S21.E01: The Right Thing

[Xeliou66]

3 minutes ago, Raja said:

"Did you elect me because I'm a lesbian?"

That made me laugh. But the thought of Serena as DA gives me nightmares, she would ruin the show.

[GHScorpiosRule]

5 hours ago, Halting Hex said:

When I thought Waterston had too many commitments elsewhere, I mused about having Serena become the first open LGBTQ person to be elected D.A., and to thus be more overtly political

No, just no, because for most of its 20 year run, the show wasn't overtly political, and I really don't want to watch it, if Eid decides that this new season will go in that direction. Season 18 was more political because it was setting up Jack to become the next District Attorney. He was interim when the season premiered.

I just want murder, investigation, plea or no plea, trial and verdict. That's it. When TPTB and network is telling me that the "Mothership is Back" then I fucking want the MOTHERSHIP back.

[ML89]

4 hours ago, tessaray said:

t didn't really feel right to me, sorry to say. The music, the sound effects and the camera angles were weird. Close but off. The performances were okay though I was disappointed in Donovan. The writers didn't do him any favors. I think my favorite part was all the cameras out and recording the two detectives as they searched for information. Life has changed for cops, no doubt about it. It was unsettling. (Not the accountability,  the non-stop surveillance.)

There was something off - the sets were too bright and too big. The claustrophobic feel of the squad room was gone.

Why did they cast two guys that resemble each other on either side? Couldn't they at least have cast a brunet and blond? I had to really look to make sure who was who. I also didn't care for Donovan's character - interesting line from Bernard about not having a long lasting relationship with a partner for the last six years. So did Lupo leave then? What happened to Anita, Mike and Connie? IMWTK

Not a big fan of either prosecutor but I did like Camyrn Manheim as the boss.

The writing was very flat and clunky too - they did this one way better back in season 4's "Sweeps." The whole "the timeline is this, no it's that" with the wife and the accuser was terrible. Plus, where was our interview with the bartender while they're making drinks and cleaning the bar? C'mon, now, that is prime L&O!

 

 

Edited February 28, 2022 by ML89

[GHScorpiosRule]

4 minutes ago, ML89 said:

So did Lupo leave then? What happened to Anita, Mike and Connie? IMWTK

Clearly Lupo left some time in the last 12 years.

Van Buren probably retired.

Mike, from what I understand, made a couple of appearances on that SHIT SHOW, SVU, and also on the same show, it was revealed that Connie is now a federal prosecutor?

But there was no mention of what happened to any of the characters that were in the then series finale in 2010.

[Raja]

48 minutes ago, ML89 said:

There was something off - the sets were too bright and too big. The claustrophobic feel of the squad room was gone.

Why did they cast two guys that resemble each other on either side? Couldn't they at least have cast a brunet and blond? I had to really look to make sure who was who. I also didn't care for Donovan's character - interesting line from Bernard about not having a long lasting relationship with a partner for the last six years. So did Lupo leave then? What happened to Anita, Mike and Connie? IMWTK

Not a big fan of either prosecutor but I did like Camyrn Manheim as the boss.

The writing was very flat and clunky too - they did this one way better back in season 4's "Sweeps." The whole "the timeline is this, no it's that" with the wife and the accuser was terrible. Plus, where was our interview with the bartender while they're making drinks and cleaning the bar? C'mon, now, that is prime L&O!

 

 

Mr. Cutter became a supervisor of special victims prosecutors. Ms. Rubiossa first went to Los Angeles as a Deputy D.A. and to be with her sick mother and then returned to New York as an Assistant U.S. Attorney

[ML89]

9 minutes ago, Raja said:

Mr. Cutter became a supervisor of special victims prosecutors

 

54 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Mike, from what I understand, made a couple of appearances on that SHIT SHOW, SVU,

Cutter is not a supervisor, he's a court room guy... waste of talent.

 

9 minutes ago, Raja said:

Rubiossa first went to Los Angeles as a Deputy D.A. and to be with her sick mother and then returned to New York as an Assistant U.S. Attorney

Oh, that's right, I forgot she got dragged into the ill fated Law & Order LA (yes, of course, she'd move to LA and take the bar in a matter of months to be a Cali ADA...). So if she's a federal prosecutor, is she working for Abbie Carmichael (I'm sure the show isn't saying, just wondering...)

 

Thanks for the info!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 28, 2022 by ML89

[CrystalBlue]

The only way they could try to rehab Jamie if they brought her back would be:

1.  Conversation with Jack McCoy.

2.  Better makeup (lipstick!) and lighting to explain ...

3.  She's feeling much better now and had been recovering from Covid.  Her OOC 5th Amendment BS was caused by Post-COVID 'Brain Fog' (it's a real thing).  She was dazed and confused when she was visited by Nicole Bell and didn't respond appropriately.  Mea culpa to Jack.

4.  Jamie can then go on her merry way and we won't see her again.

[shapeshifter]

1 minute ago, CrystalBlue said:

The only way they could try to rehab Jamie if they brought her back would be:

1.  Conversation with Jack McCoy.

2.  Better makeup (lipstick!) and lighting to explain ...

3.  She's feeling much better now and had been recovering from Covid.  Her OOC 5th Amendment BS was caused by Post-COVID 'Brain Fog' (it's a real thing).  She was dazed and confused when she was visited by Nicole Bell and didn't respond appropriately.  Mea culpa to Jack.

4.  Jamie can then go on her merry way and we won't see her again.

Sounds like a plan.
Upon a second look, I suggest that in addition to a bit more color on her lips, they need to lighten up on the eyebrow pencil. This is not a competition with Waterston. 

[CrystalBlue]

2 minutes ago, shapeshifter said:

Sounds like a plan.
Upon a second look, I suggest that in addition to a bit more color on her lips, they need to lighten up on the eyebrow pencil. This is not a competition with Waterston. 

😃  I really think they were trying to tell us something.  A foreboding of where her character was going, if you will.  Carey Lowell doesn't look that bad now.

[Prairie Rose]

1 hour ago, ML89 said:

There was something off - the sets were too bright and too big. The claustrophobic feel of the squad room was gone.

I think it's more the fact that they are using wide, fancy camera angles and too many filters. It doesn't look...gritty. The Mothership was and still should look gritty!!

[Prairie Rose]

1 hour ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Clearly Lupo left some time in the last 12 years.

Van Buren probably retired.

Mike, from what I understand, made a couple of appearances on that SHIT SHOW, SVU, and also on the same show, it was revealed that Connie is now a federal prosecutor?

But there was no mention of what happened to any of the characters that were in the then series finale in 2010.

Mike was a Bureau Chief ADA on SVU. He appeared in four episodes in SVU's Season 13 (2011-12).

[auntiemel]

13 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

My main criticism was that male Hugh Dancy as Executive Assistant District Attorney Nolan Price didn't bring in female Odelya Halevi as Assistant District Attorney Samantha Maroun until closing arguments.
It seems the female ADA should have taken over as soon as the jury seemed to be siding with the admittedly guilty-of-murder female rape victim. 
The only reason to not have her take over sooner in real life would be if she wasn't very good in court (yet); 
the only reason to not have her take over in a fictional TV show is if the actor isn't very strong. 🤷‍♀️

Another reason not to have her take over earlier is because Dancy is the bigger star.

[WendyCR72]

13 hours ago, auntiemel said:

Another reason not to have her take over earlier is because Dancy is the bigger star.

Bingo.

Apparently, this was repeated on Sunday night...and got a 0.1 in the Almighty demo. I hope it isn't a harbinger...

[Prevailing Wind]

Someone here mentioned it was being rerun on Saturday - all I saw on Saturday was Dateline & SNL in prime time.  I had no idea it was being shown again on Sunday, or I would have watched.

[GHScorpiosRule]

10 minutes ago, Prevailing Wind said:

Someone here mentioned it was being rerun on Saturday - all I saw on Saturday was Dateline & SNL in prime time.  I had no idea it was being shown again on Sunday, or I would have watched.

I haven't confirmed, but I thought it was supposed to re-aired on Peacock on Saturday.

@WendyCR72, did it air again on NBC or Peacock?

[shapeshifter]

Just now, GHScorpiosRule said:

I haven't confirmed, but I thought it was supposed to re-aired on Peacock on Saturday.

@WendyCR72, did it air again on NBC or Peacock?

It's on the free Peacock.

[GHScorpiosRule]

23 minutes ago, shapeshifter said:

It's on the free Peacock.

Right. But @WendyCR72 wasn't clear where it aired on Sunday. So I'm assuming all repeats and re-airings will be on Peacock?

[WendyCR72]

51 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

I haven't confirmed, but I thought it was supposed to re-aired on Peacock on Saturday.

@WendyCR72, did it air again on NBC or Peacock?

NBC, Sunday at 10:00 p.m. ET was the repeat. But yeah, it is also on Peacock.

[Arcadiasw]

2 hours ago, WendyCR72 said:

NBC, Sunday at 10:00 p.m. ET was the repeat. But yeah, it is also on Peacock.

And Hulu

[Ms Blue Jay]

The way the female lawyer was used was so cheap too.  Hugh Dancy was like, you've had trauma.  Go trot it out to the jury.  I'm barely cleaning up the language he used.

[CrystalBlue]

36 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

The way the female lawyer was used was so cheap too.  Hugh Dancy was like, you've had trauma.  Go trot it out to the jury.  I'm barely cleaning up the language he used.

Yeah, he exploited his second chair to win the prosecution's case.  Exec. ADA Nolan Price (Hugh Dancy) wanted ADA Samantha Maroun (Odelya Halevi) to relive her trauma and air her family's tragedy for the win.

[Xeliou66]

28 minutes ago, CrystalBlue said:

Yeah, he exploited his second chair to win the prosecution's case.  Exec. ADA Nolan Price (Hugh Dancy) wanted ADA Samantha Maroun (Odelya Halevi) to relive her trauma and air her family's tragedy for the win.

I thought it was smart to have Maroun give the closing as a female touch would help win over the jurors who thought Price was overly harsh with the defendant and would react better to a female delivering the argument, plus it gave Maroun, who had been in the background of the episode up until that point, a chance to show off her skills. However it was a cliched background for Maroun to have a relative murdered, that was cliched and unnecessary, it would’ve been better if she just gave the argument without the personal touch. So I agreed with having her deliver the closing, but the writers threw in a cliche that was unnecessary. 

[CrystalBlue]

51 minutes ago, Xeliou66 said:

I thought it was smart to have Maroun give the closing as a female touch would help win over the jurors who thought Price was overly harsh with the defendant and would react better to a female delivering the argument, plus it gave Maroun, who had been in the background of the episode up until that point, a chance to show off her skills. However it was a cliched background for Maroun to have a relative murdered, that was cliched and unnecessary, it would’ve been better if she just gave the argument without the personal touch. So I agreed with having her deliver the closing, but the writers threw in a cliche that was unnecessary. 

It was a last-minute decision by Price.  If they had discussed it before and Maroun was OK with it, it wouldn't be so bad.  If Price had planned to let Maroun take over the closing argument and her personal murder story wasn't in the mix, I wouldn't mind her taking over in order to connect with the jury.

[Jane Tuesday]

On 2/27/2022 at 9:12 AM, shapeshifter said:

I would love to have your dad as my across-the-street neighbor who pontificates about TV shows over us taking our trash bins to the curb.

Aww, thank you!  He especially loves British drama, if you're into that.  :D

 

12 hours ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

The way the female lawyer was used was so cheap too.  Hugh Dancy was like, you've had trauma.  Go trot it out to the jury.  I'm barely cleaning up the language he used.

 

11 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

I thought it was smart to have Maroun give the closing as a female touch would help win over the jurors who thought Price was overly harsh with the defendant and would react better to a female delivering the argument, plus it gave Maroun, who had been in the background of the episode up until that point, a chance to show off her skills. However it was a cliched background for Maroun to have a relative murdered, that was cliched and unnecessary, it would’ve been better if she just gave the argument without the personal touch. So I agreed with having her deliver the closing, but the writers threw in a cliche that was unnecessary. 

Agree with both of these.  I feel like it was somewhat common on L&O to have the junior ADA take over questioning a witness or doing the closing statement because of optics.  So, a female ADA questioning a rape victim-turned-killer makes sense.  But I definitely thought episode 1 was a little early to jump into her full back-story.  I know it's a pilot thing to try to flesh out every character, but I think it's unnecessary and cluttered.

[GHScorpiosRule]

6 minutes ago, Jane Tuesday said:

Agree with both of these.  I feel like it was somewhat common on L&O to have the junior ADA take over questioning a witness or doing the closing statement because of optics.  So, a female ADA questioning a rape victim-turned-killer makes sense.  But I definitely thought episode 1 was a little early to jump into her full back-story.  I know it's a pilot thing to try to flesh out every character, but I think it's unnecessary and cluttered.

We never saw Paul questioning witnesses or the defendant during his three years; only told that he would take Teasdale's case in season two's "Severance" and it was offscreen!

Claire finally got to do some questioning, actually, she was the lead in season 6's "Trophy" because Jack's actions or non actions had come into question. But she never got to do any closing or take over cross examination or even direct in her first two seasons.

So Maroun doing the closing didn't...ring any bells for me, or didn't make me think why? Of course having Nolan SAY why was stupid.

I know it sounds like I didn't like this, but I thought it was okay. I'm nitpicking because this isn't a spin off, or a new show. And Eid was involved during the original run. So I'm very critical of the stuff I'm irked and pissed off about, because they have the blue print and 20 years of shows to use as a guide.

[candall]

On 2/24/2022 at 7:45 PM, shapeshifter said:

...

Waterston's eyebrows need to be trimmed for large-screen HD TV.
</shallow>

That's funny, I was thinking I missed Sam's eyebrows from when they looked like long-haired tasered caterpillars.  

[Halting Hex]

On 2/28/2022 at 7:10 PM, Prairie Rose said:

Mike was a Bureau Chief ADA on SVU. He appeared in four episodes in SVU's Season 13 (2011-12).

Did he share any scenes with Courtney B. Vance?  Cutter and Carver?  (Preferably with Rodgers, the Slicer.)
 

6 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Claire finally got to do some questioning, actually, she was the lead in season 6's "Trophy" because Jack's actions or non actions had come into question.

Claire actually took the lead five episodes before that, in "Humiliation", where she convicted the plastic surgeon of the prostitute's murder, only to rethink things when his wife "fumbled at the goal line" and "accidentally" destroyed hubby's alibi.

(It was a silly case in the first place; Claire should know that husbands don't kill their mistresses…wives kill mistresses and try to frame the cheating bastard.  Everyone knows that.)

I also think it was a bad conviction;  Claire's big break was that Dr. Horny has said that the $2000 in withdrawals from his account wasn't to pay the $2000 the victim had on her as blackmail; he claimed his wife had withdrawn the cash to buy antiques.  But the wife could only produce $800 worth of antiques, so…

Er, excuse me, Claire.  So the wife couldn't account for the entire $2000.  But the $800 she actually spent leaves only $1200 unaccounted for, and $1200 ≠ $2000, last I checked.  I guess Claire was lucky she got a jury that didn't get the concept of "subtraction", but still.

[GHScorpiosRule]

12 minutes ago, Halting Hex said:

Did he share any scenes with Courtney B. Vance?  Cutter and Carver?  (Preferably with Rodgers, the Slicer.)

Not unless Carver appeared on SVU SHITSHOW. As far as I know, Carver has only ever appeared on Criminal Intent.

[Xeliou66]

15 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Not unless Carver appeared on SVU SHITSHOW. As far as I know, Carver has only ever appeared on Criminal Intent.

Carver has never appeared on SVU. We don’t know what happened to him after he left CI, or why he left CI for that matter.

[Raja]

10 minutes ago, Xeliou66 said:

Carver has never appeared on SVU. We don’t know what happened to him after he left CI, or why he left CI for that matter.

I think it became clear that it was a Sherlock show and the "Order" of Criminal Intent, or SVU for that matter was not career role that  being the ADA's of the mothership, Los Angeles  or Trial by Jury was

[Johnny Dollar]

The scene where Cosgrove got pissed off because he couldn’t smack around a witness seemed very off. What cop in 2022 doesn’t know that their every action will be recorded on someone’s phone. It seemed like a very heavy handed way to show that he was some kind of old school hard-ass still living in the 80s. And there’s no way a judge wouldn’t have declared a mistrial after he spoke about the confession on the stand. 

[blackwing]

I really liked it, warts and all.  I like the cast, even if I feel like some of them need time to find their groove.

Granted it’s been years since the show went off the air, and it’s been years since I’ve seen some of these people, but damn, some of the familiar faces looked so… old.

Sam Waterston looked every bit his age.  Was he not in many scenes because he doesn’t want to work much?

I last saw Jeffrey Donovan in “Burn Notice”, and he has aged a bit.  I also don’t care for his New York accent, it seems forced. 
 

Hugh Dancy was unrecognisable to me, but I haven’t seen him in years.  Carey Lowell was also unrecognisable.  I get that actors age too, but I guess seeing some of these actors and remembering what they used to look like just made me feel so old myself.  On the other hand, Camryn Mannheim looked great!

The story itself, I enjoyed it.  Colour me surprised that they actually convicted the woman.  I was sure she was going to get acquitted because of politics and public sentiment.

[shapeshifter]

33 minutes ago, blackwing said:

Sam Waterston looked every bit his age.  Was he not in many scenes because he doesn’t want to work much

As someone myself who has aged a lot in those intervening years, I noticed in Sam Waterston’s first scenes how erect he still held himself, but in a later scene, where he was leaning against the door frame, I wondered if that was in part because he was getting tired.

 

36 minutes ago, blackwing said:

Colour me surprised that they actually convicted the woman.  I was sure she was going to get acquitted because of politics and public sentiment.

We didn’t learn what her sentence was, did we? I don’t think they even stated what the minimum could be, and whether the judge would have discretion to give an even lighter sentence.

 

[debraran]

There were so many shows but there was one where you knew they didn't fight for a conviction the way they normally would and a time the defense attorney opened a door a slight bit so they could question something with a really despicable defendant. I remember Jack questioned the lawyer later and he didn't reply, but said they both would sleep that night. 

I liked how they showed many outcomes because that happens.

[Katy M]

5 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

 

We didn’t learn what her sentence was, did we? I don’t think they even stated what the minimum could be, and whether the judge would have discretion to give an even lighter sentence.

 

L&O very rarely shows the sentencing phase.  I'm glad she was convicted, but I think a sentence more towards the min than the max would be fine.

[GHScorpiosRule]

7 hours ago, blackwing said:

Sam Waterston looked every bit his age.  Was he not in many scenes because he doesn’t want to work much?

No. The District Attorney has always been in fewer scenes than the cops and ADAs.

6 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

I noticed in Sam Waterston’s first scenes how erect he still held himself, but in a later scene, where he was leaning against the door frame, I wondered if that was in part because he was getting tired.

Sam/Jack has always done that leaning against the door frame thing after he became DA in the last few seasons.

 

6 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

We didn’t learn what her sentence was, did we? I don’t think they even stated what the minimum could be, and whether the judge would have discretion to give an even lighter sentence.

No. But Maroun was insisting on giving her the lightest sentence possible, and she sounded more like Rohmbot there than an assistant DISTRICT ATTORNEY. 

The judge could even give her the maximum of the light sentence. We didn't always know what the sentence was when someone was found guilty.

[Xeliou66]

Some deleted scenes from the episode just got posted - and I thought everyone might find it interesting that there was a scene between Jack/Jamie that they deleted for some reason. They had a brief discussion at the DA’s office where Jack tells her she has to tell the truth and says “this is a line you can’t cross” and Jamie replies she’s not sure if she can do that and walks off. I have no idea why they deleted this scene, as it was nice to see Jack and Jamie talk, although I’m still pissed about how they threw Jamie under the bus.

There were a few other deleted scenes, mainly of Bernard/Cosgrove investigating, plus one where Price and Maroun discuss the case and Price talks about his past as a defense lawyer.

[GHScorpiosRule]

15 minutes ago, Xeliou66 said:

Some deleted scenes from the episode just got posted - and I thought everyone might find it interesting that there was a scene between Jack/Jamie that they deleted for some reason. They had a brief discussion at the DA’s office where Jack tells her she has to tell the truth and says “this is a line you can’t cross” and Jamie replies she’s not sure if she can do that and walks off. I have no idea why they deleted this scene, as it was nice to see Jack and Jamie talk, although I’m still pissed about how they threw Jamie under the bus.

There were a few other deleted scenes, mainly of Bernard/Cosgrove investigating, plus one where Price and Maroun discuss the case and Price talks about his past as a defense lawyer.

Link?

And such BULLSHIT that they cut it out. And there should also be a scene on the cutting room floor of Jack firing her.

I’m also watching the early seasons while watching this new season and in season two’s Forgiveness, the victim’s father starts to threaten to kill his daughter’s murderer if they don’t convict, but Ben cuts him off and reminds him that he’s an officer of the court. So best not do anything. Still, I blame Eid for destroying Jamie’s character. She was one of the BEST ADAs this show had.

[Xeliou66]

18 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Link?

And such BULLSHIT that they cut it out. And there should also be a scene on the cutting room floor of Jack firing her.

I’m also watching the early seasons while watching this new season and in season two’s Forgiveness, the victim’s father starts to threaten to kill his daughter’s murderer if they don’t convict, but Ben cuts him off and reminds him that he’s an officer of the court. So best not do anything. Still, I blame Eid for destroying Jamie’s character. She was one of the BEST ADAs this show had.

You can find the deleted scenes on the All Things Law and Order blog, that’s where I found them, I’m not sure how to link them.

No idea why they cut it, and it pisses me off to no end what they did to Jamie, they ruined her character for no reason at all. 

[GHScorpiosRule]

Here are all the deleted scenes.

Even that scene leaves a lot to be desired.

[CrystalBlue]

Thanks for finding the deleted scenes and posting the links, guys!  Very interesting.  Jack/Jamie scene definitely should have been shown.  Some of the other scenes had stilted acting.  The ADAs scene was pretty good.  They need to air a similar one in the future to flesh out Nolan.  We already know Samantha had a family member murdered.  We don't want soap opera backstories, but occasional ones that explain the characters' motivations would be nice.

[shapeshifter]

5 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Here are all the deleted scenes.

Thanks, @GHScorpiosRule!
I think this deleted scene would have done a lot to explain both the trial strategy and the characters of the new (to us) ADAs:  Law & Order  21.2  “The Right Thing,” deleted scene "Irrefutable Evidence":

 

[TakomaSnark]

Just had on a S1 SVU episode, 'Uncivilized.' Cragen goes to meet with the State Attorney General, who laments to Cragen, 'It used to be you catch 'em, we cook 'em.'

Used to be, eh? Someone tell Frank Corrigan.

 

[KimberStormer]

When they first started doing the "main characters very explicitly explaining their positions on The Issues" bit I cringed, but then I had to admit it was very accurate to the original run.  A certain datedness is appropriate for this show, and I hope they keep to the case of the week without any season arc or whatever.  The great thing about original L&O is you can watch almost any episode, from any season, at any time with no context and get basically the whole experience, although us nerds will of course always watch the subtle modulations of feeling between Rey and Lennie or Connie and Cutter.

I can't believe, though, that they didn't have a Jack/Jamie scene.  That is what old theater books would call "the obligatory scene"!  The whole silly Cosby setup seemed like just an excuse to get a great scene between those two and then it didn't happen.  So my sister's theory that Jamie will indeed have a season arc seems sadly plausible.  I can't agree with people who say she looks unrecognizably plastic surgeried -- she just looks 30 years older to me, because that's how long it's been, crazily enough -- but do agree with those who say her hair and makeup were terrible.

At this point I don't like any of the new characters, though hopefully the second chair lady will get to do the traditional second chair legwork in the future and so have more than 5 minutes of screen time and we can get an idea of her character beyond Tragic Backstory.  I thought the new ADA guy was just awful, badly written and badly acted, completely unconvincing.  I wanted to see Jack McCoy growl MAKE THE DEAL in classic Adam Schiff fashion!

On 2/25/2022 at 4:26 PM, 853fisher said:

Forgot to say that McCoy's "the police are under attack!  Some people even want to defund them, for God's sake!" really threw me.  I don't remember this character that way.

I feel like Jack (with his cop dad) was always a "tough on crime" kind of guy, not as much of a nutcase as Abbie Carmichael but I feel like of course he's going to be against defunding the police.  I sort of like how old and out of touch he seems on it, very plausible for an old guy like him imo.

On 2/25/2022 at 11:46 AM, GHScorpiosRule said:

It was obvious to me about Jack and Claire in that one episode, whose name I’m blanking on, where Jack tells Claire to take the next elevator because he wouldn’t be good company “tonight” and especially in “Aftershock” when she doesn’t show up at the bar where he’s been waiting for her and got himself drunk because they all witnessed someone put to death. He’s pretty much a jerk when he says “The hell with her.”

"At least she's Irish!" -- Lennie Briscoe.  Everyone knew they were sleeping together!

[shapeshifter]

36 minutes ago, KimberStormer said:

I hope they keep to the case of the week without any season arc or whatever.  The great thing about original L&O is you can watch almost any episode, from any season, at any time with no context and get basically the whole experience,

Good point that at least so far they seem to be sticking to the COTW formula, which I infinitely prefer over the season-long (or more!) arc formula. I've got enough on-going life issues to keep track of without having to do homework in order to appreciate a TV episode (not that I don't rehash dialogue from old episodes to death when I feel like it, heh).

[ItCouldBeWorse]

On 2/24/2022 at 10:24 PM, Ohiopirate02 said:

I noticed a lot of sun damage on Carey.  She looks like she never used the proper SPF when she was younger.  In comparison to Camryn, fat can make you appear younger.  It's the classic conundrum, ass or face? 

Another way to say that is that if your face is very slim, it tend to wrinkle more easily.  That's why some people get fat injections in their face.  Also, different people just age differently. Carey looks her age, which we are not used to in television actresses.  Camryn looks significantly younger than her true age.

On 2/24/2022 at 10:08 PM, Door County Cherry said:

At some point, she doesn't need to be under arrest.  It's complicated but if they're interrogating her believing her to be a suspect, instead of just a witness, and she's of the belief she's not at liberty to leave, then they should have Mirandized her.  If I were her defense, I'd argue that the minute Cosgrove said "tell us the truth and we'll let you leave" she didn't feel like she could leave and should have been read her rights.

Agreed.  There was a good chance the confession would have been thrown out after a Miranda hearing.  Which is why...

On 2/24/2022 at 10:24 PM, stonehaven said:

Speaking of deals, why didn't the DA at least entertain a plea deal if they weren't using a confession?

...there would have been a plea offer.

It's not as though the DA wanted to try a case with a popular defendant and very unpopular victim.  The jury could very well have acquitted in spite of the evidence.

Edited March 8, 2022 by ItCouldBeWorse

[ItCouldBeWorse]

On 2/24/2022 at 11:10 PM, txhorns79 said:

I also think in reality a cop that purposefully ignores an ADA's instructions and tells the ADA off afterwards is not someone who is going to have a fruitful career in law enforcement.  A cop who is not going to be predictable on the stand is someone who will not be useful as a witness.   

If the confession had been suppressed, then I think that the defense attorney opened the door to admitting the confession, as she asked Cosgrove if he had personal knowledge of the defendant's guilt, and he answered yes, the defendant had confessed to him.  Since the confession was not suppressed, but the DA agreed not to enter it into evidence, the result was different.  Perhaps Cosgrove didn't get the nuance.

On 3/2/2022 at 10:16 PM, Johnny Dollar said:

And there’s no way a judge wouldn’t have declared a mistrial after he spoke about the confession on the stand. 

I generally agree, but the issue would have been reserved for appeal after conviction, during which time the judge could have allowed the convicted defendant to remain out on bail.  However, since the defendant admitted shooting the victim by claiming self-defense, I don't think it will be a good ground for an appeal.

On 3/3/2022 at 8:21 AM, GHScorpiosRule said:

The judge could even give her the maximum of the light sentence. We didn't always know what the sentence was when someone was found guilty.

I believe the minimum is 15 years for 2nd degree murder in NYC..

[Katy M]

On 3/7/2022 at 11:41 PM, ItCouldBeWorse said:

If the confession had been suppressed, then I think that the defense attorney opened the door to admitting the confession, as she asked Cosgrove if he had personal knowledge of the defendant's guilt, and he answered yes, the defendant had confessed to him

I feel like the rules of suppressed evidence and agreed not to use evidence would be the same.  After all, they agreed not to use it just to save the judge of the trouble of a suppression hearing, or whatever.

[ItCouldBeWorse]

17 minutes ago, Katy M said:

I feel like the rules of suppressed evidence and agreed not to use evidence would be the same.  After all, they agreed not to use it just to save the judge of the trouble of a suppression hearing, or whatever.

The impeachment exception allows the use of illegally obtained evidence (I.e., evidence suppressed after a hearing) to impeach the defendant's testimony.  If the prosecution voluntarily agrees not to use evidence, then I believe they are stuck, no matter how the defendant testifies.

In this case, if the defendant had taken the stand and specifically denied that she ever told the police that she had shot the victim, and her confession had been suppressed, it could possibly have been used to impeach her, although the circumstances that led to the suppression would also become part of the testimony.  If the prosecution agreed that the confession was a nullity, then it could not.  (It became irrelevant once the defendant admitted the shooting.)

[Samsnee]

All I could think about this episode was how the defendant looked like Linda Cardellini in Legally Blonde and wanted her to talk about how she was in the shower during the murder. 
 

Good to have this show back even if it doesn’t quite feel the same and probably won’t last another 20 seasons.