S20.E04: Revenge

[Aethera]

Quote

As a string of break-in assaults grows more violent, the cops investigate an online incel group to identify a suspect.

[Aethera]

A reminder to all: everyone is allowed to love or hate Olivia Benson, or any other character, as much as they want. However, discussion of her has been taking over the episode threads again, as it did last year. If you want to talk primarily about what you think of her and how she is saving or ruining the show, take it to the Olivia Benson thread, please.

[MrsRafaelBarba]

Hope tonight's episode is better than last week.

[MrsRafaelBarba]

Jesus Christ, attack of the Incels!!

[balmz]

ok episode, creepy though, fin as usual was great, liked that everyone got a chance to shine, also the whole thing of making the mother homeless made me uncomfortable despite the son's actions, like she had nothing to do with it at all, doesn't seem right to make her suffer

[Fellaway]

Welp.  I was liking this ep.  Everyone on the squad is playing, interesting case, no personal stuff, some old school twists, then...  Then they throw Carisi under the bus, trying to get him down to the rest of their levels when it comes to circumventing the law, by having him try to get away with not having a warrant.  No, Show.  No.  Then!  To add insult to injury, Benson tells him, nice try, but he's not a lawyer, even if he has a law degree.  (Guess she forgot the part where he also passed the Bar.)  But, she patted him on the arm, so I guess she gets a pass for being patronizing and insulting.  RME.

I do not accept this as canon.

And that last scene, where someone who is a lawyer, by Benson's standards, basically just stands there and lets her client get manipulated into a confession?  Oy.

Well, it was forty minutes of good ep.  Don't know what happened for the back twenty.  Learn to sustain, Show!

[HunterHunted]

I thought this was an actual decent episode. It was fully and correctly in the SVU wheelhouse. I will say that I was a bit pissed that the final guy called the "wrong number" which is bullshit. I know it was to make his decades long stalking and harassment of her look even more unjustified. But even if she did get the message, his actions were unjustified and horrible. This type of a reaction from a man is the reason women often try to soft pedal rejections because they're afraid that some psycho is going to pull this shit. 

The Mothership had an episode a lot like this. It was "Pledge."

4 hours ago, balmz said:

also the whole thing of making the mother homeless made me uncomfortable despite the son's actions, like she had nothing to do with it at all, doesn't seem right to make her suffer

Asset forfeiture is completely legal. You have to prove that you're innocent and not involved in criminal activity to get your stuff back assuming law enforcement hasn't sold it. It's something that a lot of people of many different political ideologies want to change, but law enforcement loves it.

https://harvardlawreview.org/2018/06/how-crime-pays-the-unconstitutionality-of-modern-civil-asset-forfeiture-as-a-tool-of-criminal-law-enforcement/

Some law enforcement agencies even have wish lists about items they'd like to seize.

https://www.businessinsider.com/cops-use-wish-lists-to-decide-forfeiture-cases-2014-11

Edited October 12, 2018 by HunterHunted

[MrsRafaelBarba]

What's next, an episode where a woman is killed for refusing to give her phone number? 

[wknt3]

The Good:
The plot. It was all about a team of elite detectives investigating a particularly heinous sexually based offense. Now that's the formula for a series I could consistently love. This really felt like classic SVU in a lot of ways, both good and bad.
Fin! He was on fire this week, both with the snark and the serious moment. One of my favorite moments in the episode was the look he gave the party promoter d-bag when he handed Fin the leash, This series has always been the best in the franchise at doing LOL comedy and it's really needed in episodes like this that really need a few lighter moments.
Carisi. Some nice moments throughout.
Nice work from the guest cast.
Stone was acting like himself again - it was nice to see him calling out the squad, making the legal decisions, and acting like a member of a separate, yet equally important group representing the people in the criminal justice system and not an adjunct to Benson and the squad.
No unnecessary soapy personal drama! Probably the reason it felt like we got a fully realized COTW that didn't feel rushed in any way.

The Bad:
As I said this episode felt like the traditional formula and that included the traditional weak points. Specifically the clunky exposition and the big staged confronation finale where the suspect's lawyer is conveniently struck mute.
The millennial bashing was a but much.
The insistence on having Benson be the one to interact with all the victims and reassure them that it is not their fault. Especially since Mariska insisted on dialing on the whispering and watery eyed anguish up to 11. It was bad enough that she was at the initial crime scent to begin with and acting like a detective instead of a CO, but at least they kept that to Season 17-19 levels.

Overall this was about 1000 x better than last week's fiasco. Not a home run, necessarily, but a solid double, and after the last episode where they managed to hit themselves in the crotch and head repeatedly with the bat, it has me feeling much better about the show.

Edited October 12, 2018 by wknt3

[HunterHunted]

10 minutes ago, MrsRafaelBarba said:

What's next, an episode where a woman is killed for refusing to give her phone number? 

It's already happened in real life.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/07/mary-spears-killed-detroit_n_5945518.html

https://mic.com/articles/133535/yet-another-woman-has-been-killed-for-turning-down-a-man-who-asked-her-out#.DIYc5LQuE

[MrsRafaelBarba]

12 minutes ago, HunterHunted said:

It's already happened in real life.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/07/mary-spears-killed-detroit_n_5945518.html

https://mic.com/articles/133535/yet-another-woman-has-been-killed-for-turning-down-a-man-who-asked-her-out#.DIYc5LQuE

Yeah and it's frightening. 

[HunterHunted]

1 minute ago, MrsRafaelBarba said:

Yeah and it's frightening. 

The latter case is a couple of blocks away from my childhood home.

[Iguessnot]

What bothered me was Olivia is so committed to being an advocate, she doesn't bother doing her job. The first rape victim is telling Olivia what happened, and then with her baby talk voice she gives the usual disclaimer " I know this is difficult" but can you describe the guy. The woman was actively talking. Why would giving a description be difficult? The woman continues to describe what leads up to the assault, and Olivia asks about his race/ethnicity and she replies he was wearing a helmet. Olivia just writes that down because a seasoned SVU detective wouldn't inquire if the victim saw his hands or any other body part during the rape. The lady asks whether she has to do this now, and Olivia the advocate says nope you don't and immediately arranges her transport to the hospital. Of course the victim says something that requires advocate Olivia to declare once again "it's not your fault."

As long as she drops a few soundbites, Olivia doesn't even pretend to be doing her job (or her former job).

When they arrested that guy at his home, they didn't even say why he was under arrest. 

How is a lawyer smart enough to get her client off on a warrant issue, dumb enough to let him run him mouth like that?

Olivia who can't bother to sufficiently interview the first rape victim, because it's to difficult, drags the last one into a room with her rapist, having Stone make the introduction. Bizarre.

[Xeliou66]

This was way better than last week and better than the premiere as well, it felt like a classic SVU in many ways. 

I loved seeing a good investigation with a lot of twists and turns, everybody playing a role, Fin and Carisi each had some great scenes, I want more of them working together, they are awesome. 

Nice to see Stone being an ADA and not Benson’s lapdog and doing his own job separate from Benson, after last weeks Puppet Stone, it was great to see him back to his normal self, I’m hoping last week was just a one time thing and Stone remains a strong prosecutor and not what we saw last episode.

No Noah and no Al/Rollins pregnancy drama was very refreshing.

My issues with the episode were : The constant scenes of Benson reassuring the victims, it felt like a PSA and an attempt to boost up Mariska/Benson and make her look like the patron saint of all rape victims, one scene would’ve been fine, but we had it least 3 of the same scenes. Mariska needs to tone down her facial expressions, her over dramatic acting is laughable, especially her look at the end when she found out the perp had called the wrong number. And Staines not telling her client to shut up at the end when the perp went on a rant, she’s a sharp lawyer and she would’ve told him to shut up, I bought that the perp would lash out at Carol given his years of resentment and obsession with her, but Staines should’ve done everything in her power to keep her client quiet.

Overall this was a good episode that felt like a classic SVU storyline : good investigation with good twists, nice use of all the characters, no personal soaps, no political preaching and not much St Olivia worship. It’s nice to see that SVU can still deliver a strong episode. 

[SarahPrtr]

2 hours ago, wknt3 said:

Especially since Mariska insisted on dialing on the whispering and watery eyed anguish up to 11. It was bad enough that she was at the initial crime scent to begin with and acting like a detective instead of a CO, but at least they kept that to Season 17-19 levels.

GRRRRR!!!!  Her whispering!!!  ARGGHHH!!!!  I just skip over those scenes.  Not missing anything.

[HunterHunted]

13 hours ago, Iguessnot said:

How is a lawyer smart enough to get her client off on a warrant issue, dumb enough to let him run him mouth like that?

This is a perennial Law & Order problem and not just SVU. Criminal Intent and the Mothership both had this same issue. It's probably just better to consider it as one of those Law & Order tropes like people too busy to stop doing their jobs to answer police questions.

My siblings and I call the too busy to stop doing their jobs "Listen detectives, these sweaters aren't going to fold themselves." Because so often, none of the jobs have any real urgency.

Edited October 12, 2018 by HunterHunted

[WendyCR72]

46 minutes ago, HunterHunted said:

This is a perennial Law & Order problem and not just SVU. Criminal Intent and the Mothership both had this same issue. It's probably just better to consider it as one of those Law & Order tropes like people too busy to stop doing their jobs to answer police questions.

On Criminal Intent, very, (VERY) infrequently, the excuse of the accused having waived counsel would come up. But, yeah, more often than not the attorney was a potted plant. While it was more prevalent with Goren and Eames, it also happened with Logan/Barek, then Logan/Wheeler, and Nichols/Wheeler and Nichols/Stevens. (I don't recall accused folks waiving much during the Mothership, though someone had to in 20 seasons, right? LOL!)

So @HunterHunted identifying it as a franchise trope fits here. But you'd think by now someone on staff could figure out creative ways and/or reasons why the lawyers just let their clients dig a bigger hole for themselves after...what, 28 years of this franchise?!

[dttruman]

If you are going to place this reminder concerning Mariska Hargitay or Olivia Benson, could you please put a link in it for the "Olivia Benson thread" for those of us who aren't computer savy and have to go back and find it.

[dttruman]

This is their best episode of the season, but it took them four episodes to do it. I just hope I am not still saying this at the end of the season. This had some creativity to it and a natural flow. It had a good twist in there and even had me guessing the outcome. My prediction was the father (of the murdered son) was going to step in at the last second and shoot "Iron Cross", I can't remember his name. The only noticeable flaw and most have pointed it out already was the inconsistency of the defense attorney.  You would think they would have caught that.

There was only one other inconsistency that I noticed that didn't take place. Considering Benson's flare for women's rights and over dramatics, I thought she was going to burst into the interrogation room and relieve Fin and Carisi of duty and have them brought up on charges of disrespecting a female superior officer, when they told a suspect that Benson has buffalo nuts, is too good for mortal man, and needs to be given it good.

[wknt3]

9 hours ago, HunterHunted said:

This is a perennial Law & Order problem and not just SVU. Criminal Intent and the Mothership both had this same issue. It's probably just better to consider it as one of those Law & Order tropes like people too busy to stop doing their jobs to answer police questions.

 

8 hours ago, WendyCR72 said:

So @HunterHunted identifying it as a franchise trope fits here. But you'd think by now someone on staff could figure out creative ways and/or reasons why the lawyers just let their clients dig a bigger hole for themselves after...what, 28 years of this franchise?!

It bothered me a bit, even though I am well aware it is a franchise trope, and one that this particular series has always been a bit too reliant on. It was the execution here that bugged me more than anything else. If the lawyer had been a bit more assertive beyond just telling her client not to talk and touched his shoulder or something, incel creep could have shoved her aside and left her in shock for a moment. This staging would have given her a good reason not to shove a sock in his mouth, been in character with the perp's issues with women and violent streak, and been better television as it would have helped a lot with suspension of disbelief and been more dramatic plus it would have given Callie Thorne more to work with.

Edited October 12, 2018 by wknt3
autocorrect fail.

[HunterHunted]

@wknt3 Criminal Intent and SVU were both particularly guilty of pulling this. The Mothership constantly employed a variation of this that I call the "bombing run." The bombing run always occurs at trial and is almost always during the final 5 - 10 minutes of the episode. Usually it's the EADA cross examining the defendant. He tries one question. He gets a sustained objection. He tries another tactic. He gets another sustained objection. He tries a 3rd tactic, which should have been objected to and sometimes is, but the EADA is able to barrel through before the judge rules, ask a dozen questions or so, and ultimately the defendant is so overwhelmed that he or she confesses

For the "bombing run" to work, both the judge and defense attorney have to forget how their mouths work and stay silent during the barrage of a dozen questions. They usually do. The judge has to also forget that he or she has gavel to use to get the EADA's attention. The judge never uses the gavel.

Edited October 13, 2018 by HunterHunted

[gesundheit]

I figured they were going to do an incel episode, and here we are! I think they did a fairly decent job of it, I agree with those above who felt it was the best of the season thus far (save the ridiculous final scene where the defense attorney's tongue was spontaneously numbed or something). I did have to look at my watch several times in the first 10 minutes or so, though, because the second I heard "Chad and Stacy" I was like DON'T ANY OF YOU DETECTIVES READ THE INTERNET? That's very famously (or infamously, rather) what the incels use. And they definitely had fun with everyone's mommy issues. Nicely done! But indeed, as someone said above (sorry, for some reason the site doesn't let me quote or do paragraph breaks or anything normal), the best moment of the episode was definitely Fin having to take the leash of the tiny puffy white dog. The look on Ice-T's face was priceless. Dude's not going to win any acting awards, but he can pull a "moment" with beauty. The show is lucky to have him!

[DesertCyclist]

13 hours ago, Iguessnot said:

How is a lawyer smart enough to get her client off on a warrant issue, dumb enough to let him run him mouth like that?

Smarter writing would have had her at least attempt to and then him brush her off -- she's a woman, after all.

[dttruman]

On 10/12/2018 at 12:35 AM, Iguessnot said:

How is a lawyer smart enough to get her client off on a warrant issue, dumb enough to let him run him mouth like that?

Do you think when the lawyer saw what kind of a guy he really was, that she let him dig his own grave by not telling him to shut up? I think that's the excuse the writers would give to justify the situation.

Edited October 13, 2018 by dttruman

[augmentedfourth]

Oh lord, I spend too much time on the internet. I hadn't read any episode descriptions before going in, but as soon as I heard the incorrect names of Chad and Stacy, I knew exactly where this was headed and I wasn't wrong. I'm just thankful my mom gave up on the show this season in favor of Grey's Anatomy because I would have had a lot of explaining to do. And I'm perfectly happy with not having to explain incels to my mother. (I remember having to explain the Gamergate episode to her a couple years ago. "But that sounds really dumb." Yes, Mom, it does and it is. And I think there was another internet-y episode last year I had to explain, but I'm drawing a blank.)

 

Anyway! Not a terrible episode, for the reasons already pointed out above - an actual SVU case and minimal personal drama. I agree that the final unnecessary reveal that the guy used the wrong phone number felt a little off. I get that it was supposed to make him seem even more unreasonable/unlikable and the woman more of an innocent victim. But let's say he had left her a message with the right number. If she'd ignored/deleted it, if she turned him down gently, even if she laughed in his face and told the entire school what a loser he was...none of that would have meant she deserved to be raped and her husband murdered. A stronger ending might have been if she'd stared him down and said something like, "I would never have gone to the prom with you...and this is why" as he gets carted off. 

[Iguessnot]

11 hours ago, dttruman said:

Do you think when the lawyer saw what kind of a guy he really was, that she let him dig his own grave by not telling him to shut up? I think that's the excuse the writers would give to justify the situation.

There was an episode back in the day when a lawyer sabotaged his guilty client (something about a fraternity log). However the viewing audience was given this information. This Revenge episode, she was just a fly on the wall. 

[ForeverAlone]

I enjoyed this episode MUCH more than last week's political crapfest. It felt much more like the type of SVU episodes I like. It involved actual sex crimes, actual investigations that required them to do their job and the perp didn't just land in their lap. It required Peter to do some actual lawyering, with interesting twists and turns. Everybody got to contribute to this episode and it didn't feel lopsided. This episode incorporated more current themes this show is known for (i.e. incels and their twisted, ridiculous philosophy), but it did it better than political themes. 

The only gripe I had was that the incel dudes seemed just a tad over the top in their deluded entitlement, or at least that Tony (I think that was his name) confessed way too easily and they were all way too eager to confess. I know they needed to get to an arrest some way. I just wish the episode was written that it wouldn't have required a confession. I'm not a personal fan of those emotional outburst confessions and prefer when the team uses evidence to prove their case. But overall that is a minor thing, since this was a substantial improvement over the first three episodes. 

[SarahPrtr]

5 hours ago, Iguessnot said:

There was an episode back in the day when a lawyer sabotaged his guilty client (something about a fraternity log). However the viewing audience was given this information. This Revenge episode, she was just a fly on the wall. 

Oh yeah, Brotherhood, in season 5.  The lawyer was the father of the murdered student.

[dttruman]

On 10/13/2018 at 11:54 PM, ForeverAlone said:

(i.e. incels and their twisted, ridiculous philosophy

 

On 10/13/2018 at 11:54 PM, ForeverAlone said:

the incel dudes seemed just a tad over the top in their deluded entitlement

I agree with you, but you have to give some kudos to the writers on this one. This wacked out way of thinking can only be found on the "Dark Net". That's what gave it a little more credibility to me. Usually they write stuff that they expect us to swallow hook, line, and sinker, no matter how unrealistic it sounds.

Edited October 15, 2018 by dttruman

[dttruman]

21 hours ago, Iguessnot said:

There was an episode back in the day when a lawyer sabotaged his guilty client (something about a fraternity log). However the viewing audience was given this information

I think there was another SVU one, when a lawyer knew her client killed someone, but let it go for some 20 years but then sabotaged her client.

[Aethera]

On 10/12/2018 at 5:56 AM, dttruman said:

If you are going to place this reminder concerning Mariska Hargitay or Olivia Benson, could you please put a link in it for the "Olivia Benson thread" for those of us who aren't computer savy and have to go back and find it.

It is in the post at the top of the thread that I "Announcementized" to show just above the reply box - but in the pinned version, it's missing. This is likely a bug, which I'll report, but meanwhile, here it is :) 

[PaisleyPam]

On 10/12/2018 at 12:35 AM, Iguessnot said:

What bothered me was Olivia is so committed to being an advocate, she doesn't bother doing her job. The first rape victim is telling Olivia what happened, and then with her baby talk voice she gives the usual disclaimer " I know this is difficult" but can you describe the guy. The woman was actively talking. Why would giving a description be difficult? The woman continues to describe what leads up to the assault, and Olivia asks about his race/ethnicity and she replies he was wearing a helmet.

Yeah..."What kind of helmet?" might have been a useful question. Motorcycle? Football? Viking?

[dttruman]

4 hours ago, PaisleyPam said:

Yeah..."What kind of helmet?" might have been a useful question. Motorcycle? Football? Viking?

I agree, these are the little things they miss or leave out. When writers leave these out, is it because they are sloppy in their storytelling or do they have to make time for someone who is guaranteed a certain amount of camera time and dialogue?

Edited October 15, 2018 by dttruman

[Iguessnot]

1 hour ago, dttruman said:

I agree, these are the little things they miss or leave out. When writers leave these out, is it because they are sloppy in their storytelling or do they have to make time for someone who is guaranteed a certain amount of camera time and dialogue?

The helmet was semi important and the woman specifically described it as a motorcycle helmet. The rapist was wearing gloves but I had to rewind to find that out. Olivia didn't bother to ask.

[Joe Hellandback]

On ‎12‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 5:35 AM, Iguessnot said:

What bothered me was Olivia is so committed to being an advocate, she doesn't bother doing her job. The first rape victim is telling Olivia what happened, and then with her baby talk voice she gives the usual disclaimer " I know this is difficult" but can you describe the guy. The woman was actively talking. Why would giving a description be difficult? The woman continues to describe what leads up to the assault, and Olivia asks about his race/ethnicity and she replies he was wearing a helmet. Olivia just writes that down because a seasoned SVU detective wouldn't inquire if the victim saw his hands or any other body part during the rape. The lady asks whether she has to do this now, and Olivia the advocate says nope you don't and immediately arranges her transport to the hospital. Of course the victim says something that requires advocate Olivia to declare once again "it's not your fault."

As long as she drops a few soundbites, Olivia doesn't even pretend to be doing her job (or her former job).

When they arrested that guy at his home, they didn't even say why he was under arrest. 

How is a lawyer smart enough to get her client off on a warrant issue, dumb enough to let him run him mouth like that?

Olivia who can't bother to sufficiently interview the first rape victim, because it's to difficult, drags the last one into a room with her rapist, having Stone make the introduction. Bizarre.

One of my biggest bugbears with the series, they never let the victims talk and they lead them through their testimony.

[Joe Hellandback]

On ‎12‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 12:11 PM, dttruman said:

This is their best episode of the season, but it took them four episodes to do it. I just hope I am not still saying this at the end of the season. This had some creativity to it and a natural flow. It had a good twist in there and even had me guessing the outcome. My prediction was the father (of the murdered son) was going to step in at the last second and shoot "Iron Cross", I can't remember his name. The only noticeable flaw and most have pointed it out already was the inconsistency of the defense attorney.  You would think they would have caught that.

There was only one other inconsistency that I noticed that didn't take place. Considering Benson's flare for women's rights and over dramatics, I thought she was going to burst into the interrogation room and relieve Fin and Carisi of duty and have them brought up on charges of disrespecting a female superior officer, when they told a suspect that Benson has buffalo nuts, is too good for mortal man, and needs to be given it good.

I thought EXACTLY the same thing, I thought the Robert Wagner lookalike was going to take the law into his own hands. 

On ‎12‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 4:57 PM, HunterHunted said:

@wknt3 Criminal Intent and SVU were both particularly guilty of pulling this. The Mothership constantly employed a variation of this that I call the "bombing run." The bombing run always occurs at trial and is almost always during the final 5 - 10 minutes of the episode. Usually it's the EADA cross examining the defendant. He tries one question. He gets a sustained objection. He tries another tactic. He gets another sustained objection. He tries a 3rd tactic, which should have been objected to and sometimes is, but the EADA is able to barrel through before the judge rules, ask a dozen questions or so, and ultimately the defendant is so overwhelmed that he or she confesses

For the "bombing run" to work, both the judge and defense attorney have to forget how their mouths work and stay silent during the barrage of a dozen questions. They usually do. The judge has to also forget that he or she has gavel to use to get the EADA's attention. The judge never uses the gavel.

That goes all the way back to Perry Mason, getting the guilty party to admit their crime on the witness stand. It was so influential that real defence lawyers referred to the 'Perry Mason effect', juries expected to see it in real court and were reluctant to convict without it. 

[Joe Hellandback]

On ‎15‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 11:26 PM, dttruman said:

I agree, these are the little things they miss or leave out. When writers leave these out, is it because they are sloppy in their storytelling or do they have to make time for someone who is guaranteed a certain amount of camera time and dialogue?

In fairness they had him on CCTV but you're right, they NEVER take proper descriptions, Olivia just says 'What did they look like?' and the witness/victim lists only the most distinctive features. 

[Joe Hellandback]

On ‎14‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 4:54 AM, ForeverAlone said:

The only gripe I had was that the incel dudes seemed just a tad over the top in their deluded entitlement, 

If anything they played it down!

[ForeverAlone]

6 hours ago, Joe Hellandback said:

If anything they played it down!

Yeah their online persona definitely, but I don't think those deluded dumbasses would be bowing up so much in the face of being questioned by actual detectives. I think their bravado would have crumbled and they would have been pissing their pants in fear. 

[Joe Hellandback]

1. Interesting little touch that the couple are watching a slasher flick before being attacked for real. 

2. Should Finn not wait until the witness has recovered from his concussion before questioning him?

3. What are the odds that the aerobics instructor is carrying his gun right then and there (and why?) and it's the exact same type as used by the suspect? Why do they send exactly 2 officers to arrest this armed and dangerous suspect, were ESU busy that day (for once)? When will the SVU ever learn not to reveal they're police until they're within touching distance of the suspect?

4. Once again Finn insults the witness then asks for his co-operation? And since when does throwing parties make you a pimp? Like the fact that he has to hold the guy's dog but we should have had a close up of Carisi grinning. Note in the background we see this big cruise ship sailing behind the witness then it disappears in the next shot. 

5. I like 'Do what?', hope he becomes a recurring character. 

6. Nice legal argument, you can see both sides which is always good. 

7. Considering Olivia and Amanda's relationships with their own mothers it's amazing they take exception to Finn's remark. 

8. Exactly what right has Olivia to slap around the suspect in front of everyone in the final scenes? You have to sympathise with the Incel guy in the final scene, you look around the room and everyone is so beautiful except him. 

[Joe Hellandback]

Oh and points to Finn for his hookers remark, nice to know not everyone in the SVU is a prude. Always loved the scenes where he'd put choirboy Eliot in his place.