S02.E11: Survival Instincts

[MyAimIsTrue]

Bull represents Jemma Whitbeck, a teenager arrested for robbing a jewelry store with an older man she disappeared with 18 months ago. To persuade the jury she is not guilty, Bull argues that Jemma was actually a victim of his abuse and manipulation and not his willing accomplice.

[marina to]

Knew there was going to be some kind of twist at the end. Was just waiting for it.

[secnarf]

25 minutes ago, marina to said:

Knew there was going to be some kind of twist at the end. Was just waiting for it.

I was also waiting for the twist, but thought they left it rather ambiguous - it could have also been her turning on her computer to reconnect with the world (as Bull had asked, she didn't know who the president was); I thought it unlikely that she would be able to communicate with that guy while he was in prison. I suppose she could be buying another fake ID, though.

[marina to]

I really thought she had just been playing everyone at the end.

[secnarf]

38 minutes ago, marina to said:

I really thought she had just been playing everyone at the end.

But that little closet with the shackles wasn't a set up...

[marina to]

4 minutes ago, secnarf said:

But that little closet with the shackles wasn't a set up...

Could have been a kinky sex room, if the show wanted to go there.

[Dowel Jones]

I was sort of hoping for a Primal Fear twist, with it turning out that she was the mastermind behind the whole thing.  Just to keep this series interesting once in awhile.  The courtroom scenes continue to grate on me (Wait, what?  You can't do that!).  What really bugged me overall was that Bull, as an authority figure, puts his arm around a traumatized teenager and gives her a hug.  Wrong.  Wrong. Wrong. 

No side plots?  Are we resetting for the new year?

[dttruman]

3 hours ago, Dowel Jones said:

I was sort of hoping for a Primal Fear twist, with it turning out that she was the mastermind behind the whole thing.  Just to keep this series interesting once in awhile.  The courtroom scenes continue to grate on me (Wait, what?  You can't do that!).  What really bugged me overall was that Bull, as an authority figure, puts his arm around a traumatized teenager and gives her a hug.  Wrong.  Wrong. Wrong. 

No side plots?  Are we resetting for the new year?

This would have been a better story line than the one they used in this episode. It's funny how they conveniently leave out, where the DA cross examines Jemma. These court room scenes have no natural flow, because they only show you what they want for expediency and throw out the realism. 

[Bobbin]

And not a single reference to Patty Hearst. Or the well-known term, Stockholm Syndrome. Very interesting.

Bottom line:  who ya gonna believe? Sleazy adult predator or naive teenager?

My jaw dropped when the D.A. dismissed any notion of her having been kidnapped and raped at 16 because she's an adult now! What...??

[Aliconehead]

6 hours ago, dttruman said:

10 hours ago, Dowel Jones said:

I was sort of hoping for a Primal Fear twist, with it turning out that she was the mastermind behind the whole thing.  Just to keep this series interesting once in awhile.  The courtroom scenes continue to grate on me (Wait, what?  You can't do that!).  What really bugged me overall was that Bull, as an authority figure, puts his arm around a traumatized teenager and gives her a hug.  Wrong.  Wrong. Wrong. 

No side plots?  Are we resetting for the new year?

This would have been a better story line than the one they used in this episode. It's funny how they conveniently leave out, where the DA cross examines Jemma. These court room scenes have no natural flow, because they only show you what they want for expediency and throw out the realism. 

They did this on Elementary the first season.  There was a kidnapped kid that ended up turning evil

Edited January 3, 2018 by Aliconehead

[Netfoot]

3 hours ago, Bobbin said:

Or the well-known term, Stockholm Syndrome.

Thank goodness.  The term is bandied about far too much.

[JessDVD]

That was... interesting.

2003 called and it wants its Macbook back.

I wish that they had left that ending less ambiguous. Were we supposed to interpret it as she actually was the mastermind? Or just reconnecting with the world? I also would have preferred they devote that 90 seconds of screen time on why juror #10 was red and/or mentioning the major amount of counseling that girl will need, assuming she was telling the truth.

I have vowed to never, ever let my 4 young daughters get on the internet as teens, a vow I will likely not uphold but at this moment am quite bound to. (I just keep picturing my own teen wanderings on the early stages of the Internet and am like SWEET JESUS NO)

As soon as I saw a guy my age and a teen girl on the screen, I yelled something along the lines of, does this show have any awareness of stuff going on in the world right now. Between that and the last one with Bull escorting a 9 year old into her apartment alone, the timing is bad.

[brgjoe]

I am still going "WTF!?" at that ending.  Then again, I am a PC guy and not a Mac user.  ;)

Yes, and I totally agree -- I hope we are done with wayward children episodes now.  The last two shows weren't very well done.  There have been plot holes you could drive semi truck convoy through.  Not to mention being on the creepy/icky side of things.

And yeah, the "Patty Hearst" thing was the first thing I thought of when they were caught robbing that jewelry store.  But it's possibly they didn't mention it since a lot of the younger demographic perhaps has never heard of her before.

[UsernameFatigue]

All I could think of watching this episode was how much the actress playing Jemma looks like a young Angelina Jolie. If they ever do a movie based on AJ's life, they won't have to look far for someone to play her. 

[Sake614]

I knew there’d be a twist at the end but I honestly thought she was going to kill herself. Not quite sure what I was supposed to think when she turned on the computer. She certainly could have been the mastermind behind the whole thing, but even if she wasn’t I wouldn’t put it past her to try and connect with someone else and end up in a similar situation.

  As others have said, my very first thought with the robbery was Patty Hearst. 

[Emma9]

I thought she pulled it together for her testimony at the end a little too quickly and tidily, and when they never mentioned investigating why the single juror 'inexplicably' wouldn't support her, I guessed he just had a better bullshit detector than the rest of them. So I'm still going with her being behind at least some of it...then again, I also thought Bull's Magical Christmas Child last episode would end up being a mini sociopath, so maybe I'm just grasping for twists in hopes they'll make the show interesting.

[Netfoot]

8 minutes ago, Emma9 said:

I'm just grasping for twists in hopes they'll make the show interesting.

But if that happens, Bull will be shown to be fallible, and I doubt they will go there.  Regrettably.  

[marina to]

I thought the juror who wouldn't move was a predator himself and didn't see anything wrong with the situation. Keep an eye on him and the mirror juror, law enforcement.

[NeverLate]

At the end. She was simply addicted to the life on the web. Real life wasn't the same. I believe he kept her locked up, but after watching the end twice, her reality was being online.

Quote

I thought the juror who wouldn't move was a predator himself and didn't see anything wrong with the situation. 

Absolutely, otherwise why couldn't he see she was a child.

I actually thought this wasn't a bad episode,timely. A UK study is showing young teens are addicted to the likes they get online. 

[mythoughtis]

She’s still 16 emotionally. Her maturity growth stopped at the traumatic event. She’ll need counseling to get started growing again.  So, of course, the internet is still important to her.  Getting on the computer first thing doesn’t mean she is evil... it means she’s still immature and reckless. 

Mom should have moved that computer to the common area already. 

The actress reminded me of the actress from the Law and Order SVU episode ‘The Family’ about the rich young woman who lived on the street as a matriarch in a street family of kids.  That character was evil. 

[Netfoot]

1 hour ago, mythoughtis said:

The actress reminded me of the actress from the Law and Order SVU episode ‘The Family’ about the rich young woman who lived on the street as a matriarch in a street family of kids

Sou nds like the plot of a Bill Gibson novel!

[sinkwriter]

The second half was rage-inducing to watch. That prosecutor had no compassion for that girl until he heard her testimony; it was like he couldn't conceive of her being emotionally manipulated by an older man and just wanted to get the convictions. And that asshole who manipulated her was so twisted... as if he really was just an 'innocent' guy in love with a younger woman who talked him into robbing a store. Give me a fucking break.

 

I don't think that girl is a master manipulator who planned all this. I do think that she needs massive amounts of therapy, because she looks like she's so messed up by the experience that she's got it in her head that she needs to find another relationship where someone will order her around. Her going online like that in the end seemed (to me, anyway) as if she has no clue just how deeply messed up she is because of what she's been through. She'll probably go through a string of self-destructive relationships, if she doesn't get therapy. I wish we had seen Bull be adamant about her needing counseling, rather than the show trying to be all "Was she innocent or was she manipulating the jury? Dun dun DUNNNNNN! YOU decide!" with that semi-spooky music at the end. 

Edited January 23, 2018 by sinkwriter

[auntiemel]

Catching up on all these shows now, via binge. My take on the ending sequence was that even though this particular problem was solved for her, the emotional deficit inside that made her go looking for (and be vulnerable to) the predator was the root issue, and still not healed - and was, in fact, probably much worse. I thought it implied that the events of the episode were kind of pointless, because she was going to wind up back in a similar situation sooner rather than later.

[txhorns79]

I have been binging the show on Amazon.  While I realize that the only courtroom experience any of the writers seem to have is having watched reruns of Night Court, this episode was just so bad, I had to comment.  I did not understand why we weren't shown the cross of the guy who kidnapped her, since Bull and the team had information that would have at least made him appear less credible.  I didn't understand the ADA's bizarre argument that the fact the guy had raped and kidnapped the woman he was testifying against somehow did not count because the girl had not pressed charges.  And I didn't get why they made such a big deal out of the one immovable juror if they did not intend to explore it.  Also, I have no idea what the ending was supposed to mean?  She didn't learn her lesson?  She actually was the mastermind?  She just wanted to Google current events?   

If you want a much better version of this storyline, Law and Order did it about 25 years ago in an episode starring Amanda Peet as one-half of a pair of criminals who turned out to be a teenage kidnapping victim.        

[Chaigirl]

The end made me think about the end of Stockholm, Pennsylvania (movie) and first thing that came to my mind was that she had become the predator 🥴