Chicago Justice - General Discussion

[FnkyChkn34]

50 minutes ago, Misslindsey said:

I agree. It does not bother me. Back when I did not watch all the Chicago shows, like I do now, I just treated the crossover characters as recurring characters that other shows have as well. Sometimes they do not add much to the plot like a paramedic popping up on Med, bartending at Molly's and sometimes they do. If they add more to the plot there are usually some throwaway lines about a character's background and other stuff. I imagine part of the reason of the crossover characters are for people who watch the other Chicago shows to tune in to this one.

Exactly, and I actually like it.  I can't really explain why, but I like that this fictional world is all connected somehow.  I don't watch Chicago Med or SVU, but I get the gist of what's going on and I like when those characters come on the shows I do watch (PD and Fire).  Antonio leaving PD and joining Justice was my first draw to watching Justice, and it seems decent so far.  If I have time to follow another show, I'll continue watching.

[msani19]

I only watched this cause it was on after This Is Us. In fact, I was actively avoiding another Chicago show, cause I've not liked them thus far.

I was pleasantly surprised and actually liked it! It did very much remind me of the original L&O which was a show I adored, so that worked in it's favor. Am I right that the DA Stone is supposed to be L&O Ben Stone's son? That's a nice connection. I'll try another episode next week to see if I'll add this is the viewing rotation. I could do without too many drop-ins from the other Chicago shows but I'm guessing that's inevitable.

[J0nas3]

3 hours ago, Xantar said:

But seriously, I care about Antonio because I know him from Chicago PD. I've got no sense at all on the female investigator.

I think they could stand to develop her character more, but I know her as Ava Crowder. I guess you could say I'm already in the tank for her, just would like to see more of her character on this show.

[Waterston Fan]

I admit, I have added people and made good friends. 

[Waterston Fan]

I liked this episode a lot and it's funny they called Hermann to get the phone.

I do think they could develop the females a bit more for the DA and investigator's office. What are their names again? lol  

[Xeliou66]

Yeah Stone and the investigator that used to be on PD seem to be the only characters that are fully fleshed out. I hope for more development for the two females and the DA. 

This episode was really good, like I said, outstanding writing and handling of timely and difficult issues without being preachy or biased, and it reminds me a lot of the original L&O and Trial By Jury, for example the scenes with Stone and Valdez eating and then Stone and the defense lawyer having a drink and discussing the case, those scenes were very reminiscent of original L&O scenes. 

[Tetraneutron]

So, they're basically remaking "Law and Order: Trial By Jury", right? Anyone remember that one? A brief spinoff that starred Lilith from "Frasier" and Jerry Orback for 2 episodes before he died? Which itself was a remake of the Order half of the Mothership. Makes sense. The original show WAS incredibly successful and the only reason it was cancelled after a basically-unheard-of 20 seasons was because NBC cut Dick Wolf's budget thinking he's make up the shortfall out of his pocket and he called their bluff. 

I thought the episode was sloppy. I got what they were trying to do with showing all sides of Are Muslims Dangerous and What's the Line Between Multiculturalism and Racism but none of the points landed because each random character got one line about it, or characters contradicted themselves later in the episode, and all the twists meant it made no sense who was arguing for what.  WTF was with that War and Peace-length speech about niqabs and Vitamin D? Who cares? If the show wants to debate the issue of Islamic garb: valid cultural expression or sexist and patriarchal, there were a million better ways to do it. 

The dumbest thing, though, was Jafar's motivation. Remember when Melanie (blonde ponytail with bicycle) said Danny had accused Jafar of plagiarism? And then we forget about it in Stone's big cross examination where it's all about jealousy? What the hell? It's a way better motive to kill someone because he knows you plagiarized his work and can get him kicked out of school and destroy his career, than just being jealous because someone is a better scientist than you? 

[Xeliou66]

Yeah some people will accept friend requests from anyone on social media. 

[MakeMeLaugh]

11 minutes ago, Tetraneutron said:

....WTF was with that War and Peace-length speech about niqabs and Vitamin D? Who cares?... 

 

When Stone had bailiff? Doorman? Whoever? hold up three fingers all the way at the door and asked the witness how many fingers she saw? I thought I accidentally changed the channel to My Cousin Vinnie. That was some good lawyerin'! 

[dargosmydaddy]

I didn't catch the first two episodes. If this is the best Chicago Justice has to offer, I'll pass. The whole thing seemed very heavy handed, and both lawyers seemed to be going for shock value rather than following through on the more logical aspects of the case. I like Phillip Winchester, Joelle Carter, and Law and Order, but this wasn't doing it for me.

Did I hear correctly that the Stone character is supposed to be an ex-MLB player??

[J0nas3]

10 minutes ago, dargosmydaddy said:

Did I hear correctly that the Stone character is supposed to be an ex-MLB player??

It sounded like that to me. He said he used to be a pitcher, and I assumed it was for his HS or college, then he said he was pitching for the Cubs against the Sox (assuming he meant White)

[shksabelle]

I liked it. 

So many familiar faces and references. AND Robinette shows up next episode. He was always my favorite ADA. 

Anyone else sort of hoping for Peter Florrick to show up as the State's Attorney??  ??

[dargosmydaddy]

Yeah, that's what I thought I heard, which seemed totally random... You would think if he was in the majors, even if just briefly, he would have a certain amount of fame in Chicago that would make working there as a DA kind of awkward.

I don't know why they couldn't have just said he played in the minors or something... his baseball metaphor would've worked just as well.

[paigow]

1 hour ago, MakeMeLaugh said:

When Stone had bailiff? Doorman? Whoever? hold up three fingers all the way at the door and asked the witness how many fingers she saw? I thought I accidentally changed the channel to My Cousin Vinnie. That was some good lawyerin'! 

The topper would have been for the judge to answer before the witness could......

[paigow]

1 hour ago, Tetraneutron said:

 WTF was with that War and Peace-length speech about niqabs and Vitamin D? Who cares? If the show wants to debate the issue of Islamic garb: valid cultural expression or sexist and patriarchal, there were a million better ways to do it. 

He was trying to link her lack of Vitamin D to bad vision in a roundabout way to her required wardrobe...which might have swung a couple of votes...luckily Stone Jr knew the difference between Type 1 & 2 diabetes.

[Tetraneutron]

19 hours ago, paigow said:

He was trying to link her lack of Vitamin D to bad vision in a roundabout way to her required wardrobe...which might have swung a couple of votes...luckily Stone Jr knew the difference between Type 1 & 2 diabetes.

Yeah, I got that. But it was stupid. Not all niqab wearers have diabetes, not all diabetics have vision problems. I get why the show did that - they wanted to do the "covering your face in court for religious reasons" controversy. But it was dumb. Stone "proving" (using the My Cousin Vinny courtroom stunt) her vision is fine and she has the other diabetes doesn't change anything. People still hate the niqab for reasons that have nothing to do with the reasons presented. And the show didn't get into it at all. They talked about it without there being any kind of controversy, dramatic tension, or point.

The script seemed like it was designed to suck drama out of every scene by having the moral arguments people were making be illogical. Like Valdez talking about how Jafar was killing baby Hitler. He wasn't. Jafar's argument was that by killing Danny, he was killing adult Hitler in 1932. Danny, according to him, was fully radicalized, had purchased bomb-making materials and was planning to deploy them. If that had indeed happened, Jafar WOULD, 100%, no ambiguity, be a hero and Islamophobia vs multiculuralism or whatever would have had nothing to do with anything. 

Again, if the script were remotely coherent, the dramatic turn would have been that our society, protestations and cries of "Islamaphobia" to the contrary, are so ready to believe all Muslims are terrorists that we condemn innocent men on no evidence at all. (Worth noting all the Muslims depicted in the show were fully Westernized and not different from any of the white characters except for their names, unless you could Adi's unseen strict religious dad and one woman who wears a niqab but that's it). 

20 hours ago, J0nas3 said:

It sounded like that to me. He said he used to be a pitcher, and I assumed it was for his HS or college, then he said he was pitching for the Cubs against the Sox (assuming he meant White)

Yup. The actor is 35, assume Peter is the same age. I assumed when he talked about his ballplaying past he was in the minors briefly or something, but he was in the majors? College + law school = 7 years. We're supposed to buy he had a whole second career as a pro ballplayer before being the lead prosecutor in a major city, a job people have when they're 50? And it's not like Peter just got the job either. Normally stuff like this doesn't bother me, but if they're going to spend EVERY EPISODE talking about his baseball past, to the point where it's the only biographical detail we have on anyone? Make it not dumb. 

[Gigglepuff]

Interesting article about one of the legal consultants for Chicago Justice. 

 

http://www.chicagolawyermagazine.com/Archives/2017/02/Q-A-feb17.aspx

[MakeMeLaugh]

Not only a former MLB player, but for the Cubs. And a pitcher, for God's sake. A minor leaguer playing right field, say, for a less popular team, even a collegiate All-American would have been enough to add a layer to Stone's character, but no, Show has to go all out unbelievable. Maybe Anna can have American Idol winner on her resume, sure, why not. 

[Xeliou66]

Not all MLB players are famous or rich. I take it Stone was a relief pitcher in the MLB for a little while but was never a big star or anything and a lot of players like him only major MLB fans would remember. I don't find it unbelievable that someone like him would become a prosecutor in his second career, plenty of athletes who weren't superstars have successful second careers in unrelated fields, and especially with Stone's dad being an ADA he probably had a lifelong interest in the law. I think his background is interesting and Stone is by far the shows best character right now.

[dargosmydaddy]

I'm not saying it's impossible, just that it's an odd character choice, particularly one to just randomly drop into a conversation. They could develop it more later, I guess, but it took me out of the show, like, "Wait, did I just hear that?" It also seems odd for him to have gotten to where he is at such a relatively young age as a second career... He seems to be a big deal in the DA's office (he gets high profile cases and has an underling); how long has he been there? Assuming he went to college while playing baseball, and maybe he made the majors shortly out of college (which is a bit of a stretch), so let's say he was 24-25... and then got hurt right away? Or fizzled out right away? In both cases, you'd think he'd want to rehab/ stick it out in the minors awhile longer, especially after having had a taste of the majors at a relatively young age. Regardless, after retiring from baseball, he'd have to go to law school, and then work his way up through the DA's office... I mean, I guess the timeline could work, but it's pretty tight.

And while yes, having a cup of coffee in the majors doesn't earn him instant fame, the fact that he's now working in the same city where he played... I think there might be enough rabid Cubs fans who might at least recognize him/ make the connection. I'd love to see an opposing attorney use that while questioning prospective jurors. ("Are you a Cubs fan? Do you recognize this man?") Or it could work against Stone, too. Didn't it sound like he kind of blew a game (and against the White Sox, no less) when he was telling his story?

Anyway, I'm clearly overthinking all of this, particularly for a show I really don't intend to watch much...

[Tetraneutron]

I think the reason it bugs people is that it's related to that everyone on TV has to be young and pretty now. Want to know one of the reasons the original "Law & Order" was so good? It had some of the best actors in America delivering the lines. Michael Moriarty, Steven Hill and Jerry Orbach could do anything, acting-wise. Same with all the NY theatre actors they had playing the guest star roles. It made the show better than a formulaic, didactic, procedural had any right to be. Now we'd never see that, because Moriarty and Hill and Orbach aren't underwear models and they'd never get cast today. And I think that's a shame. And making Peter Stone a baseball player when it doesn't work out timelinewise changes what the show is, to just another show where pretty people wear inappropriate clothes to the office and have sex with each other.

It's far from my biggest problem with the show. Just saying. And hopefully the writers develop the rest of the characters soon.

[Chris Knight]

The actor who plays Stone is only 35 ??? Holy cow. I thought he was 50. I do like him so far though. Not crazy about his assistant. And I want more Apollo Creed !

I could have done without Mr. O'Boyle's exaggerated Chgo accent. No one under the age of 75 talks like that around here...

[MakeMeLaugh]

4 hours ago, Tetraneutron said:

... Michael Moriarty, Steven Hill and Jerry Orbach could do anything, acting-wise. Same with all the NY theatre actors they had playing the guest star roles. It made the show better than a formulaic, didactic, procedural had any right to be. Now we'd never see that, because Moriarty and Hill and Orbach aren't underwear models and they'd never get cast today...l

Yes to the talent in L&O--and another thing, they weren't playing to be likeable. Even the relatively few playful moments and Lenny's wisecracks helped carry the story. But now I must pause to fan myself as I imagine Mike Logan in his skivvies....

5 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

Not all MLB players are famous or rich. I take it Stone was a relief pitcher in the MLB for a little while but was never a big star or anything and a lot of players like him only major MLB fans would remember. I don't find it unbelievable that someone like him would become a prosecutor in his second career, plenty of athletes who weren't superstars have successful second careers in unrelated fields, and especially with Stone's dad being an ADA he probably had a lifelong interest in the law. I think his background is interesting and Stone is by far the shows best character right now.

It's still unnecessary overkill.  

Edited March 10, 2017 by MakeMeLaugh

[Xeliou66]

6 hours ago, dargosmydaddy said:

I'm not saying it's impossible, just that it's an odd character choice, particularly one to just randomly drop into a conversation. They could develop it more later, I guess, but it took me out of the show, like, "Wait, did I just hear that?" It also seems odd for him to have gotten to where he is at such a relatively young age as a second career... He seems to be a big deal in the DA's office (he gets high profile cases and has an underling); how long has he been there? Assuming he went to college while playing baseball, and maybe he made the majors shortly out of college (which is a bit of a stretch), so let's say he was 24-25... and then got hurt right away? Or fizzled out right away? In both cases, you'd think he'd want to rehab/ stick it out in the minors awhile longer, especially after having had a taste of the majors at a relatively young age. Regardless, after retiring from baseball, he'd have to go to law school, and then work his way up through the DA's office... I mean, I guess the timeline could work, but it's pretty tight.

And while yes, having a cup of coffee in the majors doesn't earn him instant fame, the fact that he's now working in the same city where he played... I think there might be enough rabid Cubs fans who might at least recognize him/ make the connection. I'd love to see an opposing attorney use that while questioning prospective jurors. ("Are you a Cubs fan? Do you recognize this man?") Or it could work against Stone, too. Didn't it sound like he kind of blew a game (and against the White Sox, no less) when he was telling his story?

Anyway, I'm clearly overthinking all of this, particularly for a show I really don't intend to watch much...

Stone's baseball career has been mentioned a few times, not just that one time. Robinette I know mentioned how Ben Stone would talk about Peter's baseball talent. We don't really know when Stone was born or how long he pitched for, I would assume Stone was born sometime in the mid-late 70's, it is very surprising that the actor who portrays him is only 35. We don't know when exactly Stone got his law degree or when he stopped pitching. It's a tight window but it is plausible IMO.

I think that it would be a very interesting story if there was a situation where a big Cubs fan was on the jury and recognized him, that would be an interesting spin on the jury tampering story that the original L&O did a few times in its run and I would like to see them take advantage of that as I'm sure some Cubs fans would know Stone. That would be a very interesting story. 

[Raja]

On 3/8/2017 at 8:03 AM, Xantar said:

I'm not really sure why there has to be two investigators for the State's Attorney's office. We know from The Good Wife that one sufficiently badass investigator can solve a case all on his or her own. :-)

But seriously, I care about Antonio because I know him from Chicago PD. I've got no sense at all on the female investigator.

If I had it my way, this show wouldn't just be about murder all the time just like Chicago Med isn't all about traumatic injuries or Chicago Fire isn't all about fires. There are a lot of things that the State's Attorney's office does besides murder. The story surrounding the Baltimore City Detention Center would make an excellent episode.

 

I was thinking, what no time for back up when the two went to arrest a murder suspect. The Law & Order mothership played it straight they normally had uniformed cops with the detective team or ESU (NYPD's SWAT team) actually kick the door and go in first. Seeing Mr Stone playing his father it seems it just may be all murder. Maybe cost cutting is in effect but you think they could give some Chicago PD extras some additional work.

On 3/8/2017 at 2:27 PM, dargosmydaddy said:

I didn't catch the first two episodes. If this is the best Chicago Justice has to offer, I'll pass. The whole thing seemed very heavy handed, and both lawyers seemed to be going for shock value rather than following through on the more logical aspects of the case. I like Phillip Winchester, Joelle Carter, and Law and Order, but this wasn't doing it for me.

Did I hear correctly that the Stone character is supposed to be an ex-MLB player??

They really are stacking the deck with young Mr Stone, an ex Cub. After a backdoor pilot and three episodes perhaps spreading the love to other cast members is in order.

[candall]

I liked it well enough.  And even though I don't watch PD or Fire, I think it's fine for them to reward their viewers with some crossover references as treats.

But if I start getting the sense my enjoyment of the show is diminished because I lack full knowledge of Dick Wolf's Chicagoworld, I'm going to balk.   (I can't even imagine how critical people would be if the Shondaland shows were interwoven and co-dependent.) 

ETA:  every now and then I see an old L&O that I don't know very well and I think "How did I miss this?"  And then it turns out the conclusion is lost forever, in the mists of Homicide.

Edited March 11, 2017 by candall
laughing at myself

[Kel Varnsen]

Liked the part wherr Atwater saw the writing on the wall, realized he might have roughed the guy up and decided to take the plea.

Didn't really like that they kind of

Liked the part where Atwater saw the writing on the wall, realized he might have roughed the guy up and decided to take the plea.

Didn't really like that they kind of stopped their investigation at the point where the victim was arrested. He was a corner drug dealer. It wouldn't be hard to believe that he got in a fight at some point before he met Atwater.

Was shocked that the hospital wasn't Chicago Med.

[paigow]

Stone must have watched "A Few Good Men" on a loop during law school....

[Raja]

I spent the entire hour convinced that they were going to recast Stone's assistant. So did we learn that there is no homicide unit on the Chicago PD? Stone personally gave orders to canvas the neighborhood

Edited March 13, 2017 by Raja

[paigow]

22 minutes ago, Raja said:

I spent the entire hour convinced that they were going to recast Stone's assistant. So did we learn that there is no homicide unit on the Chicago PD? Stone personally gave orders to canvas the neighborhood

Voight & crew were busy torturing interrogating drug cartel suspects...besides, they probably hated the judge....

[Raja]

I just could imagine the transported Chicagoan  Detective Fontana if McCoy invaded his crime scene and acted like the police didn't think of checking with the neighbors.

[FnkyChkn34]

Was this episode supposed to help me like Valdez, or dislike her more?  Because, I dislike her more.

[MakeMeLaugh]

Thank the hand of God that the crack investigators were coincidentally told by perfect handwriting lady that the rape victim had an unknown jealous exhusband--another deus ex machina result--is this just going to happen on every episode? Seriously, Show, it would be a lot better for the detectives' reputations if Nagle had discovered his existence on her own, maybe looking through all those files late at night as she was. 

I can't imagine it is ethical for any attorneys to go have drinks with the judge who just decided a case they had presented to the judge. Regardless of shenanigans. Valdez can leave any time.

[Xantar]

No, it isn't really that unethical for a lawyer to have drinks with a judge provided it is only drinks. The judge I worked for was a personal friend of many of the lawyers who appeared before him, and often times while waiting for people to get in place so that court proceedings could begin, he and the lawyers would chat off the record about their latest vacation, how the kids are doing etc. In this case, it seems more improper because Valdez said, "Did you tell her yet?" To the judge. 

About halfway through the episode, I realized that we were never going to find out exactly what Valdez's relationship with the judge was. It's an interesting choice. She was standing on her right to privacy, and the show backed that up by never actually telling us what's going on. I'm guessing that she's secretly his daughter. It has to be a pretty damn sensitive secret for her to keep silent about it in the middle of all this.

[FnkyChkn34]

It's unethical to buy the judge drinks, or a meal or anything else because any small gift can look like a bribe.  But as long as Valdez wasn't paying, it's technically acceptable.  Might still not "look" that great, but not entirely unethical.

I agree that Valdez can leave at any time.  Or the writers could at least make her interesting?  One or the other would be nice.

[Gigglepuff]

I wondered if Valdez was the judge's daughter too. The hug didn't seem romantic to me. I could be way off of course. I kind of liked how they left the details of their relationship a mystery. 

[Tetraneutron]

2 hours ago, MakeMeLaugh said:

 

I can't imagine it is ethical for any attorneys to go have drinks with the judge who just decided a case they had presented to the judge. Regardless of shenanigans. Valdez can leave any time.

There are no rules against it. He wasn't at that point presiding over any cases of hers. It wouldn't be reasonable to expect no attorneys or judges to be friends. I thought the whole thing was stupid. OBVIOUSLY she wasn't sleeping with him, even though the show tried to make it ambiguous, and even if she were, why would it matter to the case? Her evidence was really basic eyewitness stuff. That he was shot by some guy on a bike. I mean, I know the show wanted to shoehorn in something about sexism and slut-shaming but it didn't work at all. I don't believe the writers have given any consideration to whether there's supposed to be some big secret. They just wanted to write a story about sexism and didn't care if it made sense from a character perspective. 

I never say this, but the actress playing Valdez is . . . yikes. Her preferred method of expressing emotion seems to be swallowing. And what was that eye-rolling on the witness stand? Is her character 12? The thing that bugged me most was her insisting on being a part of the case even though it should be abundantly clear (and Stone said) that she's a witness and can't be a member of the prosecution. Of course she can't! Why would she even want to? She knows what the rules are! Why was this even an issue besides terrible writing? Aren't these characters supposed to be smart?

I've been watching this show because it's a skim-milk frozen yogurt version of real "L&O", which I miss. But this episode was like the worst part of SVU, which I've never liked much. 

Edited March 13, 2017 by Tetraneutron

[MakeMeLaugh]

Ah, I see re ethical. The irony is that all I know about TV court sustems I learned from Law & Order, where very rarely, maybe three times max, Adam Schiff, the DA, met a judge for a come-to-Jesus drink at "the club," but I don't ever remember seeing any of the asst DAs or second chair people interacting with the judiciary. So Dick Wolf has only himself to blame for my justice lens :)

[Sandman]

1 hour ago, Xantar said:

About halfway through the episode, I realized that we were never going to find out exactly what Valdez's relationship with the judge was. It's an interesting choice. She was standing on her right to privacy, and the show backed that up by never actually telling us what's going on. I'm guessing that she's secretly his daughter. It has to be a pretty damn sensitive secret for her to keep silent about it in the middle of all this.

I think I took the opposite lesson: I kept expecting that there would be a reveal that "Are you going to tell her?" didn't mean what everyone instantly assumed. The fact that no such reversal came to Valdez's "rescue" suggests to me that she was in fact sleeping with him, but that the show was making the point that her right to privacy isn't negated by such a sexual relationship, inappropriate as it may be. Even so, I tend to agree with Gigglepuff that their hug did not look like something between bed partners.

It also seems abundantly clear to me that Valdez didn't have a leg to stand on, let alone a pin to perch her high horse on, about participating in the case; that made absolutely no sense. She's a witness; or she's in a compromising liaison with Judge Naughty ("Ep title drink!"); or she's a family member. Any of those should disqualify her instantly. I don't even mind Barbaro as an actress, but the writing of this episode was weak.

[paigow]

If she is a family member ...every verdict she won where he presided would be vacated on appeal when TMZ broadcasts the truth...both would be disbarred for failing to recuse...

[Xeliou66]

Very weak episode IMO. The writing seemed very off for most of it, they had to rely on a very weak gimmick to win at trial after barely showing any of the trial, the police would've been investigating, not the SA investigators, and Stone's boss, Mark something, was only in one scene despite the fact that the murder of a judge would be a huge case and he would be under pressure and monitor it closely, he's been totally wasted so far which is a shame as he seems like an interesting character. I didn't really care what happened, I didn't like the victim or the killer, and the writing was just off the whole time. Also stop with the chase scenes every episode, and of course every time the tough female investigator has to be the one to make the take down. 

As for Valdez and the judge, what the hell was that? It was clear she was screwing the judge, but what was pathetic was the fact that the writers made it look like she was some sort of hero for screwing a judge and not telling anyone and saying it was her right to privacy, well guess what, screwing a judge is highly unethical and could get her disbarred, and every case that she was involved with that was presided over by that judge would be reviewed and convictions would be tossed, so yeah it's a huge deal and very unethical, and it doesn't make her some kind of strong independent woman to screw a judge and say it's no ones business, it makes her a sleazy idiot.

Valdez is by far the worst character on this show, and the actress playing her is awful, she can't she emotion or express herself without going over the top, she has about as much talent as Detective Beauty Queen from the original L&O, a plastic pretty face. This episode just made me like Valdez a lot less. 

[BlueJayFan]

1 hour ago, Xeliou66 said:

Very weak episode IMO. The writing seemed very off for most of it, they had to rely on a very weak gimmick to win at trial after barely showing any of the trial, the police would've been investigating, not the SA investigators, and Stone's boss, Mark something, was only in one scene despite the fact that the murder of a judge would be a huge case and he would be under pressure and monitor it closely, he's been totally wasted so far which is a shame as he seems like an interesting character. I didn't really care what happened, I didn't like the victim or the killer, and the writing was just off the whole time. Also stop with the chase scenes every episode, and of course every time the tough female investigator has to be the one to make the take down. 

As for Valdez and the judge, what the hell was that? It was clear she was screwing the judge, but what was pathetic was the fact that the writers made it look like she was some sort of hero for screwing a judge and not telling anyone and saying it was her right to privacy, well guess what, screwing a judge is highly unethical and could get her disbarred, and every case that she was involved with that was presided over by that judge would be reviewed and convictions would be tossed, so yeah it's a huge deal and very unethical, and it doesn't make her some kind of strong independent woman to screw a judge and say it's no ones business, it makes her a sleazy idiot.

Valdez is by far the worst character on this show, and the actress playing her is awful, she can't she emotion or express herself without going over the top, she has about as much talent as Detective Beauty Queen from the original L&O, a plastic pretty face. This episode just made me like Valdez a lot less. 

Clear to whom? Read this thread, seems pretty split.

[themadman]

Chicago PD must be appreciating the break they got from having to investigate a high-profile murder.

[FnkyChkn34]

3 minutes ago, themadman said:

Chicago PD must be appreciating the break they got from having to investigate a high-profile murder.

This makes sense though, assuming he was a state or federal judge.  The murder of a federal judge would probably go to the FBI, actually.  Very plausible for the state or feds to "pull rank" on all cases like this.

[Waterston Fan]

I liked this episode even though, I'm not sure it makes that much sense to me that an ex-husband would go crazy over a 7 year case. 

Is Nagel the last or first name? I wish she had a better first name if Nagel is the first. 

I think if she was his daughter, it would have been found out eventually but I think they were just good friends. 

[Xeliou66]

Yeah we would've found out if she was his daughter. If the judge and Valdez weren't sleeping together, what does "have you told her yet?" mean? It's pretty clear to me that they were having an affair. 

[Xantar]

Just spitballing here, but the "her" in "have you told her yet?" might have been the foster daughter. I have no earthly idea what he was going to tell her or why Valdez would be interested, though. 

[alias1]

I'm pretty sure she's the judge's daughter.  He needed to tell his wife that he had a child by another woman (thus the "have you told her yet").  There is no way they were having an affair.   Affairs look way different than how they were interacting. 

This episode did feel very off to me.  Definitely not that interesting.  And yes, I had to laugh at the "YOU'RE GD RIGHT I DID."  I'm not even sure now he actually said that, but it brought back A Few Good Men so that's what I thought he said.        

[Xeliou66]

That is a possibility, and it might be confirmed at some point, but I doubt we will ever hear about it again. I think that Valdez was screwing the judge, and the judge was going to divorce his wife for her. That is the only thing that makes any sense unless we find out otherwise later on.

I think almost everyone agrees that this was a bad episode. The writing didn't make any sense and was off, and I was bored and didn't care, and they had to rely on a weak gimmick to win, and they didn't even get to the trial until the last 15 minutes, they barely focused on the legal side despite the fact that the victim was a judge, and they totally wasted the DA character. 

I did like the psych expert that Stone met with and the insight he provided, I like that this show has a psych expert similar to Skoda or Olivet from the mothership and I hope to see this guy again. 

Edited March 14, 2017 by Xeliou66

[paigow]

29 minutes ago, Xeliou66 said:

I did like the psych expert that Stone met with and the insight he provided, I like that this show has a psych expert similar to Skoda or Olivet from the mothership and I hope to see this guy again. 

Hope you are not someone that hates crossovers because the dude is Head of Psychiatry on Chicago Med