S16.E21: Perverted Justice

[WendyCR72]

A woman wants to recant her testimony in an incest case from when she was a child and free her father from prison, but the judge won't reopen the case. The squad then turn to retired Capt. Cragen, whose memories of the investigation may help.

 

 

[Primetimer]

Cragen pitches in on a reopened case whose 'victim' wants to recant her accusations...again.

Read the story

[Hero]

How awesome was Andre Braugher in this episode? I would love if he was a regular.

Carisi's hair looked really good and he was super sexy tonight.

So, did the father rape her or not? I really don't like ambiguous endings, but I thought that this episode was good.

[Spartan Girl]

Well that ending was unsettling.

At least it was good to see Cragen. And I had to laugh at Baynard's "You're new here, aren't you?" to Carisi.

Edited May 7, 2015 by Spartan Girl

[MrsRafaelBarba]

Judging from her look at Benson in the last scene, I think he did.

That OITNB actress, very pretty young woman.

[william0102]

I thought he was guilty the entire time.
 

The dad was so silently angry and the daughter acted way distraught/clingy right up until her testimony. Plus they kept asking her about "that night", never about any other time. I'm still not sure about the whole semen in the underwear thing since they didn't really explain it. Was there really any? The dad kept saying it was planted, then said during his testimony that there wasn't any. Too unclear on that point.

 

I believe he wrote her to try to get her to take it back, make her think it wasn't true. I think we're supposed to believe that after her bad childhood that the fact that he kept writing her let her believe that her mother had made her lie. Her mother was/is a alcoholic and an addict, and that was eventually what the daughter turned to, so it's not too hard to believe that she would see her mother as a bad example and want to distance herself. The daughter could even believe that she can't remember what actually happened because of the drugs. Or be so grateful that her dad still loves her, despite her addictions, that she was willing to believe that it had been a lie.

Edited May 7, 2015 by william0102

[Malbec]

Nice to see the show is still capable of producing really solid, personal-nonsense-free episodes.  Cragen brought a breeze of sanity with him, it seems.  I loved seeing him and Amaro double-cross the original detective.  Andre Braugher was wonderful as always, and Carisi's buttkissing was amusing.

 

It was a kick seeing Robert Sean Leonard play the prosecutor -- and I really like that he didn't play the guy as a 100% evil douchebag.  It's more powerful to have a mistaken conviction come from someone who seems to genuinely think he was putting away a pedophile.  In a way, he seemed like a looking-glass version of Barba, reflecting the relentless drive toward a conviction that normally we'd all be cheering on.  (Or was he right all along??? The ambiguity at the end was some classic SVU.)

[RafaelBarbas]

I loved everyone realizing what a joke Carisi is.

 

I wish Barba could have been in this episode- fans have been wanting Barba vs Ellis for years.

[mtmjr]

I thought this was an awesome, classic SVU episode.  It seems like every episode in which Andre Braugher's character features is great (that Mike Tyson one, even though it was so controversial for obvious reasons, I though was one of the best they've ever done).

 

The ambiguity of the ending was not at all what I expected, but made perfect sense.  I still think that the father was innocent.  To me, the relationship of the mother and the detective, the confession to the schoolteacher, and the subsequent attempt to recant as a teenager, all pointed solidly to the story being made up.  But obviously the poor young woman was very, very suggestible.  Basically, she grew up a "people pleaser," and this was the result of her trying to please people with diametrically opposed agendas.  And seriously, who the hell remembers, at the age of 23, exactly what happened when you were 6?  All memory by then is going to be so filtered through subsequent experience that they were asking the girl, and she was asking herself, to literally do the impossible.

 

This kind of episode is why I first fell in love with this show, and continue to watch.  It takes a scenario that could be painted in stark terms of black and white, and unexpectedly ends up all grey.  I would vote it the best episode of the season, but for the lack of Barba ;)  Also, how great to see multiple scenes played out with all or mostly non-white actors.  

Edited May 7, 2015 by mtmjr

[MrsRafaelBarba]

This one reminds me of the episode Doubt, when a female student accused a Professor

of rape. Billy Campbell and Shannyn Sossamon.

Edited May 7, 2015 by MrsRafaelBarba

[CleoCaesar]

Really tense and involving episode. Good stuff, SVU. I was never a big fan of Cragen but it was nice to see him back for a bit.

 

I also thought about the "Doubt" episode. The unresolved endings are so unsettling.

 

The daughter really was incredibly suggestible. In the end, even she doesn't know what really happened and she's probably not ever going to have a relationship with the dad she'd spent years idolizing and apologizing to.

 

Pros for He Did Rape Her: the semen comments that were never really resolved; the bruising on the girl's thighs; the hand injury wasn't noted by the doctors.
Pros for He Didn't Rape Her: the girl seemed utterly convinced the whole episode (except for the end) that she remembered lying and being coached; the schoolteacher's letter.

 

Judging from her look at Benson in the last scene, I think he did.

 

I read her look as a "shit what have I done? I have no idea if he's guilty or not".

[mtmjr]

 

I read her look as a "shit what have I done? I have no idea if he's guilty or not"

 

Oh absolutely, me too.  She was starting to come to terms with the horrible fluidity of her memory, and just how suggestible she still was.  In the end, I think the young woman (whose name escapes me) was the SVU victim here, which Liv realized.  She was placed in an unfair, untenable position 17 years ago, and has been living with the consequences ever since.  At least when SVU deals with young victims, they have some training in how to interview them so this kind of un-resovable ambiguity is less likely to happen.  This girl had no chance 17 years ago and it undoubtedly will affect her the rest of her life.

[shapeshifter]

...Pros for He Did Rape Her: the semen comments that were never really resolved; the bruising on the girl's thighs; the hand injury wasn't noted by the doctors...

I understood it that there was no semen, but that because the father said that the semen was planted, they surmised that he thought his semen could have been present on her--which seemed like a stretch to me. The burn might not have been visible the next morning. A burn on a finger tip can hurt like hell for a number of hours and then go away if ice is applied--I don't know about if ice is not used, but still, it could have been overlooked if it was small. Bruising on the thighs was the real red flag for me. Olivia and Braugher's character acted like they'd never read the doctor's report--what was up with that? Maybe the Florida detective was molesting the daughter?

http://previously.tv/law-and-order-svu/if-memory-serves-seventeen-years/

Amaro, formerly Scotty Valens of Cold Case: "This is why I don't like reopening cases." Hee.

Hee hee!

[CleoCaesar]

One other thing that no one mentioned was how the little girl referred to male genitalia as a "pee pee" but the mother testified (I think) that the girl said clinical words like "penis" and "vagina". The more adult words might indicate coaching. No one even brought this up during either trial.

[mtmjr]

Oh yeah, I forgot that.  That odd use of clinical terms was a red flag for me that her story as a child was made up/

[Maximum Taco]

I understood it that there was no semen, but that because the father said that the semen was planted, they surmised that he thought his semen could have been present on her--which seemed like a stretch to me.

 

I thought it was just lawyering. 

 

Since he was trying to explain away the semen stains, that's the same as admitting there were semen stains. Even if the investigation turns up none, the prosecutor can still bring up his confession in which he admitted to there being semen stains, and then he can undermine the explanation, without bringing up the fact that there was no semen.

 

e.g.

 

DA: In your interview with the police you claim your semen was planted on your daughter's clothes didn't you?

Defendant: But-

DA: Yes or no please. Did you claim your wife planted semen on your daughters clothes in an attempt to frame you?

Defendant: Yes but--

DA: Thank you. Now you also say that she hadn't been home in days. How could she have possibly done this? She clearly couldn't have! Did she really plant your semen on the clothes or is that a lie?! Yes or no!?

Defendant: It-

DA: Yes or no sir!

Defendant: Yes but-

DA: Of course it's a lie! You lied about the semen, and you lied about the rape, and now you're just trying to cover your own tracks aren't you!?

Defendant: NO!

DA: No further questions.

 

It would be up to the defense to clear up matters. But it seemed like his defense attorney was not only in the DA's pocket but she also thought he was guilty.

Edited May 7, 2015 by Maximum Taco

[shapeshifter]

One other thing that no one mentioned was how the little girl referred to male genitalia as a "pee pee" but the mother testified (I think) that the girl said clinical words like "penis" and "vagina". The more adult words might indicate coaching. No one even brought this up during either trial.

I thought it was the opposite--that the mother said the little girl had said, "pee pee," but that when the prosecutor had the adult daughter read her own words from 17 years ago she had used the clinical words--which struck me as a disconnect/red flag too. Either way, it was inconsistent, which I think is the point. The child had been at least coached, if not told to lie. I think the point was more that the "truth" would never be a certainty in this case, that:

...In the end, I think the young woman (whose name escapes me) was the SVU victim here, which Liv realized. She was placed in an unfair, untenable position 17 years ago, and has been living with the consequences ever since. At least when SVU deals with young victims, they have some training in how to interview them so this kind of un-resovable ambiguity is less likely to happen. This girl had no chance 17 years ago and it undoubtedly will affect her the rest of her life.

Edited May 7, 2015 by shapeshifter

[wknt3]

The Good:

 

The guest stars. Andre Braugher, Robert Sean Leonard and Dann Florek? Wow. And the rest of the guest cast was good/great too.

A solid plot that really felt like old school SVU with no unnecessary personal involvement from the squad or heavy handed thematic links pounded home.

They got the mandatory Noah scene out of the way early and focused on the case.

Nice to see the nods to continuity and history. It's too bad that Exiled screwed things up though, How great would it have been if they cut from Cragen talking about his source the "lifer" to him and Profaci in a diner?

 

The Bad:

 

No Finn.

No Barba.

The Carisi dialogue could have really used another draft. Unless they're setting up his tragic next season plot where he's developed some sort of early onset dementia it was overdone and moving in the wrong direction. He's supposed to be a bit naive and enthusiastic, not a complete idiot right? It kept coming off like he had no experience with the realities of the criminal justice system at all. I know this show has only recently rediscovered subtlety and realism, but they could have done better.

They were investigating an old case and bringing back characters and they didn't give us some DA Investigator Munch?

 

This was a really good episode. They've been on a pretty good run lately. Unless they really go off the rails next week I think this will definitely be the best season in a while.

Edited May 7, 2015 by wknt3

[Princess Lucky]

Really good episode. I agree with most of the comments here; the episode did remind me of the good old times. I especially liked that the ambiguity wasn't a gimmick. Even in 'Doubt' (which was a fantastic episode) the ambiguity existed because someone was lying. In this episode, the ambiguity was the very basis of the case. The victim herself was unsure, which, considering the circumstances, makes perfect sense. And I also liked that the element of memories (and their accuracy) was introduced. This wasn't a ham-fisted approach, this was actually almost subtle.

I read her look as a "shit what have I done? I have no idea if he's guilty or not".

Exactly. And I loved that moment.

I do also agree that this season has been surprisingly solid. Definitely an "SVU later years" highlight.

All the guest stars were fantastic. Andre Braugher is flawless, Robert Sean Leonard really nailed the ambiguity of his own character, and both Samira Wiley and Glenn Plummer handled some tough moments really well. A very well acted episode all-around. And it was fun seeing Cragen again. Aw.

Ok, so, when did Carisi become my favourite character? I can't pinpoint the moment, but it happened. I love that there's been so much of him this season; I can't remember the last time there was a Carisi-free episode. And I also think the best episodes of the season have been the ones with a lot of Carisi (this week, the Carisi-centric, the one with Marcia Cross and the Slenderman episode, to name a few). Coincidence? Not in my book.

In this episode, even though there were the moments where Carisi was too eager and too over the top, and even though it seemed that people were dissing him left and right, I actually thought he seemed more at home. Rollins and Benson sassing him was, I thought, cute (not to mention, he started it with Benson, and he totally laughed at Rollins' joke). More playful ribbing, less "get this guy out of here". And he was at the christening, too, which, by the way, I forgot to mention above and was adorable.

I also thought Ellis was nice to Carisi; it was really fun to see Carisi being a total fanboy, and there were the standard Carisi Awkward Moments, but overall I thought the difference between the way Ellis treated him and the way Barba treats him was pretty stark. Because Ellis is a kinder character. Just because Carisi (or, let's face it, the writers) needs to tone it down several notches, it doesn't mean he is, or should be treated as, an idiot.

And I don't know how to feel about all the Carisi dissing, by the way; on one hand, it's still hilarious. On the other hand, it's getting too repetitive and I agree with the recap; let it go, already. I do think that ultimately it has made me like Carisi more, though (and it has also made me like the others a little less, on occasion). It's made him more of an underdog. Maybe that's the point? Usually a new character is introduced and is all Awesome!!!1!, which can backfire with the audience. Carisi has been introduced in a very different way, and the audience seems to love him.

Lastly, Carisi's hair looked pretty fabulous. I had to say it.

Edited May 7, 2015 by Princess Lucky

[abbottrabbit]

 

They were investigating an old case and bringing back characters and they didn't give us some DA Investigator Munch?

 

I was also disappointed that whatever "lifer" at the 27 Cragen went to talk to stayed off screen. I know it's been forever since Cragen was there, and most of the detectives he worked with have been shown on screen as having retired and/or died. But don't tease me with that possibility if you're not going to follow through. 

[DesertCyclist]

Peter Scanavino discusses his character Carisi (both in this specific episode and in general) in this video.  He's aware of how his character comes across, and he's very appreciative of his fans.  What a great smile!

[wisteria]

That OITNB actress, very pretty young woman.

 

Indeed. Samira Wiley is turning into a hell of an actor. A role like this is really difficult, since she has to sell the uncertainty without coming across as capricious or dim.

 

 

And yeah, it was a great week for guest stars, especially those from OITNB.  I got a kick out of seeing icky Caputo as another (slightly less icky) law enforcement officer.

[Hero]

Really good episode. I agree with most of the comment here; the episode did remind me of the good old times. I especially liked that the ambiguity wasn't a gimmick. Even in 'Doubt' (which was a fantastic episode) the ambiguity existed because someone was lying. In this episode, the ambiguity was the very basis of the case. The victim herself was unsure, which, considering the circumstances, makes perfect sense. And I also liked that the element of memories (and their accuracy) was introduced. This wasn't a ham-fisted approach, this was actually almost subtle.

Exactly. And I loved that moment.

I do also agree that this season has been surprisingly solid. Definitely a "SVU later years" highlight.

All the guest stars were fantastic. Andre Braugher is flawless, Robert Sean Leonard really nailed the ambiguity of his own character, and both Samira Wiley and Glenn Plummer handled some tough moments really well. A very well acted episode all-around. And it was fun seeing Cragen again. Aw.

Ok, so, when did Carisi become my favourite character? I can't pinpoint the moment, but it happened. I love that there's been so much of him this season; I can't remember the last time there was a Carisi-free episode. And I also think the best episodes of the season have been the ones with a lot of Carisi (this week, the Carisi-centric, the one with Marcia Cross and the Slenderman episode, to name a few). Coincidence? Not in my book.

In this episode, even though there were the moments where Carisi was too eager and too over the top, and even though it seemed that people were dissing him left and right, I actually thought he seemed more at home. Rollins and Benson sassing him was, I thought, cute (not to mention, he started it with Benson, and he totally laughed at Rollins' joke). More playful ribbing, less "get this guy out of here". And he was at the christening, too, which, by the way, I forgot to mention above and was adorable.

I also thought Ellis was nice to Carisi; it was really fun to see Carisi being a total fanboy, and there were the standard Carisi Awkward Moments, but overall I thought the difference between the way Ellis treated him and the way Barba treats him was pretty stark. Because Ellis is a kinder character. Just because Carisi (or, let's face it, the writers) needs to tone it down several notches, it doesn't mean he is, or should be treated as, an idiot.

And I don't know how to feel about all the Carisi dissing, by the way; on one hand, it's still hilarious. On the other hand, it's getting too repetitive and I agree with the recap; let it go, already. I do think that ultimately it has made me like Carisi more, though (and it has also made me like the others a little less, on occasion). It's made him more of an underdog. Maybe that's the point? Usually a new character is introduced and is all Awesome!!!1!, which can backfire with the audience. Carisi has been introduced in a very different way, and the audience seems to love him.

Lastly, Carisi's hair looked pretty fabulous. I had to say it.

I totally agree with everything you say. The poking fun at Carisi is getting pretty old and kind of irritating. I don't remember Rollins or Amaro being treated like this when they introduced them. Hopefully it stops next season.

And, Carisi's hair looked amazing. I like this style than the slicked back one he has worn.

[Princess Lucky]

Peter Scanavino discusses his character Carisi (both in this specific episode and in general) in this video. He's aware of how his character comes across, and he's very appreciative of his fans. What a great smile!

Awwwww. He's even more adorable in real life.

Thanks for the link!

It's weird to hear him without the accent, like, pronouncing his r's and everything. And I agree, I like that he's aware of Carisi's over-eagerness and how it can come off weird, but he accepts it as a character trait, not as a flaw. That's how I see it as well. Carisi is a bit much, but in an endearing way.

[Grundoon59]

Count me in as someone who would love to see a "lifer from the 27" on camera but it wouldn't have been Profaci since the Mike Logan returns movie from the mother ship made Profaci a bad guy - maybe even a killer but my memory is a bit hazy but definitely his police career was over. 

[MorbidPet]

I also agree that this was a good episode however I just can't with the show right now. I'm starting to fully grasp that they are really not going to even touch on the fact one of their own was raped & I find it actually offensive that a show that's supposed to be about special victims don't deal with it, like doesn't even acknowledge it, we haven't gotten a single second of what happened to Rollins since that episode. Like why even go there if they weren't going to use it? Like I don't expect much, just something that could show her dealing with it in some minor way. No instead they've devoted this entire season to Benoah drama & with the cast rotation this has been the worst season since SVU.02 started for me and if they don't somehow fix it next season this diehard had enough of this crap. Rollins won't even be in the next ep so I don't have to watch it and then there will be a finale with just Benoah drama & 

a probable shooting in the last frame

and that's it for crap season 16

They are basically telling survivors just go to a yoga retreat in Puerto Rico for 2 weeks and you're cured. You can go on about your business after that. This is not the SVU I've loved for many, many years. Sorry, rant over.

 

Seeing Cragen just reminded me how much I miss him and SVU.02. He ran a good squad and he cared for his men/women. I miss the compassion this show used to have.

[Hero]

Peter Scanavino discusses his character Carisi (both in this specific episode and in general) in this video.  He's aware of how his character comes across, and he's very appreciative of his fans.  What a great smile!

He's great! I love how he is aware of how Carisi may come off to the viewers and how, at least I think, what makes Carisi who he is.  Hopefully we will have Carisi many seasons to come. And he does have a great smile! Thanks for posting the video .

[oucellogal]

Now that you mention it, MorbidPet, you're absolutely right. They really have dropped the ball with Rollins. I don't know exactly what I expected, but I guess I thought we'd see SOME indication that it was still a part of her life; even something small like she's gambling again, or she's redoubled her efforts in that area because she knows she's at a weak point, or she's finally seeing the therapist, or she's actively NOT seeing the therapist because She Is Fine, but we've gotten NOTHING. Absolutely no indication that it even happened. And for something of that magnitude, you need to have some follow-up. I think any reaction on her part would be within the realm of believability, but the fact that there is absolutely NO reaction is not.

Edited May 7, 2015 by oucellogal

[Bananna]

A surprisingly good episode, I groaned a little at the beginning with the Benoah scene but thankfully it faded out. However, we have a whole episode of Benoah drama to look forward to soon - I can hardly wait. 

 

The ambiguity at the ending was good and felt genuine. I got the impression that he was innocent, but the whole thing seemed rather confused. Robert Sean Leonard was good in his ADA role and all the other actors were good enough that they distracted me from the fact that neither Fin or Barba were in this episode. 

[Badger]

It was good until that terrible ending which was nothing but propaganda for the idea that women never ever lie about rape.  They did the same thing with the show that was based on the UVA case.  Even though in real life it was obvious that the accuser lied, on the show, they made it seem as though she had told the truth.

[MyrtleGroggins]

Loved the episode for the most part (Andre Braugher is awesome!!), and in theory, I like an ambiguous ending.  However, in the specific case of What Happened That Evening In Question, the (probably coached) 6 year-old Michelle's testimony is that her father attempted intercourse with her (followed by digital penetration) and it "hurt a lot."  Yet, there is nothing presented from the doctor's testimony that would indicate vulvar/vaginal trauma, and THAT fact didn't ring true to me if she were assaulted that evening. If it had been digital penetration only, then I could see discomfort without overt signs of trauma, but there were no further mention of abnormalities found during the pelvic exam, and I find it difficult to believe that there would be no evidence found given the allegations as presented. ::climbs off medical soapbox::

 

Or maybe the doctor subscribed to the same "Let's be as awful at our jobs as humanly possible" newsletter that the father's original lawyer publishes.

 

I guess I would've found it a more plausible ambiguous ending (...that sounds weird) if it were fairly clear-cut that on THAT NIGHT, the father hadn't done anything, but perhaps he or some other party (the shady detective, perhaps?) had assaulted her, and she had difficulty remembering what exactly happened when.

 

I'm surprised that we didn't see testimony (or at least an evaluation) by a psychiatrist/psychologist, who might have shed light onto Michelle's memory, and whether some component of her waffling at the end was truly just her predilection for being a people-pleaser, or if she truly had doubts about the veracity of her story.  Also, bonus opportunity to see either B.D. Wong or J.K. Simmons!!

[The Wild Sow]

I'm going with believing that the dad was innocent, and here's why:  The fact that Michelle told her teacher, at the time the case was going on, that her mother was forcing her to LIE about her father.  Not, "making me talk about my father molesting me."  Not, "making me go to court."  "Making me LIE."

 

That's a very specific disclosure, to a non-involved adult, at the relevant time and long before her memory had time to fade with time and substance abuse..

 

I think her self-doubts at the end of the trial were more a result of the DA messing with her head & suggesting that she didn't "really" remember, than any actual self-doubt.  She had to admit (to the courtroom, and also probably for the first time to herself)  that she really didn't have a clear memory (because she was 6!)  Coupled with the phenomenon of false memories forming when one tells the same story over and over - either the molestation story OR the "Mom made me lie" story.

 

But she made a very clear statement to her teacher, shortly after the incident, that her Mom was forcing her to lie.  Michelle also mentioned being embarrassed throughout her life by people knowing, or thinking they knew, that her father had abused her.  She hated being the subject of gossip, or pity, or prurient curiosity, and wanted the story to go away.  Now I'm sure she felt that way, as a teen and as an adult.  But that's a fairly sophisticated viewpoint for a 6-year-old, even if she was aware of gossip, etc., at that age.  Doubtful that the other first-graders would be aware of the situation, and if adults were whispering about it and looking at her "funny" - well, as Benson said, kids pick up on a lot.  But a lot of "grownup business" also goes over their heads!  And making the story go away by telling the teacher that it was a lie (instead of, say, the judge & the lawyers!) would be an awfully convoluted way to go about it, at any age let alone 6.

 

One last bit of evidence that led me to conclude that Dad was set up was just the look on Mom's face when Bayard asked her "Oh, you just thought it up yourself then?"  Guilty as hell!

 

TheWildBoar, on the other hand, is absolutely certain that the cop boyfriend came up with the plan to get rid of Dad.

[ethalfrida]

I agree this episode was the best in a really long time. And Andre Braugher was his usual stellar self. Now if they had only not introduced Olivia as an adoptive mom. That story has no business in SVU. And she doesn't carry it well. All she does is stand and do do that shaky bounce thing with him. Poor child.

[shapeshifter]

I'm going with believing that the dad was innocent, and here's why:  The fact that Michelle told her teacher, at the time the case was going on, that her mother was forcing her to LIE about her father.  Not, "making me talk about my father molesting me."  Not, "making me go to court."  "Making me LIE."

 

That's a very specific disclosure, to a non-involved adult, at the relevant time and long before her memory had time to fade with time and substance abuse...

Good point. At least the writers didn't have the letter from the teacher turn out to be fabricated because the teacher and the dad were involved. Even if they had, I'd still agree that the point of the story was:

 

...I think her self-doubts at the end of the trial were more a result of the DA messing with her head & suggesting that she didn't "really" remember, than any actual self-doubt.  She had to admit (to the courtroom, and also probably for the first time to herself)  that she really didn't have a clear memory (because she was 6!)  Coupled with the phenomenon of false memories forming when one tells the same story over and over - either the molestation story OR the "Mom made me lie" story...

[shksabelle]

More Andre Braugher, please.  A LOT more!

[marceline]

When Ellis looked at Carisi and said, "So you're new here," for just a moment I saw Captain Raymond Holt of the Brooklyn 9-9.

[candall]

True story:  at the very beginning, I glanced up and thought, "Why are we looking at a picture of that kid from The Omen?"

 

I felt pretty strongly that the dad was innocent.  The daughter's whole messed up life was kind of a testament to that.  She "recanted" as a kid, to the teacher, then she recanted as a teen--and fell into drugs afterward as a result of that going nowhere.  Now she's sobered up and recanting again.

 

Plus, heh, you know, the mom and the cop boyfriend were slime versus the dad, who's spending his life behind bars teaching convicts to read.

 

She came across as fairly stable in the first part of the show, so I didn't find RSL's cross-examination nearly clever or shrewd enough to make her suddenly go "hummina hummina, hey maybe I DID get molested by Daddy!  Oh, who knows, I just can't remember."

 

I think the deal with the semen was that the cops just made it up in the first place, to trick him, and he looked suspicious because he came up with an explanation ("must've been planted") instead of saying that was impossible.  I could be wrong--the writing didn't make it very clear.

 

Bottom line, I was on low boil the whole time.  Please stop making rape victims the questionable party--the odds for justice are already stacked so far against them.

[atir]

When Noah was getting christened, did someone introduc him as "Noah Parker" or a similar name? It didn't sound like Benson.

[CleoCaesar]

The kid's name is Noah Porter. I don't think Olivia can change his name until the adoption has gone through.

[Snookums]

This one was haunting. It was really hard to figure out what happened. I kept waiting for the patented SVU twist--The DA and the detective are colluding! The mom was hiding the fact that the cop was the molester! The terrible lawyer was having an affair with the DA! One of the judges/jurors was bribed!

 

Instead, the show finally realized that the fireworks are unnecessary. Hire good actors and trust them, they'll balance on that high wire and have the audience holding its breath the whole time. The actress playing Michelle was amazing--such a good job playing a woman who's just starting to reassemble her life and can believe she's strong, weak, a liar, a truth sayer, at any given moment. The part where she tells Olivia that she really, truly can't remember what really happened? You realize this person has spent her entire life literally not being able to trust the ground beneath her feet, and she's been dancing madly to compensate for that feeling of it slipping away since she was six.

 

I do agree, though, that the dad was most likely innocent; her telling her teacher, the setup (not a huge plot point but clearly implied) between the mom and the detective, and the fact that the doctor's report didn't include evidence of vaginal trauma on a six year old who was supposedly raped with an adult man's penis point away from it happening. But in her mind? She'll never know, because she was a six year old surrounded by people who had their own reasons, reasons so important to their own view of the world that they've furiously obliterated any annoying details for seventeen years. She'll never, ever know for sure. For really sure.

[Maximum Taco]

When Ellis looked at Carisi and said, "So you're new here," for just a moment I saw Captain Raymond Holt of the Brooklyn 9-9.

 

Yup.

 

In fact in the scene directly following that DA Robert Sean Leonard even specifically asked him "How's life in Brooklyn?"

 

And I answered "Hilarious and awesome!" on his behalf.

Edited May 9, 2015 by Maximum Taco

[Kel Varnsen]

Count me in as someone who would love to see a "lifer from the 27" on camera but it wouldn't have been Profaci since the Mike Logan returns movie from the mother ship made Profaci a bad guy - maybe even a killer but my memory is a bit hazy but definitely his police career was over.

If the stuff with the detective and the mom happened after Cragen left does that mean the whole thing happened on Lt. Van Buren's watch?

Also if the dad was inprison doing a life sentence for child rape how come he was so well liked that he was tutoring other prisoners? That kind of goes againt everything tv has taught me about how sex offenders who prey on children do in prison.

[MrsRafaelBarba]

Peter Scanavino discusses his character Carisi (both in this specific episode and in general) in this video.  He's aware of how his character comes across, and he's very appreciative of his fans.  What a great smile!

Awwwwww, a hottie and sweetheart !

Please writers, don't give him some tragic backstory.

[LeGrandElephant]

The kid's name is Noah Porter. I don't think Olivia can change his name until the adoption has gone through.

For that matter, isn't she still technically just a foster mother? Is it ok for a foster parent to have a foster child baptized/christened?

[GarnetGirl]

I'm sure that Raul Esparza was off filming Hannibal and that is why he wasn't available for this episode but:

 

1. There is no way Barba would not be at that christening.

2. It would have been more interesting dramatically if he had been the one that prosecuted the case. Robert Sean Leonard was fine, but to have Barba believe that the conviction was just might have increased the ambiguity even more, and would have been an interesting conflict for Olivia. Although my head would have exploded from the awesomeness of having Andre Braugher and Raul Esparza together in courtroom scenes.

[Dot Com]

For that matter, isn't she still technically just a foster mother? Is it ok for a foster parent to have a foster child baptized/christened?

I would certainly think that he'd gave to be officially hers first. Though it wasn't a christening it was a dedication (I remember perking my ears up when I heard that). I believe it was a Unitarian church. In my church (conservative baptist) we have baby dedications. There is no baptism involved and no godparents. If I were a Catholic christening then Barba most definitely should have been there and been made Noah's godfather.

[abbottrabbit]

 

If the stuff with the detective and the mom happened after Cragen left does that mean the whole thing happened on Lt. Van Buren's watch?

 

If it happened "17 years ago"  -- 1998 -- then yes, it would have been end of Season 8 or early Season 9 of original L&O. So yes, Van Buren would've been the CO; Lennie & Rey would've been the detectives. That's also the year that Exiled aired, which -- as Grundoon59 points out above -- puts Profaci out of the frame for being a "lifer" at the 2-7. 

 

Of the other detectives that Cragen would've known that the audience knows as well: Greevey's dead; Logan retired (from Criminal Intent); Ceretta took a desk job in another precinct; Lennie's dead (on screen and in real life). SVU did crossovers with original L&O, so he could've known Curtis (moved to ... California or something?) and Greene (resigned in semi-disgrace after being cleared of murder), but neither of them would've been "lifers" in his eyes.

 

Which is just a long way of saying ... I know it wasn't a REAL possibility, intellectually, but that doesn't stop me from wishing it could've been. 

Edited May 11, 2015 by abbottrabbit

[zoey1996]

I don't know about in the US, but in the UK in the county where my DD lives, a child placed with a family pending adoption can be baptized only if the family is given permission.  Once the child is adopted, of course the parents can have him or her baptized.  But since this was a dedication in a Unitarian church, and not a baptism, I doubt it would be a problem here in the US.

 

Love Braugher, and it was also great to see Leonard.  Also seeing Cragen made me smile.

 

Never having watched Orange is the New Black, I had to google to find out.  Wiley is beautiful, and she did an excellent job with her character.