstein and that isn’t what happened in Indifference, Lowenstein was convicted and got 25 to life. They could’ve come up with another way of explaining Lowenstein’s release without rewriting what happened - it’s one of the few examples of poor continuity on L&O. Also Carla was just as nuts and despicable as Jacob Lowenstein was, and this episode made her out like she was some kind of victim of Lowenstein - that didn’t ring true. 
The only thing the episode got right about the original case was just how creepy Lowenstein was - he was just as chilling here as he was the first time around, one of L&O’s most evil and creepy villains. He was still the exact same sociopathic creep that he was years earlier. And it was nice to see Cragen talk about the case with Green/Fontana, that was a well done crossover cameo since Cragen was the squad leader at the time of the original case.     
I thought the jury’s decision was so dumb not to convict Joyce Draper, the evidence was clear she did it and Jack made a strong closing argument, but I guess the jury just thought Lowenstein deserved it and wouldn’t convict no matter what the evidence was or what the prosecution said, and Arthur alluded to that. 
It’s a decent episode but the continuity errors bugged me.

[andromeda331]

On 12/18/2023 at 1:17 PM, Xeliou66 said:

I saw Fixed last night on WE and I’m still bugged by the continuity errors in this episode - they said the DA’s pleaded out Lowenstein and that isn’t what happened in Indifference, Lowenstein was convicted and got 25 to life. They could’ve come up with another way of explaining Lowenstein’s release without rewriting what happened - it’s one of the few examples of poor continuity on L&O. Also Carla was just as nuts and despicable as Jacob Lowenstein was, and this episode made her out like she was some kind of victim of Lowenstein - that didn’t ring true. 

I agree they should have a different reason for how he got out of jail. State running out of money and/or he became a model prisoner are the usual reasons. It would make more sense then the one they used. I don't like them changing Carla either. They made a point in the original that while she probably was abused by her husband she was just as bad as he was for abusing the kids. Mike pointed that out when Greevey said he felt bad for Carla. He grew up with parents just like them. Dad hit Mom and Mom hit Mike. Hell, they interrupted her about to burn her son's hand. 

Quote

The only thing the episode got right about the original case was just how creepy Lowenstein was - he was just as chilling here as he was the first time around, one of L&O’s most evil and creepy villains. He was still the exact same sociopathic creep that he was years earlier. And it was nice to see Cragen talk about the case with Green/Fontana, that was a well done crossover cameo since Cragen was the squad leader at the time of the original case.

They got that right. They also got how his son was right too. He was lucky to have gotten good adopted parents' but he still had a hard time and he was still terrified of Lowenstein.
 

Quote

I thought the jury’s decision was so dumb not to convict Joyce Draper, the evidence was clear she did it and Jack made a strong closing argument, but I guess the jury just thought Lowenstein deserved it and wouldn’t convict no matter what the evidence was or what the prosecution said, and Arthur alluded to that. 
It’s a decent episode but the continuity errors bugged me.

That's exactly what happened. They knew what she did but they didn't care. but the person she ran down was so dispicable that they didn't want to convicted her. I really don't think any jury would have convicted her.  Lowenstein was just so dispicable. Plus, he was no longer a threat to anyone anymore. I wish they could thrown his stupid girlfriend in jail for her stupidity in dating and letting her child around a man who abused his kids and sexually abused and murdered his daughter. I know women (and men) can be that stupid. They should go to jail for it.

[Xeliou66]

8 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

I agree they should have a different reason for how he got out of jail. State running out of money and/or he became a model prisoner are the usual reasons. It would make more sense then the one they used. I don't like them changing Carla either. They made a point in the original that while she probably was abused by her husband she was just as bad as he was for abusing the kids. Mike pointed that out when Greevey said he felt bad for Carla. He grew up with parents just like them. Dad hit Mom and Mom hit Mike. Hell, they interrupted her about to burn her son's hand. 

They got that right. They also got how his son was right too. He was lucky to have gotten good adopted parents' but he still had a hard time and he was still terrified of Lowenstein.
 

That's exactly what happened. They knew what she did but they didn't care. but the person she ran down was so dispicable that they didn't want to convicted her. I really don't think any jury would have convicted her.  Lowenstein was just so dispicable. Plus, he was no longer a threat to anyone anymore. I wish they could thrown his stupid girlfriend in jail for her stupidity in dating and letting her child around a man who abused his kids and sexually abused and murdered his daughter. I know women (and men) can be that stupid. They should go to jail for it.

Lowenstein’s current girlfriend was epically stupid, letting the creep move in with her and her kids. I think that’s one reason the jury refused to convict Draper, they still saw Lowenstein as a danger who needed to die. But she still should’ve gone to prison, vigilante justice is wrong and she should’ve just informed his parole officer and sent him back to prison. 
The continuity errors just bugged me, particularly the way they said they cut a deal with Lowenstein when that was not what happened. It was nice to see that the son had a good adoptive family. And it was nice to see Cragen. It was a good idea to bring Lowenstein back, like I said he was very chilling with his whole “I’ve always been a good daddy” lines, but the execution of the plot was botched in some ways.

[andromeda331]

2 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

Lowenstein’s current girlfriend was epically stupid, letting the creep move in with her and her kids. I think that’s one reason the jury refused to convict Draper, they still saw Lowenstein as a danger who needed to die. But she still should’ve gone to prison, vigilante justice is wrong and she should’ve just informed his parole officer and sent him back to prison. 

That's probably the reason. Just watching the video of his session with Draper. It was clear he still was a danger. No kid would be safe as long as he was walking the streets. I do agree Draper should have gone to jail. She had other options. Living with children was a violation of his parole. Also, who's to say she won't do it again? She's a prison therapist and there are a lot of horrible people who get released from prison who absolutely should not. Is she going to run them down too? Or kill them in some other way.
 

Quote

The continuity errors just bugged me, particularly the way they said they cut a deal with Lowenstein when that was not what happened. It was nice to see that the son had a good adoptive family. And it was nice to see Cragen. It was a good idea to bring Lowenstein back, like I said he was very chilling with his whole “I’ve always been a good daddy” lines, but the execution of the plot was botched in some ways.

Me too. That's what made it hard to enjoy the episode. I don't know why they made the mistakes. It would made a really great episode had they not. 

[Xeliou66]

19 minutes ago, andromeda331 said:

That's probably the reason. Just watching the video of his session with Draper. It was clear he still was a danger. No kid would be safe as long as he was walking the streets. I do agree Draper should have gone to jail. She had other options. Living with children was a violation of his parole. Also, who's to say she won't do it again? She's a prison therapist and there are a lot of horrible people who get released from prison who absolutely should not. Is she going to run them down too? Or kill them in some other way.
 

Me too. That's what made it hard to enjoy the episode. I don't know why they made the mistakes. It would made a really great episode had they not. 

Yeah those mistakes were easily avoidable if they had just watched Indifference closely before coming up with the episode. It was very sloppy - something which L&O rarely is. Did they just think the viewers had forgotten the details of the case since it was a season 1 episode? Shoddy job. But Lowenstein’s creepiness was spot on - and he still was a danger given that he was living with kids again. But Draper should’ve just informed the authorities who would’ve had Lowenstein locked up again. 

[Xeliou66]

The start of season 15 is on Sundance tonight - decent episodes although season 15 wasn’t as good as seasons 13-14 (then again 13-14 were outstanding overall), but Fontana is a real prick, especially at the start. I get that he had impossible shoes to fill as Briscoe was a legend and the most iconic detective on L&O, but Fontana is really unlikable much of the time - he comes in with a smug, superior attitude, and he was out of line with his snide remark to Van Buren saying he “didn’t realize he got transferred in to the local branch of Amnesty International” - very disrespectful which was par for the course with him - and in the next scene he tells Green he wants them to get off to a good start, completely oblivious to what a dickwad he came off as. Not to mention his attitude towards abuse of detainees was disturbing but given that he stuck the guy’s head in a toilet in a later episode it was in character for him. At least Fontana had personality, but it wasn’t a very likable one - Lennie leaving really dealt a blow to the show - the detective side didn’t become great again until season 18. Fontana was just too damn abrasive - almost like Cosgrove was at the start of the revival episodes, at least they fleshed Cosgrove out and made him a lot more likable - Fontana remained a jerk.

Paradigm is a pretty good episode other than Fontana being an ass, the legal stuff was interesting, Jack was great as usual - Serena was whiny once again, it was pathetic how Serena wanted to just turn the case over to the military to avoid the issue - I liked that Jack and Arthur stood firm in trying the case in NYC instead of avoiding a trial so as not to cause a political firestorm - the victim was murdered in NYC and her killer deserved to be tried in an American court. Jack’s closing was great as usual - revenge killings/vigilante justice is always wrong, and that’s what this was, it wasn’t an act of war, it was a cold blooded act of revenge by the perp against someone who tortured her brother - while I find torture despicable, revenge killings are always wrong as well, the jury was right to convict, to acquit would’ve condoned lawlessness and vigilantism. I was annoyed at how Serena and Arthur were bickering about foreign policy - Serena was usually irritating and while I like Arthur overall, at times it felt like his dialogue was written to let the actor spout his real life political beliefs. I liked when Jack reminded them that it wasn’t about politics, it was a personal revenge killing, and Jack’s line about the killing being blood feud and the end result of blood feud is chaos was great.

The Dead Wives Club is another decent episode, it also dealt with 9/11 issues, in this case PTSD and the lives first responders to the attack. Fontana was somewhat better here, and it was an interesting case how the victim of the ferry crash was actually murdered. Serena was once again whiny and overly soft, I think they were clearly setting up Serena’s exit at this point. The jury was right to convict, the defendant’s story was tragic, and the husband was a very lousy person, but personal troubles never justify murdering someone over a love triangle. Skoda was good as always, and I liked seeing him interact with Arthur, the only time they shared a scene - this was the last time Skoda would appear until season 20. I liked Arthur’s line about how he was elected DA because people wanted to feel safe after 9/11 and it would be ironic if people used it as an excuse to break the law on his watch.

Season 15 was pretty good but a slight drop off after the excellence of 13-14, and Fontana’s jackass demeanor didn’t help things. Still most episodes were decent.

[Spartan Girl]

On 6/6/2024 at 11:17 PM, Xeliou66 said:

The Dead Wives Club is another decent episode, it also dealt with 9/11 issues, in this case PTSD and the lives first responders to the attack. Fontana was somewhat better here, and it was an interesting case how the victim of the ferry crash was actually murdered. Serena was once again whiny and overly soft, I think they were clearly setting up Serena’s exit at this point. The jury was right to convict, the defendant’s story was tragic, and the husband was a very lousy person, but personal troubles never justify murdering someone over a love triangle.

Actually, and God help me, that episode was one of the few times I actually AGREED with Serena. I think the wife really was suffering from PSTD stress and the only reason she hadn’t tried to seek professional help was because she was forced to work full time and raise her kids.

Edited June 8, 2024 by Spartan Girl

[Xeliou66]

4 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Actually, and God help me, that episode was one of the few times I actually AGREED with Serena. I think the wife really was suffering from PSTD stress and the only reason she hadn’t tried to seek professional help was because she was forced to work full time and raise her kids.

The defendant was sympathetic and probably did have PTSD, but I think she still knew right from wrong. Letting her off the hook would basically give anyone who had a traumatic past a free pass for murder, as Jack and Arthur pointed out. I agree that there would be room for leniency at sentencing but I think the jury was right to convict. Serena seemed to be rooting for an acquittal, and it was far from the only time Serena came off as soft - like I say I think they were definitely setting up her exit by this point.  
But I see your points, and the husband in this episode was a real lousy shithead for ditching his wife for his best friend’s newly rich widow. 

[andromeda331]

On 6/8/2024 at 12:31 PM, Xeliou66 said:

But I see your points, and the husband in this episode was a real lousy shithead for ditching his wife for his best friend’s newly rich widow. 

Then deciding to get full custody of their kids. Because she wasn't doing a good job. You left her high and dry to support your kids while working full time now you want to take the kids because she isn't doing a good job? What an asshole. The whole thing was his fault. Part of me wishes she had killed him instead. 

Edited June 9, 2024 by andromeda331

[Xeliou66]

1 hour ago, andromeda331 said:

Then deciding to get full custody of their kids. Because she wasn't doing a good job. You left her high and dry to support your kids while working full time now you want to take the kids because she isn't doing a good job? What an asshole. The only thing was his fault. Part of me wishes she had killed him instead. 

Yeah he is the one who her rage should’ve been directed at - he was a terrible person. 

[Spartan Girl]

7 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

The defendant was sympathetic and probably did have PTSD, but I think she still knew right from wrong. Letting her off the hook would basically give anyone who had a traumatic past a free pass for murder, as Jack and Arthur pointed out. I agree that there would be room for leniency at sentencing but I think the jury was right to convict.

I agree that she shouldn’t have been let off the hook, I’m not saying it was an excuse. I just hated that Jack acted like she was faking the PTDS just because she never actually sought help for it beforehand. In other circumstances, I would have agreed, but considering the fact that she was forced to work full time when she had been a stay at home mom before because the louse ex husband didn’t help her out financially, when would she have found the time or the money? That was what Serena seemed upset about, and I can’t say I blame her.

And yeah, I nearly threw up in my mouth while writing that.

7 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

Then deciding to get full custody of their kids. Because she wasn't doing a good job. You left her high and dry to support your kids while working full time now you want to take the kids because she isn't doing a good job? What an asshole. The only thing was his fault. Part of me wishes she had killed him instead. 

Agreed, though I don’t have that much sympathy for the new wife either. She was her best friend, and yet she didn’t seem to have that much remorse for stealing her husband.

Edited June 9, 2024 by Spartan Girl

[andromeda331]

18 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Agreed, though I don’t have that much sympathy for the new wife either. She was her best friend, and yet she didn’t seem to have that much remorse for stealing her husband.

I don't either. As you point out she had no remorse for stealing her best friend's husband. Where was her sympathy? Or that her new husband wasn't paying any child support. She was really just as bad as her husband. 

[Spartan Girl]

55 minutes ago, andromeda331 said:

I don't either. As you point out she had no remorse for stealing her best friend's husband. Where was her sympathy? Or that her new husband wasn't paying any child support. She was really just as bad as her husband. 

She had more than enough money to do the bare minimum of human decency and help her former friend out financially. And she chose not to because it was “her” money. Yup, she was an asshole.

[Xeliou66]

Just watched Tombstone, and it’s definitely one of season 15’s better episodes, very good plot about the murder at the prestigious law firm, and the head lawyer covering for the killer. Green getting shot was intense. It pisses me off that they don’t show the TBJ episode that concludes the plot about Green’s shooting, although it had nothing to do with the case dealt with in Tombstone and the witness was killed because of other shady business he was in, still the episode should be shown. I liked Jack’s rage at the defense lawyer when she tried to get the case dismissed after the witness was shot and how Jack got Fogg to testify. Arthur’s scenes were good as well, I liked his concern for Green even though the two never shared a scene together, and his scene at the end with Jack where he told Jack he did good getting the conviction and that they needed that one, it was clear both were affected by Green’s shooting.   
However Fontana was a complete ass to Jack for no reason in this one, Jack was concerned about Green and even expressed concern for Fontana and instead Fontana was just a dickwad and got in his face. Fontana was really unlikable much of the time - just a smug, condescending, uncaring asshole. He was certainly different from Lennie which was what they wanted, but god he was a huge prick much of the time. I did laugh when he called the lawyer a cheap shyster and threatened him, it was typical Fontana. But Fontana is one of my least favorite detectives, he was just so callous and a bully much of the time.

And Fontana/Falco are just hard to stomach together, both were so abrasive. I’m watching Publish and Perish now, and while it’s an interesting episode about the scummy former commissioner and the murdered porn star, the Fontana/Falco pairing just takes me out of the episode they are such an unlikable pairing. Thank heavens that pairing was only together for 4 episodes. 

[andromeda331]

38 minutes ago, Xeliou66 said:

Just watched Tombstone, and it’s definitely one of season 15’s better episodes, very good plot about the murder at the prestigious law firm, and the head lawyer covering for the killer. Green getting shot was intense. It pisses me off that they don’t show the TBJ episode that concludes the plot about Green’s shooting, although it had nothing to do with the case dealt with in Tombstone and the witness was killed because of other shady business he was in, still the episode should be shown.   

I like that episode. It was fun trying to figure out who the killer was. Green getting shot was well done. I agree that I wish the second part episode from TBJ was shown with it. Jack was great as always.

Quote

However Fontana was a complete ass to Jack for no reason in this one, Jack was concerned about Green and even expressed concern for Fontana and instead Fontana was just a dickwad and got in his face. Fontana was really unlikable much of the time - just a smug, condescending, uncaring asshole. He was certainly different from Lennie which was what they wanted, but god he was a huge prick much of the time. I did laugh when he called the lawyer a cheap shyster and threatened him, it was typical Fontana. But Fontana is one of my least favorite detectives, he was just so callous and a bully much of the time.

Yeah Fontana was such a jerk and I don't know why. Jack was trying to get a conviction and not do anything to get it tossed out. Fontana with his "side" what go and threatened people? Great idea, what could possible go wrong?

Quote

And Fontana/Falco are just hard to stomach together, both were so abrasive. I’m watching Publish and Perish now, and while it’s an interesting episode about the scummy former commissioner and the murdered porn star, the Fontana/Falco pairing just takes me out of the episode they are such an unlikable pairing. Thank heavens that pairing was only together for 4 episodes. 

Falco managed in just for episodes make it the person I hate the most among the main cast even topping Serena and Fontana. It was four episodes too long.

[Xeliou66]

16 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

I like that episode. It was fun trying to figure out who the killer was. Green getting shot was well done. I agree that I wish the second part episode from TBJ was shown with it. Jack was great as always.

Yeah Fontana was such a jerk and I don't know why. Jack was trying to get a conviction and not do anything to get it tossed out. Fontana with his "side" what go and threatened people? Great idea, what could possible go wrong?

Falco managed in just for episodes make it the person I hate the most among the main cast even topping Serena and Fontana. It was four episodes too long.

Yeah Tombstone had a slew of interesting suspects with the goings on at the big shot law firm, it was an interesting case. I liked Jack’s intensity and how he wouldn’t make a deal after Green’s shooting, and I liked how Arthur expressed concern for Green as well and had a large role in the episode. Fontana however was a complete dick for no reason whatsoever to Jack - Jack was obviously concerned about Green above all else, and Fontana acted like he was the enemy for no reason other than Fontana just had a hostile attitude most of the time. Fontana was really unlikable a lot of the time, I cut him some slack because no one could replace Lennie but Fontana didn’t do himself any favors with his attitude. 

Falco was basically a mini Fontana - those two together were the most unlikable pairing in L&O history - they were both so abrasive much of the time. And Falco was even worse when he returned in season 16 and acted like a complete moron.

The detective part of the show definitely suffered from Lennie’s exit - Fontana was mysterious and kind of intriguing but extremely hard to root for.