S23.E01: Freedom of Expression

[WendyCR72]

Airing January 18, 2024.

Quote

In the wake of a murder on campus, the line between free speech and hate speech at a university is examined.

 

[Spartan Girl]

[Xeliou66]

1 hour ago, Spartan Girl said:

Agreed 100% - the current writers don’t usually handle delicate social issues well, and I’m afraid this episode will be very clunky and preachy the way SVU often is when they try to make a statement - that’s what I’m worried this episode will be - trying to make a statement instead of giving us a compelling story.    
I just hope the new detective gets off to a decent start but the episode description doesn’t sound good so I’m nervous about that as well.

[WendyCR72]

The writers' room needs some people with law degrees to consult with! (Assuming it doesn't already...)

The original 20 seasons seemed well versed in legal definitions and strategies and whatnot, often citing specific cases.

The new episodes seem deficient in that area.

[wknt3]

13 hours ago, WendyCR72 said:

The writers' room needs some people with law degrees to consult with! (Assuming it doesn't already...)

The original 20 seasons seemed well versed in legal definitions and strategies and whatnot, often citing specific cases.

The new episodes seem deficient in that area.

I agree that the new episodes are lacking in the legal area, but I don't know if it's a lack of knowledge since I've noticed a fair number of OG writers and producers involved. My guess is that it's more about a dilution of the writing talent pool due to the rise of streaming, along with the budget and running time cuts increasing the difficulty of doing it well (i.e. being required to do in hallway exposition what would have been done in the courtroom with extras and guest cast previously).

Edited January 4 by wknt3
fix typos

[dttruman]

On 1/1/2024 at 1:44 PM, Xeliou66 said:

Agreed 100% - the current writers don’t usually handle delicate social issues well, and I’m afraid this episode will be very clunky and preachy the way SVU often is when they try to make a statement - that’s what I’m worried this episode will be - trying to make a statement instead of giving us a compelling story.    
I just hope the new detective gets off to a decent start but the episode description doesn’t sound good so I’m nervous about that as well.

You know it's probably bad if it's at  Hudson University!

[Spartan Girl]

Well, that was a shitshow. Once again, juries are morons.

[dttruman]

6 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

Well, that was a shitshow. Once again, juries are morons

One word, "Superficial". No depth at all. The trial part was only about 5-7 minutes.

[shapeshifter]

It was much better than I was dreading.

[CraftyHazel]

I thought it was absolutely awful.  I did like the new detective, though.

[Xeliou66]

Yeah this was about as awful as I was expecting. A lot of the episode felt like Dick Wolf trying to make a political statement and those episodes are rarely any good - I’ll try to avoid being explicitly political, but it’s clear where Dick Wolf stands on Israel/Palestine and this felt like an attempt to bash the side he dislikes. I thought it was absurd that the actual killer got a manslaughter plea of 10 years while the professor was charged with murder - in fact I’m kind of glad she was acquitted. I don’t believe she was more responsible for the murder than the actual killer, she was extreme and a borderline caricature, which is definitely what Wolf/the writers were going for, but I don’t believe she caused the murder, and I was disturbed by the message of the episode that we were supposed to want people put in prison for hate speech, at least that’s how it felt to me. Plus the evidence was flimsy and relied entirely on the killer’s testimony. Plus after not losing a case all of last season, it was nice to have a surprise ending of them losing. 
So this episode was overall a stinker, at least it wasn’t as bad as say Dignity from season 20, but it wasn’t good.

Also bad was that Jack had only one scene, I hope that isn’t a sign of things to come, I know Sam is 83 and wants probably a limited role, but hopefully they utilize him more going forward. Although now that I think about it it’s probably best he wasn’t used much because this episode was a suckfest and I would hate for Jack to get tarnished in it.

The only good thing is I like the new detective, Vince Riley, he fit in well from the start, they didn’t give him any over the top behavior or try to make him stand out too much, he just did his job, and I think Riley/Shaw have nice chemistry and will make an enjoyable pairing. I liked that they mentioned Cosgrove and Shaw called him a great cop, but I hate that the higher ups seemed to have forced him out, I would’ve liked more closure for Frank than that as he had grown on me a lot. But at least they mentioned him. It’s clear Riley has some backstory with being in the doghouse with the higher ups, but I’m glad they didn’t dwell on that and just alluded to it.

I do wish they would cut out the action scenes, hopefully they’ll dial back the shootings/foot chases/intense situations, that just isn’t L&O.

Overall this was a clunker, though I did laugh at the fact that Hudson U remains a cesspool of chaos. But the episode felt more like a statement that an entertaining story, and it was so bad I was kind of rooting for the defense. The killer, an adult who was free to think for himself, should’ve gotten much more than 10 years, and I didn’t like the message the show was sending. Oh and Price and Maroun still don’t really inspire much from me, Price seems to lack consistent characterization and something about Maroun just doesn’t click.

Hopefully they’ve gotten the political statements out of their system and the show will be a lot better going forward. And I do like Riley and think him and Shaw will be a strong duo. And hopefully there will be more Jack going forward.

[Cotypubby]

I was really hoping for another courthouse shooting there at the end.

1 hour ago, Spartan Girl said:

Well, that was a shitshow. Once again, juries are morons.

Yup. Also come on, there was no Jewish person on that jury? No way would an actual NY jury let that psycho go free.

[Door County Cherry]

11 minutes ago, Xeliou66 said:

The only good thing is I like the new detective, Vince Riley, he fit in well from the start, they didn’t give him any over the top behavior or try to make him stand out too much, he just did his job

I don't know.  In the beginning, they had him threaten to shoot a guy simply standing around with a knife and they ended his scenes by having him kill another suspect (although more obviously justified that time.) 

So it felt a bit over-the-top but at least he hasn't gone on any rants yet.  I like Reid Scott but I'm very confused by the new creative direction he's supposed to take us. I was hoping they'd use his comedic sensibility a bit more which would help the show but so far he's just there.  He and Shaw are okay but don't have the chemistry Shaw had with Cosgrove yet. 

I didn't mind that they started the episode about free speech but I definitely wish there would have been a twist away from it at the end.  I mean there were two people from both sides of this issue willing to commit murder on the streets of New York over it. It felt so ridiculous.  

 

[MerBearHou]

I rolled my eyes at how *many* current news issues they tried to squeeze into the first episode.  Plagiarism by a University president, anti-Semitism by students defacing posters, manipulation by college leaders, the killer seen on camera buying lipgloss for himself (if I followed that correctly), Israel and Palestine, the new detective having never shot anyone before even though he sure was threatening to shoot at the beginning of the episode and reacted so arrogantly to his partner — my head was spinning.  It was a clunker of an opening episode IMO.  The trial side has not improved one bit in the writers’ time off.  

Edited January 19 by MerBearHou

[Xeliou66]

1 minute ago, Door County Cherry said:

I don't know.  In the beginning, they had him threaten to shoot a guy simply standing around with a knife and they ended his scenes by having him kill another suspect (although more obviously justified that time.) 

So it felt a bit over-the-top but at least he hasn't gone on any rants yet.  I like Reid Scott but I'm very confused by the new creative direction he's supposed to take us. I was hoping they'd use his comedic sensibility a bit more which would help the show but so far he's just there.  He and Shaw are okay but don't have the chemistry Shaw had with Cosgrove yet. 

I didn't mind that they started the episode about free speech but I definitely wish there would have been a twist away from it at the end.  I mean there were two people from both sides of this issue willing to commit murder on the streets of New York over it. It felt so ridiculous.  

 

As I said I wish they would cut back on the action scenes, but Riley as a character fit in well I thought and I sensed more chemistry between him and Shaw than you did, I think they will be a strong partnership. 
I agree the episode felt ridiculous in many areas, as well as preachy. 

 

2 minutes ago, MerBearHou said:

I rolled my eyes at how *many* current news issues they tried to squeeze into the first episode.  Plagiarism by a University president, anti-Semitism by students defacing posters, manipulation by college leaders, the killer seen on camera buying lipgloss for himself (if I followed that correctly), Israel and Palestine, my head was spinning.  It was a clunker of an opening episode IMO.  The trial side has not improved one bit in the writers’ time off.  

Agreed with all of this, and don’t forget how they shoehorned in hazing on the hockey team as well. Definitely a clunker of an opening episode.

[MerBearHou]

1 minute ago, Xeliou66 said:

Agreed with all of this, and don’t forget how they shoehorned in hazing on the hockey team as well. Definitely a clunker of an opening episode.

Yes!!  Hazing on the sports team also smushed in there.  

[KeithJ]

I know they never will but I wish TV shows would stop with the “we need you to come down to the station to answer a few questions”.  Without a warrant, they can’t force you to come down to the station and even without a warrant, they can’t force you to answer questions.

[ML89]

That was a mess. I’m still not sure what Cosgrove did but at least we found out something. Jury is out on New Guy (and hopefully won’t deadlock) but at least they aren’t screaming at each other, so win there. Really hope this is the end of the message episodes. You would think Wolf of all people would take the “if you want to send a message, use Western Union” (now I guess that’s social media) to heart.

Also, I really really hate seeing the victim murdered. 

[Moose135]

54 minutes ago, ML89 said:

Also, I really really hate seeing the victim murdered. 

Same! It doesn't really add anything, and it was always interesting in the 'old days' to see how some unsuspecting person/people would stumble upon a dead body.

[Demian]

2 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

she was extreme and a borderline caricature, which is definitely what Wolf/the writers were going for

After more than 30 years of this show and its spinoffs, were you really expecting anything different? Subtle characterization is not this franchise's forte.

Actually, now that I consider it, subtle anything isn't this franchise's forte.  I keep seeing that monkey jumping out of the basketball...

Edited January 19 by Demian

[wknt3]

I really wonder how anyone could be convicted for murdering the president of Hudson University? I mean I would think any defense attorney who was halfway competent could have come up with reasonable doubt by linking the MO to one of the 987 other recent violent crimes connected to the school recently? Or by showing how many people had stronger motives? Oh well - being President of Hudson is like being drummer for Spinal Tap. You know the risks when you accept the gig.

Edited January 19 by wknt3
ducking autocorrect

[Demian]

17 minutes ago, wknt3 said:

I really wonder how anyone could be convicted for murdering the president of Hudson University? I mean I would think any defense attorney who was halfway confident could have come up with reasonable doubt by linking the MO to one of the 987 other recent violent crimes connected to the school recently?

Forget "recent violent crimes" -- let's link tonight's deceased Hudson University administrator to every single violent crime connected to Hudson University since 1990!  What's that -- about 87,532?  Where's the cover-up?  Is Dick Wolf complicit?  How many criminals have gotten away?

Shame on Law & Order.

[Raja]

7 hours ago, Cotypubby said:

I was really hoping for another courthouse shooting there at the end.

Yup. Also come on, there was no Jewish person on that jury? No way would an actual NY jury let that psycho go free.

They went a couple of seasons without the arraignment scene perhaps this episode could have used a voir dire scene for Maroun instead of her Abbie impersonation before her flip later.

[shapeshifter]

7 hours ago, Door County Cherry said:

I didn't mind that they started the episode about free speech but I definitely wish there would have been a twist away from it at the end. 

Do you have any twists in mind?
I got nothin’.

[ML89]

Re: Cosgrove: so when he got "jammed up," I guess he had his 20 and took retirement instead of walking a beat on Staten Island?

[Spartan Girl]

9 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

I don’t believe she was more responsible for the murder than the actual killer, she was extreme and a borderline caricature, which is definitely what Wolf/the writers were going for, but I don’t believe she caused the murder

She gave him the knife and told him she was proud of him after what he did. How is that “not responsible”? Yes, he was an adult and could think for himself but she egged him on and definitely used him and Chloe for martyrs for her stance. That makes her more than a “little” responsible. At the very least, it was accessory after the fact. But I agree they shouldn’t have cut a 10 year deal with him—I expect better from you, Jack.

The one relatable moment in this whole trash fire was the killer’s dad asking “What the hell was wrong with you?!” 

But I suppose I should just be grateful Danielle Melnick was nowhere near this episode.

[Raja]

It has been a constant Law & Order theme for Jack to give the actual killer a deal to go after his spiritual inspiration or corporation that produced the tool the killer used. Be it the gun maker, the pharmaceutical company the Argentine mom of the Latino anti Mexican racist.

[cfinboston]

28 minutes ago, Raja said:

It has been a constant Law & Order theme for Jack to give the actual killer a deal to go after his spiritual inspiration or corporation that produced the tool the killer used. Be it the gun maker, the pharmaceutical company the Argentine mom of the Latino anti Mexican racist.

That's a total trope. McCoy deciding to charge some big corporation or other powerful entity with "depraved indifference". 

[Spartan Girl]

42 minutes ago, Raja said:

It has been a constant Law & Order theme for Jack to give the actual killer a deal to go after his spiritual inspiration or corporation that produced the tool the killer used. Be it the gun maker, the pharmaceutical company the Argentine mom of the Latino anti Mexican racist.

The gun maker was because the circumstances let the shooter plead guilty to a lighter sentence than he deserved, but I see your point. Still, 10 measly years for a murder is pathetic.

[Ohiopirate02]

10 hours ago, MerBearHou said:

I rolled my eyes at how *many* current news issues they tried to squeeze into the first episode.  Plagiarism by a University president, anti-Semitism by students defacing posters, manipulation by college leaders, the killer seen on camera buying lipgloss for himself (if I followed that correctly), Israel and Palestine, the new detective having never shot anyone before even though he sure was threatening to shoot at the beginning of the episode and reacted so arrogantly to his partner — my head was spinning.  It was a clunker of an opening episode IMO.  The trial side has not improved one bit in the writers’ time off.  

Same, and I was trying to figure out when exactly this episode was conceived and subsequently filmed.  Some of those headlines the writers ripped their story from were from December.  Did they go back and add the plagiarism by a university president after the episode was already written? Or did they shelve their original episode one for this mess?  

[Raja]

1 minute ago, Spartan Girl said:

The gun maker was because the circumstances let the shooter plead guilty to a lighter sentence than he deserved, but I see your point. Still, 10 measly years for a murder is pathetic.

After 2 decades I'm asking myself which gun maker just like which parent when the kids murdered and I went with Cutter's case instead of the basketball. I think we are  both on Ed Green's first case

[shapeshifter]

1 hour ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

I was trying to figure out when exactly this episode was conceived and subsequently filmed.  Some of those headlines the writers ripped their story from were from December.  Did they go back and add the plagiarism by a university president after the episode was already written? Or did they shelve their original episode one

Thank you. Good to know I wasn't alone in mulling this over. Maybe there will be an interview giving a timeline of the writing and editing. 

I thought the courtroom bits showed some improvement over the last 2 seasons in that at least there weren't those moments of: Wait. What just happened? 
(where they seemingly cut out swaths of the storytelling connective tissue).
Or maybe I was just feeling so much PTSD over the ripped from last week's headlines that I didn't notice courtroom scene cuts?

[jcbrown]

Gee, too bad there were no female actors available anywhere so they had to go with another dumbass male cop. I did not like him and Wolf's hard-on for agro men gets really really old.

Also, thanks, L&O, for bringing a story I can't even stand to follow in real life (because there is nothing whatsoever I can do about it) to my escapism.

I really hated this episode, in case I wasn't clear.

[dubbel zout]

1 hour ago, jcbrown said:

too bad there were no female actors available anywhere so they had to go with another dumbass male cop.

It's long past time for a female partner, and she needs to be experienced so there's parity between the detectives.

[txhorns79]

8 hours ago, dubbel zout said:

It's long past time for a female partner, and she needs to be experienced so there's parity between the detectives.

I presume Detective Beauty Queen was so bad that they will never go down that road again. 

[Mellowyellow]

Great episode!!!! 

Both the law and order sides lived up to their potential today. I appreciated the development and excitement of various aspects during the episode. 

Considering the delicate nature of the topic I thought they handled it well without preaching. More just a sad lament which is a fair reflection of the state of the world imo.

[Sake614]

I knew the teacher was going to get off as soon as the judge saw the verdict. I agree they shouldn’t have cut a deal with the kid, but as vile as the teacher was, ,she didn’t actually stab the guy. I wish we’d seen the closing arguments so st least we could have had an idea of what the defense argued. She could have easily been charged with accessory before or after the fact. But I think murder was a stretch. Although I was surprised because the looks on the jurors faces when she said she was proud of the kid seemed to indicate they were appalled as well. 

[illdoc]

30 minutes ago, Sake614 said:

She could have easily been charged with accessory before or after the fact

Or even conspiracy. In fact, while on the stand, the kid was asked "didn't you conspire with the defendant?" I actually thought that was the charge!

[Sake614]

1 minute ago, illdoc said:

Or even conspiracy. In fact, while on the stand, the kid was asked "didn't you conspire with the defendant?" I actually thought that was the charge!

Exactly! My guess is the jury hated her and would have convicted on a charge other than murder. She certainly instigated it, but while she took advantage of an impressionable young man, she didn’t force him to do anything. Just because he’s white and wealthy, doesn’t mean he gets away with murder…or at least it shouldn’t.

[Spartan Girl]

I think Chloe was in on the murder too, at least as accessory after the fact. You’d think someone who was so concerned about innocent people dying in another country would have been shaken that her rhetoric in her videos had caused someone’s death, but nope, she kept on her conspiracy theory videos like it was no big deal. It annoyed me that Maroun empathized her with her “she’s just a kid who’s very passionate” defense. There’s a right way to advocate for your beliefs and a wrong way.   

I’m not saying she deserved to be shot by that crazy guy, but I couldn’t really muster any pity for her either. And I really hate how her boyfriend was the only Palestinian person in the episode that wasn’t anti-Semitic. 

[shapeshifter]

Both Cam Lawson and Chloe Esper were undergraduates, right? So probably 20 years old or less? Maroun referring to them as "kids" points this out, but the dialogue doesn't dwell on their ages too much, which parallels the custom of 18 being the age of accountability even though modern brain studies have revealed that the reasoning area of the brain does not mature until about age 25.

Maybe in 8 years Cam will get out on parole a mature, repentant, responsible person. Or maybe he'll be bitter and angry and commit another violent, irresponsible act. Either is possible.

[Xeliou66]

17 minutes ago, shapeshifter said:

Both Cam Lawson and Chloe Esper were undergraduates, right? So probably 20 years old or less? Maroun referring to them as "kids" points this out, but the dialogue doesn't dwell on their ages too much, which parallels the custom of 18 being the age of accountability even though modern brain studies have revealed that the reasoning area of the brain does not mature until about age 25.

Maybe in 8 years Cam will get out on parole a mature, repentant, responsible person. Or maybe he'll be bitter and angry and commit another violent, irresponsible act. Either is possible.

Cam still stabbed a man to death and he deserved a hell of a lot more than 10 years for his crime - he was fully competent and knew what he was doing and could’ve chosen not to, no one forced him to do it, even taking his word that the professor suggested the idea of killing the victim, he could easily have said no like any decent person would. He wasn’t somebody who couldn’t control himself.
At most the professor was an accessory but she wasn’t more responsible for the murder than Cam was. And I couldn’t believe that the professor would admit on the stand that she was glad Cam committed the murder, had her attorney not prepped her at all? The whole point of the episode was just to demonize pro Palestine activists and make them look evil, not to make any logical sense. 

Hopefully next week will be a much better episode where the point is to tell an interesting and entertaining story, not to preach and push an agenda. 

[Theli11]

It feels like there was meat missing from the case in sacrifice of the overall agenda that's being pushed. This episode was very tough to watch and not in the good way. A twist would've done this case so damn well beyond the professor driving Cam to kill. This episode seems very barebones and pretty much makes everyone who's got personal feelings about the Israel-Palestine.... conflict (!) insane. [Specifically the Palestinian side]. It makes it seem like the only reason they killed the president was because of this which isn't how normal people act. Just felt dreadful and I can't imagine anyone on any side liking this particular episode which I feel is why the writers decided to make a Not Guilty verdict to appeal on both sides :/ A better twist that I would've at least liked some semblance of the kid being obsessed with the professor for another reason, the professor having a personal reason to kill the president besides the Palestine connection... something else. This case should've devolved into something insane by the end. 

[shapeshifter]

On 1/18/2024 at 10:56 PM, Door County Cherry said:

I didn't mind that they started the episode about free speech but I definitely wish there would have been a twist away from it at the end. 

On 1/19/2024 at 6:50 AM, shapeshifter said:

Do you have any twists in mind?
I got nothin’.

 

3 hours ago, Theli11 said:

A better twist that I would've at least liked some semblance of the kid being obsessed with the professor for another reason, the professor having a personal reason to kill the president besides the Palestine connection... something else. This case should've devolved into something insane by the end. 

Thanks for the example of a twist for this episode. 
I wonder if they considered such a twist but cut it for time. 🫤

[dubbel zout]

If Chloe was "still a kid," then so was Cam. He deserved to be punished, but why was Chloe given more of an excuse wrt her age?

When the professor said she was glad the president had been killed, I thought for sure that would seal her fate and she'd be found guilty. It would have been useful to hear why the jury voted the way it did. And I'm surprised the jury wasn't polled, but that was probably not considered for time issues.

[Broderbits]

23 minutes ago, dubbel zout said:

He deserved to be punished, but why was Chloe given more of an excuse wrt her age?

Probably because her fame and/or money gave her access to excellent lawyers that the DA's office wasn't eager to face.

Hugh Dancy was so good in Hannibal, why is he so blah here?

[Xeliou66]

8 minutes ago, Broderbits said:

Probably because her fame and/or money gave her access to excellent lawyers that the DA's office wasn't eager to face.

Hugh Dancy was so good in Hannibal, why is he so blah here?

I agree that Price is rather “blah” - he’s soured on me lately, between the terrible episode last season where he found the body and didn’t tell anyone about his prior romantic involvement with the victim, his extremely soft stance towards the guy who assassinated the politician in the season 22 finale, and now this episode, I’m just not liking him a lot right now. He was better at the start of the show it seemed, but he’s soured on me a lot over the last few episodes. 

[tvfanatic13]

On 1/18/2024 at 11:01 PM, Xeliou66 said:

As I said I wish they would cut back on the action scenes, but Riley as a character fit in well I thought and I sensed more chemistry between him and Shaw than you did, I think they will be a strong partnership. 
I agree the episode felt ridiculous in many areas, as well as preachy. 

 

Agreed with all of this, and don’t forget how they shoehorned in hazing on the hockey team as well. Definitely a clunker of an opening episode.

BINGO! I got Bingo!

[blackwing]

I was waiting for a courthouse steps shooting.  They are almost likely done with this storyline, but I think it would be interesting to see what happens in the future, if someone takes action against this professor.

I am glad that they addressed what happened to Cosgrove, but Shaw basically said something like "he was too outspoken and his emotions got the better of him".  Sounds like they were referring to both Jeffrey Donovan and Frank Cosgrove.

I found it interesting that Maroun, who is Middle Eastern (did we always know she was Lebanese or was that new information?) said she was just focused on the law and didn't want to bring anything else into it.  Was Chloe also Middle Eastern? 

But Cam Lawson did not appear Middle Eastern at all, I think it would have been interesting to at least understand why this person who is not Palestinian was so willing to take a life for a cause that he didn't seem to have any ties to.  I kept waiting for the parents to ask him why that cause was so important to him.  There was talk that this professor had indoctrinated him but that was the extent of it.

I find it preposterous that this jury could find the professor not guilty, after she said on the stand that she was happy about the death.  She may not have done the actual killing but she was an accessory and provided the means, motive and opportunity.

On 1/19/2024 at 7:10 AM, Spartan Girl said:

She gave him the knife and told him she was proud of him after what he did. How is that “not responsible”? Yes, he was an adult and could think for himself but she egged him on and definitely used him and Chloe for martyrs for her stance. That makes her more than a “little” responsible. At the very least, it was accessory after the fact. But I agree they shouldn’t have cut a 10 year deal with him—I expect better from you, Jack.

The one relatable moment in this whole trash fire was the killer’s dad asking “What the hell was wrong with you?!” 

Agree with all of this.  Why again did they need to cut a deal with Cam?  So they could get him to testify against her?  Couldn't they have subpoenaed him anyways?

On 1/19/2024 at 8:16 AM, Ohiopirate02 said:

Same, and I was trying to figure out when exactly this episode was conceived and subsequently filmed.  Some of those headlines the writers ripped their story from were from December.  Did they go back and add the plagiarism by a university president after the episode was already written? Or did they shelve their original episode one for this mess?  

I was wondering the exact same.  The Claudine Gay plagiarism issue was very very recent.  I'm wondering if they re-recorded the opening bit to include that line.  I think this episode was always intended to be the original episode one, since there was the line about Cosgrove, unless that too was added later.

On 1/19/2024 at 11:11 AM, jcbrown said:

Gee, too bad there were no female actors available anywhere so they had to go with another dumbass male cop. I did not like him and Wolf's hard-on for agro men gets really really old.

Also, thanks, L&O, for bringing a story I can't even stand to follow in real life (because there is nothing whatsoever I can do about it) to my escapism.

I really hated this episode, in case I wasn't clear.

I too am disappointed that they chose bring in yet another white male cop.  I would have loved to have seen Violet Yee promoted to field detective, instead of computer detective, or whatever her actual title is.  Or we could have gotten an Asian male detective.

I've never heard of Reid Scott but I find it interesting that he got lead billing over Mehcad Brooks.  He does seem older but I think Jalen Shaw is the senior detective, and Reilly is the junior.  Jeffrey Donovan is older than Anthony Anderson (I think) and he was the junior detective at the start.

[Sake614]

I’d love to see an experienced female detective join the squad. Wolf’s last foray was an utter disaster with the deer in the headlights junior D. Not overly impressed with Reid yet.  He seems awfully trigger happy and I was surprise when he admitted that he’d never actually shot anyone before. ‘Stop or I’ll shoot you’ is not a very effective strategy for policing, especially in 2024…
 

and yes we’ve always known Maroun is Lebanese.