S24.E16 Folk Hero

[Xeliou66]

Episode description 

When a murder suspect becomes an underground hero, Brady seeks help from a former colleague to track down a culprit who seems to be in multiple locations; Baxter, Price and Maroun disagree on the best way forward when public interest heightens. 

[dubbel zout]

Laila Robins! One of Jack's former assistants and paramours. She once had a nicely barbed scene with Claire where she pitied Claire for her feelings for Jack.

I laughed out loud when Nolan thought the case was a slam dunk. Pride goeth before a fall, especially for Manhattan ADAs.

I thought the defense was an interesting application of the law, but then the show wrecked it by having a way-too-biased judge. 

I like how Baxter always has Nolan's back, even when he thinks Nolan has been an idealistic dumbass.

Edited Friday at 01:05 AM by dubbel zout

[marc20]

Laila, and the transvestite killer as the defense's main witness?

this was a huge episode for them...Wolf clearly wanted to get out ahead of an actual trial in real life and ended up doing something the show had never done before I believe, a Sopranos like ending

where is Mechad?

good action chase scene, have to admit

wanted a question answered for a while for our legal experts here...why, in the reboot, does the prosecution stand for the verdict with the defense?...used to be only the defense...has something changed in the justice system to require this, particularly in NYC?

Edited Friday at 01:43 AM by marc20

[Irlandesa]

I KNEW that's how they were going to end it. 

I thought this was a pretty good episode, though.  The judge was definitely biased but I don't know if I can think of a decision made that made me think "nope." 

I appreciated the nunaced debate between Maroun, Price and Baxter about how to prosecute the case.  This is an instance where it really made sense.  They don't want to encourage vigilantism by going easy on the perp but they are fighting against a strong "eat the rich" sentiment, especially when the damage is so obvious. There was prudence in arguing for a deal. 

I have to admit that when I saw Jesse Metcalf in the credits and then he appeared as a cop, I expected he had something to do with it.  Then I realized he was there to work with Reid. 

 

[marc20]

43 minutes ago, dubbel zout said:

Laila Robins! One of Jack's former assistants and paramours. She once had a nicely barbed scene with Claire where she pitied Claire for her feelings for Jack.

I laughed out loud when Nolan thought the case was a slam dunk. Pride goeth before a fall, especially for Manhattan ADAs.

I thought the defense was an interesting application of the law, but then the show wrecked it by having a way-too-biased judge. 

I like how Baxter always has Nolan's back, even when he thinks Nolan has been an idealistic dumbass.

yeah, the judge was ridiculous...McCoy would have ripped his head off and probably gotten a mistrial which he wanted

[Xeliou66]

Maybe the fastest “ripped from the headlines” case in L&O history, and for only the second time in Mothership history we didn’t learn the ending. Interesting, and it worked, and strange as it sounds I could see both sides of this case - not sure how much I want to say here given the real life situation, but I can see all sides - I abhor street justice and violence, but corporate greed is despicable, this fictional victim was a dirtbag, and the system is so biased in favor of corporate America that I understand the outrage. So I liked how they ended the episode, and I liked the discussion between Baxter/Price/Maroun about it, I like how the relationship between Nick and Nolan has evolved into a more trusting one. 
The biggest flaw of this episode was how biased the judge was, allowing witnesses to speculate and get on a soapbox. I couldn’t believe it took until the end to talk about trying to get a new judge and I would’ve liked more exploration of the pros and cons of asking the judge to recuse himself.

I missed Shaw and I wondered given how he missed a big part of last week as well what was going on, was Mehcad filming something else during this time? Nevertheless I liked the “ticking clock” first half, it was unique and pulled off well. 
I was curious about Riley’s first lines, I guess he’s reconciled with his wife, it’s been mentioned several times that he split with his wife a few years ago, but maybe they are giving it another chance, still kind of weird they mentioned it out of the blue, the same way they never explicitly mentioned Nick splitting with his wife until he had a new girlfriend last week. Kind of weird, but the personal stuff is minor and I was glad there was no personal connection this week. 

[MerBearHou]

Price was remarkably restrained with that biased judge.  I’m not an attorney but it blew me away how much the judge ruled IMO improperly when objections came up.  Grounds for appeal, I would think?  I get the “gotcha” uniqueness of the Sopranos ending, but I felt cheated.  I wanted the jury to rule on the side of the clear guilty evidence and law (murder is bad) and not be swayed by the defendant’s reasoning.  As a human, I feel terrible for the defendant and his fight for his mom when she was ill and the maddening health insurance industry, but no, I cannot find him “not guilty”.  

[buckboard]

A couple of points:
1) The prosecution arguing over the validity of insurance statistics and whether the mother would have lived rather than the evidence that the murder was pure revenge seemed like it was handing the verdict to the defense.
2) Also, the argument that killing the insurance executive saved lives is like saying the killing of abortion doctors is justified because that saves lives.  The prosecution never made that connection.
 

[Irlandesa]

37 minutes ago, MerBearHou said:

Grounds for appeal, I would think?

If the verdict is "not guilty," wouldn't jeopardy attach? And if it's guilty, then the defendant will have lost with things going his way.

I liked the ending only because it was so ripped from the headlines.  I would have taken a hung jury too with the decision.  They've done that in the past with the plan to refile but no follow-through. 

[MerBearHou]

35 minutes ago, Irlandesa said:

1 hour ago, MerBearHou said:

Grounds for appeal, I would think?

If the verdict is "not guilty," wouldn't jeopardy attach? And if it's guilty, then the defendant will have lost with things going his way.

You are quite right — and THAT is one of the many reasons I’m not fit to be an attorney :)

[Madding crowd]

The judge’s rulings were ridiculous. The defendant cannot say an experimental drug would have for sure saved his mother. If that was the case then the drug company CEO could also be responsible for not providing the drug for free or for a reasonable amount. The defense cannot prove that the killing of one person will save lives, the insurance company will not close because of the death of an executive nor will they change their policies. I have my own beefs with health insurance but what the defendant did won’t change a thing.

[marc20]

7 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

Maybe the fastest “ripped from the headlines” case in L&O history, and for only the second time in Mothership history we didn’t learn the ending. Interesting, and it worked, and strange as it sounds I could see both sides of this case - not sure how much I want to say here given the real life situation, but I can see all sides - I abhor street justice and violence, but corporate greed is despicable, this fictional victim was a dirtbag, and the system is so biased in favor of corporate America that I understand the outrage. So I liked how they ended the episode, and I liked the discussion between Baxter/Price/Maroun about it, I like how the relationship between Nick and Nolan has evolved into a more trusting one. 
The biggest flaw of this episode was how biased the judge was, allowing witnesses to speculate and get on a soapbox. I couldn’t believe it took until the end to talk about trying to get a new judge and I would’ve liked more exploration of the pros and cons of asking the judge to recuse himself.

I missed Shaw and I wondered given how he missed a big part of last week as well what was going on, was Mehcad filming something else during this time? Nevertheless I liked the “ticking clock” first half, it was unique and pulled off well. 
I was curious about Riley’s first lines, I guess he’s reconciled with his wife, it’s been mentioned several times that he split with his wife a few years ago, but maybe they are giving it another chance, still kind of weird they mentioned it out of the blue, the same way they never explicitly mentioned Nick splitting with his wife until he had a new girlfriend last week. Kind of weird, but the personal stuff is minor and I was glad there was no personal connection this week. 

what was the other episode where they didn't give a verdict or had the Sopranos finale-like ending?

and again, does anybody have an answer as to why in the reboot the prosecution also stands with the defense when the verdict is read but in the original only the defense stood?...thanks

[Xeliou66]

1 hour ago, marc20 said:

what was the other episode where they didn't give a verdict or had the Sopranos finale-like ending?

and again, does anybody have an answer as to why in the reboot the prosecution also stands with the defense when the verdict is read but in the original only the defense stood?...thanks

The other ending that wasn’t revealed was Vaya Con Dios from season 10 - we don’t know which way the Supreme Court ruled on the Chilean military leader that the DAs charged with murdering an American citizen. 

[Raja]

10 hours ago, marc20 said:

good action chase scene, have to admit

With Detective Yee taking over the analyst and drone operator detectives in 27 squad room FBI and Jubal immediately sprung to mind.

On Luke Cage a known community hero was being hunted by the NYPD and citizens dressed like him to spoof the police. That everyone knew he was bulletproof would make it unlikely cops trying to make an arrest would just start shooting an unarmed man. Here within minutes of a murder during a hunt for someone armed with a handgun we have yahoos betting their lives on the fire discipline of the cops with the only knowledge being the name and title of the victim, that was a big stretch.

[shapeshifter]

10 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

I KNEW that's how they were going to end it

I, OTOH, was eagerly waiting for the verdict, and when all we got was the Sopranos Ending, I burst out laughing.

 

9 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

Maybe the fastest “ripped from the headlines” case in L&O history

This! Which I guess explains the ending.

 

10 hours ago, marc20 said:

where is Mechad?

filming “Mortal Combat II” and “And Just Like That” (imdb.com/name/nm1419635)?

[zapper]

9 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

...  I would have taken a hung jury too with the decision.  ...

A hung jury would have also reflected how torn the issue was across demographics. The inability to come to consensus would have made sense without the easy snap to black non-reveal.  It's a complex issue still playing out in real life with a lot of strong feelings on both sides.

[dubbel zout]

9 hours ago, buckboard said:

2) Also, the argument that killing the insurance executive saved lives is like saying the killing of abortion doctors is justified because that saves lives.  The prosecution never made that connection.

Abortion is an issue that could sidetrack the case, and the prosecution didn't need more debate like that.

Can the prosecution appeal a verdict? If so, I'm surprised we never had an episode where this happened, especially pre-reboot.

4 hours ago, Madding crowd said:

The defendant cannot say an experimental drug would have for sure saved his mother.

What is "saving" anyway? What would her quality of life have been? She had metastatic breast cancer; her life expectancy likely wasn't going to be that long even with the experimental drug. I know these issues are outside the immediate scope of the case, but would the son want his mother to have another six months and be doped to the gills to counteract the side effects? I doubt it.

The author of that book was ridiculous. Giving people medication isn't a guarantee they won't die sooner rather than later, so for him to say that if the insurance company had approved those claims they'd have saved the same number of lives they'd supposedly kill by refusing the claims is ridiculous. I'm a bit surprised Nolan didn't dig a little deeper there.

And then there's the fact that the guy admitted on the stand that he killed the insurance guy and he was ready to face the consequences. Why was that not made a bigger deal of?

[Raja]

2 minutes ago, dubbel zout said:

Can the prosecution appeal a verdict? If so, I'm surprised we never had an episode where this happened, especially pre-reboot.

Appeal what error? We get the federal government stepping in to prosecute "federal crimes" that we wink wink say occurred concurrent to the crime people are acquitted of 

[shapeshifter]

It was odd that the episode flipped the background of the killer Ethan Weller, I guess to make him more sympathetic?

• [THE ACCUSED (ETHAN WELLER) ON THE STAND] My father died when I was two, so my mother raised me by herself. We didn't, you know, come from money or anything like that. She used to joke around a lot, telling me my inheritance was a good work ethic and a bad credit rating. But the truth is, it was really hard on her. A lot of people in her position would have just cracked. She found a way to make it happen. She worked two jobs, she sent me to good schools, made sure I had decent clothes. Nothing too fancy, but she sent me to summer camps.

Background of Luigi Mangione (from Wikipedia): 

Quote

Luigi Nicholas Mangione…The extended Mangione family owns Hayfields Country Club, Turf Valley Resort, Lorien Health Services, the WCBM radio station, and the Mangione Family Foundation…

Mangione attended Gilman School, an all-boys private secondary school in Baltimore, where he graduated as valedictorian in 2016.[24] In 2020, Mangione graduated cum laude from the University of Pennsylvania. He received a Bachelor of Science in Engineering (BSE) in computer engineering and a Master of Science in Engineering (MSE) in computer and information science.[25][26] His undergraduate studies included a minor in mathematics, and his graduate curriculum was concentrated in artificial intelligence.[27]…

The real life killer had unresolved physical and medical issues, but it doesn't seem that health care costs were an issue: wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Mangione#Personal_life

Oh well. I can't fault the writers for not sticking to the real-life case since that's not what they were presenting.
It's just interesting to me to note the differences.

[preeya]

6 hours ago, Raja said:

With Detective Yee taking over the analyst and drone operator detectives in 27 squad room FBI and Jubal immediately sprung to mind.

My thought, exactly.

[marny]

5 hours ago, dubbel zout said:

Can the prosecution appeal a verdict? If so, I'm surprised we never had an episode where this happened, especially pre-reboot.

No, they cannot. They can appeal pre-trial evidentiary rulings and they can appeal a sentence, but not a verdict.

The fact that Nolan seemed so baffled that people could side with fake-Luigi is the most unrealistic thing I've ever seen. Is he a robot who powers down when he isn't at work and thus doesn't know anything about the world? They need to write his character with some kind of actual thought process than just "Meep morp, must prosecute criminal." Jack McCoy did his job, but also recognized that not every criminal and not every crime is created equal. Discretion exists for a reason-- sometimes you use it because the facts call for it, sometimes you use it because you recognize you may have an uphill battle.

[Irlandesa]

7 hours ago, dubbel zout said:

Can the prosecution appeal a verdict? If so, I'm surprised we never had an episode where this happened, especially pre-reboot.

They can't except there have been episodes where they tried due to corruption of a jury or judge by a defendant or defendant-adjacent. Jeopardy in Season 6 was one of those episodes where the wealthy mom of a killer got the judge presiding over her son's case a favorable loan.

Edited Friday at 10:18 PM by Irlandesa

[shapeshifter]

1 hour ago, marny said:

No, they cannot. They can appeal pre-trial evidentiary rulings and they can appeal a sentence, but not a verdict.

The fact that Nolan seemed so baffled that people could side with fake-Luigi is the most unrealistic thing I've ever seen. Is he a robot who powers down when he isn't at work and thus doesn't know anything about the world? They need to write his character with some kind of actual thought process than just "Meep morp, must prosecute criminal." Jack McCoy did his job, but also recognized that not every criminal and not every crime is created equal. Discretion exists for a reason-- sometimes you use it because the facts call for it, sometimes you use it because you recognize you may have an uphill battle.

I think we were supposed to conclude that if the defense attorney had done her opening statement at the beginning, Nolan would have seen how the jury was sympathizing with the defendant and offered the plea early. 
But, yeah, instead it seemed Nolan never reads the news or sees social media. Sheesh, I was taught that was part of my job in Library School.

[Xeliou66]

3 minutes ago, Irlandesa said:

They can't even except there have been episodes where they tried due to corruption of a jury or judge by a defendant or defendant-adjacent. Jeopardy in Season 6 was one of those episodes where the wealthy mom of a killer got the judge presiding over her son's case a favorable loan.

Yeah a situation where a judge has been bribed is the only way the prosecution can get around double jeopardy, and it’s also worth noting that in that episode the bribed judge tossed the case, he didn’t even let the jury decide - as Jack noted at the end of the episode, jeopardy never attached because the defendant was never in jeopardy, the judge was bribed and the process was corrupted. 

[shapeshifter]

On 3/21/2025 at 5:40 PM, Xeliou66 said:

Yeah a situation where a judge has been bribed is the only way the prosecution can get around double jeopardy,

I seem to recall L&O and maybe other shows where the main characters "good guys" discuss taking down an evil judge (murderer, abuser, on-the-take, etc.) and the Lieutenant or District Attorney or even the Bad Guy points out that if they do that, all the cases tried under the Bad Judge will be "revisited." 

Elsbeth's current multi-part arc involves taking down a bad judge. 
But in that instance, the goal is (IIRC?) to get at least most of the past cases overturned.

Edited Sunday at 05:29 AM by shapeshifter

[Irlandesa]

NM.  Not sure Im right and it's too OT for me to be wrong.

Edited Saturday at 12:27 AM by Irlandesa

[storyskip]

This was an interesting episode from the production standpoint. I enjoyed getting to see the 2-7 working with uniforms to get the perp.

I think Nolan uses the law as his loadstone when a case is morally grey. I don’t think he expected the judge to allow as much speculation and “paint the victim as a murderer” as the judge did. Nolan played from the rule book he believes in, but the big question is, does that rule book even apply anymore.

I think the defense attorney waiting until after the People rested was a big factor in shutting down the argument Nolan should have taken: Killing Andrew doesn’t stop the “business model” from continuing to “kill” people through denial of claim. The corporations will simply hire a new Andrews to keep the business model chugging. The “Weller was saving all the lives by killing Andrews” defense would have encountered more headwind if Nolan had been prepared to show that Andrews was just a cog. Oh, this cog broke? Just put in a new cog and keep on going. 

[Diana Berry]

I looked at the end again. The foreperson looks like she is going to say guilty.  I don’t see her forming the word not. 

.

[shapeshifter]

24 minutes ago, Diana Berry said:

I looked at the end again. The foreperson looks like she is going to say guilty.  I don’t see her forming the word not. 

I saw that too.
Maybe they edited out?

[Irlandesa]

1 hour ago, Diana Berry said:

I looked at the end again. The foreperson looks like she is going to say guilty.  I don’t see her forming the word not. 

.

I only watched it once and I thought she was going to start her next word with an "n." 

They probably filmed both versions and left it to the editors to choose.

[zapper]

still say hung jury would have been more powerful.

[preeya]

17 hours ago, zapper said:

still say hung jury would have been more powerful.

I thought that would have been the verdict, with a do-over in an upcoming episode.

[txhorns79]

On 3/20/2025 at 9:00 PM, dubbel zout said:

Laila Robins! One of Jack's former assistants and paramours. She once had a nicely barbed scene with Claire where she pitied Claire for her feelings for Jack.

"You are sleeping with him, aren't you?"  That was followed by Claire's stunned silence.  It was the line that caused a million fans to all scream at the same time!

On 3/21/2025 at 4:09 PM, marny said:

The fact that Nolan seemed so baffled that people could side with fake-Luigi is the most unrealistic thing I've ever seen. Is he a robot who powers down when he isn't at work and thus doesn't know anything about the world?

I understand they can't just have everyone in the DA's office agree on such a hot and loaded topic, but Hugh Dancy seems to struggle at times to make his line readings work.  Sometimes, it feels like Nolan is about to burst into tears, other times he acts completely clueless about how his case is playing.    

[MediaZone4K]

On 3/21/2025 at 6:24 AM, marc20 said:

what was the other episode where they didn't give a verdict or had the Sopranos finale-like ending?

and again, does anybody have an answer as to why in the reboot the prosecution also stands with the defense when the verdict is read but in the original only the defense stood?...thanks

On 3/21/2025 at 7:59 AM, Xeliou66 said:

The other ending that wasn’t revealed was Vaya Con Dios from season 10 - we don’t know which way the Supreme Court ruled on the Chilean military leader that the DAs charged with murdering an American citizen. 

Just about to say that! That 2000 episode was a very anti-climactic ending to Steven Hill's time as DA Adam Schiff.

Also, there was no good explanation as to why actor Mechad Brooks was absent. Someone on the Internet claimed budget cuts.

This was a pretty good episode. Love ripped from the headline cases as they keep L&O relevant.

Chase sequence was cool. Wise to end without a verdict to avoid giving Luigi's fate before a trial occurs. I would've gone for a hung jury, or mistrial due to the biased judge

I get why ADA Price didn't to cut a plea deal initially, it would look weak and encourage vigilantism. 

This is one of the few episodes where Marouns' SJW analysis was welcome. The CEO is not an innocent man, he's part of a soulless corporate structure that puts profits over people. His denial of claims helped kill thousands. The ignorance from the other CEOs who came to visit the DA perfectly exemplified that. Of the prosecutorial DA's office has the duty to put a man away for killing someone. Price's failure to grasp that is baffling.

I also agree with Price that Baxter is too concerned with politics and optics, over actually trying the facts of the case sometimes, but I did appreciate that Baxter let Price do his thing.

Regarding Luigi, murder is wrong but so is denying people healthcare that they pay for in order to maximize corporate profits, so that a select few executives can live in a bigger house.

 

Edited Sunday at 11:30 AM by MediaZone4K

[shapeshifter]

40 minutes ago, MediaZone4K said:

Also, there was no good explanation as to why actor Mechad Brooks was absent. Someone on the Internet claimed budget cuts.

Just in case others missed this upthread but are still reading this thread, Mechad Brooks was:

On 3/21/2025 at 8:53 AM, shapeshifter said:

filming “Mortal Combat II” and “And Just Like That” (imdb.com/name/nm1419635)

In-story, they said he was sick, and tied it into the plot a bit, which is more than writers typically acknowledge.

 

[MediaZone4K]

18 minutes ago, shapeshifter said:

Just in case others missed this upthread but are still reading this thread, Mechad Brooks was:

In-story, they said he was sick, and tied it into the plot a bit, which is more than writers typically acknowledge.

 

thanks! The NBC article which acknowledged that he was missing could've simply stated he was filming another project. Instead they take forever getting into their explanation, and just say that the character is sick, making it seem like a storyline dictated exit.

[marc20]

alert: no new show next week...Suits is on NBC

p.s. did anybody have trouble logging on Saturday?...my computer said it wasn't secure

[Raja]

11 minutes ago, MediaZone4K said:

thanks! The NBC article which acknowledged that he was missing could've simply stated he was filming another project. Instead they take forever getting into their explanation, and just say that the character is sick, making it seem like a storyline dictated exit.

Since changing from newspapers to websites editors no longer get to the point but rather put the point last so you have to go by their ads

[shapeshifter]

13 minutes ago, marc20 said:

p.s. did anybody have trouble logging on Saturday?...my computer said it wasn't secure

I guess this wasn’t posted as a banner at the top of the forums because folks who can’t log in can’t see the banner, and some still have issues:
https://forums.primetimer.com/topic/152528-unsecure-website-or-site-cant-be-reached-issues/#findComment-8614171

 

[KittyKat425]

50 minutes ago, marc20 said:

alert: no new show next week...Suits is on NBC

p.s. did anybody have trouble logging on Saturday?...my computer said it wasn't secure

Yes, I got the same message, it was fine the next day.

1 hour ago, MediaZone4K said:

Just about to say that! That 2000 episode was a very anti-climactic ending to Steven Hill's time as DA Adam Schiff.

Also, there was no good explanation as to why actor Mechad Brooks was absent. Someone on the Internet claimed budget cuts.

This was a pretty good episode. Love ripped from the headline cases as they keep L&O relevant.

Chase sequence was cool. Wise to end without a verdict to avoid giving Luigi's fate before a trial occurs. I would've gone for a hung jury, or mistrial due to the biased judge

I get why ADA Price didn't to cut a plea deal initially, it would look weak and encourage vigilantism. 

This is one of the few episodes where Marouns' SJW analysis was welcome. The CEO is not an innocent man, he's part of a soulless corporate structure that puts profits over people. His denial of claims helped kill thousands. The ignorance from the other CEOs who came to visit the DA perfectly exemplified that. Of the prosecutorial DA's office has the duty to put a man away for killing someone. Price's failure to grasp that is baffling.

I also agree with Price that Baxter is too concerned with politics and optics, over actually trying the facts of the case sometimes, but I did appreciate that Baxter let Price do his thing.

Regarding Luigi, murder is wrong but so is denying people healthcare that they pay for in order to maximize corporate profits, so that a select few executives can live in a bigger house.

 

Yes, denying people health care they are entitled to is wrong but murder is against the law. I want the believe that a jury would understand that regardless of the defendants sad story and the ignorance of the healthcare system.

[ML89]

I was expecting this starting about a hour after the event was reported. Cop side was quite well done - the drones and the cameras, Detective Yee calling the shots, very effective.

But the law side…Nolan was a disaster. Finally, he gets all the pieces handed to him, so he is not going to back down. You’d think, after all these eps of everyone’s personal drama, Nolan’s dad would have figured into this somehow.  

Riley mentions Shaw waiting in the ER for 11 hours and Brady says “that’s the game” - perfect ER vet response.

But I hated that non-ending.

 

Edited Monday at 01:01 PM by ML89

[shapeshifter]

2 hours ago, ML89 said:

You’d think, after all these eps of everyone’s personal drama, Nolan’s dad would have figured into this somehow.  

Confession: This made me laugh.
I rarely laugh at intended humor.
I guess I have a mean streak after all.

[Joimiaroxeu]

Well, that actor was no Luigi. He looked to me like a preppy naif, not an unfortunate sex symbol. /shallow

Even with a black-out ending before the fictional jury's verdict was read, I think Dick Wolf pretty much forced the IRL prosecution to seek to move the Luigi case out of Manhattan. Wolf maybe should've waited until next season for this episode.

This episode seemed a bit more ripped from reddit than from the headlines. I recognized many of the same reddit comments being made by various characters in the episode.

On 3/23/2025 at 5:48 AM, Raja said:

Since changing from newspapers to websites editors no longer get to the point but rather put the point last so you have to go by their ads

Yeah, I've noticed that and it's my theory it happens because more online news articles are being written by AI. Maybe the news providers can pay less in salary costs but AI isn't free or cheap.

[dubbel zout]

11 minutes ago, Joimiaroxeu said:

I think Dick Wolf pretty much forced the IRL prosecution to seek to move the Luigi case out of Manhattan.

L&O doesn't have that kind of influence. The attention was immense from the the start, and there were jurisdictional issues from the moment Mangione was arrested in Pennsylvania.

[Joimiaroxeu]

7 minutes ago, dubbel zout said:

L&O doesn't have that kind of influence. The attention was immense from the the start, and there were jurisdictional issues from the moment Mangione was arrested in Pennsylvania.

I was being somewhere between hyperbolic and sarcastic about Dick Wolf. And I wasn't suggesting there'd be jurisdictional issues on where the case should be prosecuted.

What I do think is that this episode could influence the potential jury pool, even with certain key differences between the fictional case and the IRL one. L&O could've waited to present this episode next season so I wonder what the rush was.

[Raja]

11 minutes ago, Joimiaroxeu said:

I was being somewhere between hyperbolic and sarcastic about Dick Wolf. And I wasn't suggesting there'd be jurisdictional issues on where the case should be prosecuted.

What I do think is that this episode could influence the potential jury pool, even with certain key differences between the fictional case and the IRL one. L&O could've waited to present this episode next season so I wonder what the rush was.

Is there another DA going or proposed show that could have beaten L&O to air?

[shapeshifter]

50 minutes ago, Joimiaroxeu said:

L&O could've waited to present this episode next season so I wonder what the rush was.

I suppose the "rush" to cover the not-yet-come-to-trial Insurance CEO murder case was audience attention grab, which I suppose equals "ratings" with the accompanying advertiser buy-in?
As streamers have multiplied, there's a lot of competition.

Basically: FOMO on the part of the networks, streamers, and everyone involved?

I don't know if things work that way these days, but with streamers (Peacock for this show) relying more on ads, it seems everything that was old may be more or less new again, but with a much shorter time span to catch viewer attention due to the glut of content echoing viewer interests, especially unscripted content in apps (TikTok, Reddit, etc.).

And the FOMO in the zeitgeist probably triggers writers to offer spec scripts within hours of TMZ spilling the tea.

Edited Monday at 04:22 PM by shapeshifter

[txhorns79]

5 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

I suppose the "rush" to cover the not-yet-come-to-trial Insurance CEO murder case was audience attention grab, which I suppose equals "ratings" with the accompanying advertiser buy-in?

I'm sure it's a ratings thing.  L&O has been doing the ripped from the headlines storylines since the beginning.  Who can forget the first season where Cynthia Nixon was a female Bernie Goetz? 

 

19 hours ago, ML89 said:

But the law side…Nolan was a disaster. Finally, he gets all the pieces handed to him, so he is not going to back down. You’d think, after all these eps of everyone’s personal drama, Nolan’s dad would have figured into this somehow.  

I'll defend Nolan a little, if only because the Judge in the case made such absurd rulings and stacked the deck so heavily for the defendant.

[Zaffy]

Interesting case and debate but poor execution.

I am sick and tired almost all judges act just  to accommodate the writers' needs.
It has become ridiculous and frustrating.

I think the most possible outcome should be a hung jury, exactly because the health insurance topic is very divisive. 

Legally, what the guy did was a crime. But public opinion is a part of justice, right? 

Edited 21 hours ago by Zaffy

[Tachi Rocinante]

Very weak episode. The writers have no clue how health insurance works - most of it was anecdotal bullshit.