Law & Order Discussion Topic (2019 - 2021)

[Xeliou66]

3 hours ago, balmz said:

what are some of the most memorable defenses you can remember on the show? it doesn't have to have worked or you agreed with it, just ones you recall stand out

the black rage defense in rage is one, also the ending of the episode suggested it might really have some merit

The defense from Angel about god wanting the mom to kill her baby was quite memorable and ridiculous, and also Dworkin’s defense in Chosen about the killer sending money to Israel, while still not admitting guilt to the murder, was bizarre. I was glad neither jury fell for those defenses, they were both involved ridiculous.

[andromeda331]

5 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

The defense from Angel about god wanting the mom to kill her baby was quite memorable and ridiculous, and also Dworkin’s defense in Chosen about the killer sending money to Israel, while still not admitting guilt to the murder, was bizarre. I was glad neither jury fell for those defenses, they were both involved ridiculous.

So am I. The defense and defense witness was ridiculous. So its totally okay to murder someone, to kill him. Take him from his family and friends, because the money the defendant stole was sent to Israel. That totally made it okay. I do love McCoy asking the wife on the stand if she would have been okay with it if the man had been Jewish. 

[MarylandGirl]

13 hours ago, balmz said:

what are some of the most memorable defenses you can remember on the show? it doesn't have to have worked or you agreed with it, just ones you recall stand out

the black rage defense in rage is one, also the ending of the episode suggested it might really have some merit

Blood Libel, where they try to claim there was a Jewish conspiracy to frame the defendant.

Thin Ice, where the father said he had "sports rage."

[Xeliou66]

12 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

So am I. The defense and defense witness was ridiculous. So its totally okay to murder someone, to kill him. Take him from his family and friends, because the money the defendant stole was sent to Israel. That totally made it okay. I do love McCoy asking the wife on the stand if she would have been okay with it if the man had been Jewish. 

I loved McCoy asking if it would’ve been okay if the victim was Jewish as well, and the wife being unable to answer. The murderer and his wife were basically saying that Jewish lives were worth more than non Jewish lives, that murder and theft was justified if the money stolen was helping Jews in Israel, and I was glad that McCoy pointed that out. Serena really pissed me off in that episode, basically accusing McCoy of anti Semitism, McCoy was terrific in Chosen.

[andromeda331]

2 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

I loved McCoy asking if it would’ve been okay if the victim was Jewish as well, and the wife being unable to answer. The murderer and his wife were basically saying that Jewish lives were worth more than non Jewish lives, that murder and theft was justified if the money stolen was helping Jews in Israel, and I was glad that McCoy pointed that out. Serena really pissed me off in that episode, basically accusing McCoy of anti Semitism, McCoy was terrific in Chosen.

He really was. That was always my favorite part about McCoy. He always asked that question or similar ones every time it came up. In this one it was if the victim had been Jewish. In the one about the Christian man who everyone thought should get off on the murder, or the woman who discovered Jesus in jail and everyone wanted to get her off. Stone used to too. I like asking that horrible Rose if murder was wrong wasn't she guilty of murder of Mary's baby in Life Choice. Also what Stone says to Shambala Green in Sanctuary.

Shambala... Just once, I'd like to hear someone in this country stand up and say, "I did it. I'm the one responsible for my actions, not my television set, and not the color of my skin." And if it makes you feel good to call me a racist, fine. But if you want to know who's really responsible for racism in today's society, take a good look in the mirror. 
 

And also to Adam

Ben Stone: Reality? The reality is that no one is willing to draw a line in the sand. Nobody is willing to say that the law is the law. And if you break it, you will be prosecuted: win, lose or draw. 
 

[GHScorpiosRule]

Finished up season 11--good-bye, Abbie! *sniff* I'll miss you! I was TOTALLY TEAM ABBIE in "School Daze." I don't know if it's my own personal experiences, but Jamie irritated the hell out of me here. Of course, let's not forget the continuity gaffe--with Jack acting this was the first time he'd seen her since she left the show. And that's not the case at all. She returned in season 10, I think? Anyhoo.

Boo-freakin'-hoo, that Henry was picked on/made fun of, blah, blah, blah. As someone who was teased unmercifully, and got her ass kicked on a regular basis during elementary school, and harassed in junior high (I finally got some respite in high school--but I suspect that was due to all those NJROTC guys who "adopted" me as their kid sister and looked out for me-we were all in the Outdoors Club-rock climbing, camping, hiking), and I never thought to get a gun and shoot and kill not only my tormentors, but those that didn't even know me or do anything to me, like Henry did. Sure, let's send him to a mental health facility for treatment. Jamie was more interested in finding some kind of solution for the number of school shootings than she was this kid.

Whenever there was a white kid, a rich white kid, who was under 20, but clearly showed signs of being a stone cold killer, Nora just had to go and clutch her pearls, asking Jack to show some compassion or figure out another way instead of just prosecuting. I LOVED what Abbie said to her.

And the mother was the worst kind of enabler--since Dad revealed that Henry had also hurt his little sister. Now HE broke my heart. And he showed me how hard it was for him to do the right thing, but he did do it. Unlike mom, who only whined an lied about that "head injury" that "caused" this to happen.

UGH. And now the Rohmbot years. I'm sucking it up and watching, and just trying to ignore both Rohmbot and Nora. And I hate to use this term, but with all the whining that Rohmbot does, and her lack of understanding is just mind numbing. But her White Privilege is out there. When she asks Kerry Washington's character in "3 DAWG night" *why she didn't walk way when the victim sexually assaulted her. Or just kept seeing things in black & white for issues that were more nuanced, because she didn't have the experience. 

But yay! Ron Carver shout out! Though it was obvious why Nora wanted him to second chair.

And sadly, we're now entering the phase of a lot of the cases being very political due to 9/11. Bleagh.

*♥️💕IDRIS ELBA!!!!!!!💕♥️

[txhorns79]

2 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

When she asks Kerry Washington's character in "3 DAWG night" *why she didn't walk way when the victim sexually assaulted her. Or just kept seeing things in black & white for issues that were more nuanced, because she didn't have the experience. 

It's interesting how much the culture has changed over the course of this show.  For instance, in the ripped from the headlines Menendez case from Season 1, Ben barely bats an eye when he hears that the father regularly abused his children, both physically and verbally.  

Also, there's some odd police procedure in that episode.  Max and Logan go to the murder victim's house, presumably to speak to the children, but no one is home except the carpet cleaner.  The house is clearly no longer a crime scene, but Max and Logan just walk up to the dead father's study and start going through his mail.  There's no discussion of a warrant or anything that might actually allow them to be there.   They did discuss whether the mail might be admissible at trial, and use it to find out that the son's college was sending the father progress reports.  It's such an odd moment. 

[blondiec0332]

26 minutes ago, txhorns79 said:

Also, there's some odd police procedure in that episode. 

The show did this sometimes. They need something to be known for a plot point and they insert it sloppily. While this show had some good plots none of the writers were Agatha Christie. 

[Xeliou66]

11 minutes ago, txhorns79 said:

It's interesting how much the culture has changed over the course of this show.  For instance, in the ripped from the headlines Menendez case from Season 1, Ben barely bats an eye when he hears that the father regularly abused his children, both physically and verbally.  

Also, there's some odd police procedure in that episode.  Max and Logan go to the murder victim's house, presumably to speak to the children, but no one is home except the carpet cleaner.  The house is clearly no longer a crime scene, but Max and Logan just walk up to the dead father's study and start going through his mail.  There's no discussion of a warrant or anything that might actually allow them to be there.   They did discuss whether the mail might be admissible at trial, and use it to find out that the son's college was sending the father progress reports.  It's such an odd moment. 

There was odd police procedure all throughout season 1, the investigation parts seemed very uneven and were hard to follow at times because of how disjointed they were. 

3 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Finished up season 11--good-bye, Abbie! *sniff* I'll miss you! I was TOTALLY TEAM ABBIE in "School Daze." I don't know if it's my own personal experiences, but Jamie irritated the hell out of me here. Of course, let's not forget the continuity gaffe--with Jack acting this was the first time he'd seen her since she left the show. And that's not the case at all. She returned in season 10, I think? Anyhoo.

Boo-freakin'-hoo, that Henry was picked on/made fun of, blah, blah, blah. As someone who was teased unmercifully, and got her ass kicked on a regular basis during elementary school, and harassed in junior high (I finally got some respite in high school--but I suspect that was due to all those NJROTC guys who "adopted" me as their kid sister and looked out for me-we were all in the Outdoors Club-rock climbing, camping, hiking), and I never thought to get a gun and shoot and kill not only my tormentors, but those that didn't even know me or do anything to me, like Henry did. Sure, let's send him to a mental health facility for treatment. Jamie was more interested in finding some kind of solution for the number of school shootings than she was this kid.

Whenever there was a white kid, a rich white kid, who was under 20, but clearly showed signs of being a stone cold killer, Nora just had to go and clutch her pearls, asking Jack to show some compassion or figure out another way instead of just prosecuting. I LOVED what Abbie said to her.

And the mother was the worst kind of enabler--since Dad revealed that Henry had also hurt his little sister. Now HE broke my heart. And he showed me how hard it was for him to do the right thing, but he did do it. Unlike mom, who only whined an lied about that "head injury" that "caused" this to happen.

UGH. And now the Rohmbot years. I'm sucking it up and watching, and just trying to ignore both Rohmbot and Nora. And I hate to use this term, but with all the whining that Rohmbot does, and her lack of understanding is just mind numbing. But her White Privilege is out there. When she asks Kerry Washington's character in "3 DAWG night" *why she didn't walk way when the victim sexually assaulted her. Or just kept seeing things in black & white for issues that were more nuanced, because she didn't have the experience. 

But yay! Ron Carver shout out! Though it was obvious why Nora wanted him to second chair.

And sadly, we're now entering the phase of a lot of the cases being very political due to 9/11. Bleagh.

*♥️💕IDRIS ELBA!!!!!!!💕♥️

Serena and Nora in the same season was hard to stomach, both were very similar characters- both dull and with very little personality, and both soft and bleeding heart types, too soft for prosecutors in some cases. It made the legal parts of that season not as compelling as the investigation parts, which were always great with Briscoe/Green.

I loved the Ron Carver reference as well, I always liked seeing continuity between the franchises and Nora referencing him was great!! I would’ve loved to have seen McCoy and Carver work together at some point, it’s too bad one character didn’t appear on the other show. 

I got tired of the constant War on Terror/political themed episodes in those seasons as well.

[andromeda331]

5 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Finished up season 11--good-bye, Abbie! *sniff* I'll miss you! I was TOTALLY TEAM ABBIE in "School Daze." I don't know if it's my own personal experiences, but Jamie irritated the hell out of me here. Of course, let's not forget the continuity gaffe--with Jack acting this was the first time he'd seen her since she left the show. And that's not the case at all. She returned in season 10, I think? Anyhoo.

Boo-freakin'-hoo, that Henry was picked on/made fun of, blah, blah, blah. As someone who was teased unmercifully, and got her ass kicked on a regular basis during elementary school, and harassed in junior high (I finally got some respite in high school--but I suspect that was due to all those NJROTC guys who "adopted" me as their kid sister and looked out for me-we were all in the Outdoors Club-rock climbing, camping, hiking), and I never thought to get a gun and shoot and kill not only my tormentors, but those that didn't even know me or do anything to me, like Henry did. Sure, let's send him to a mental health facility for treatment. Jamie was more interested in finding some kind of solution for the number of school shootings than she was this kid.

Whenever there was a white kid, a rich white kid, who was under 20, but clearly showed signs of being a stone cold killer, Nora just had to go and clutch her pearls, asking Jack to show some compassion or figure out another way instead of just prosecuting. I LOVED what Abbie said to her.

And the mother was the worst kind of enabler--since Dad revealed that Henry had also hurt his little sister. Now HE broke my heart. And he showed me how hard it was for him to do the right thing, but he did do it. Unlike mom, who only whined an lied about that "head injury" that "caused" this to happen.

UGH. And now the Rohmbot years. I'm sucking it up and watching, and just trying to ignore both Rohmbot and Nora. And I hate to use this term, but with all the whining that Rohmbot does, and her lack of understanding is just mind numbing. But her White Privilege is out there. When she asks Kerry Washington's character in "3 DAWG night" *why she didn't walk way when the victim sexually assaulted her. Or just kept seeing things in black & white for issues that were more nuanced, because she didn't have the experience. 

But yay! Ron Carver shout out! Though it was obvious why Nora wanted him to second chair.

And sadly, we're now entering the phase of a lot of the cases being very political due to 9/11. Bleagh.

*♥️💕IDRIS ELBA!!!!!!!💕♥️

My judgement maybe clouded too watching School Daze. Yeah Jamie bugged the hell out of me in School Daze and so did Nora. I was so glad McCoy and Abby kept reminding both that he shot and killed four people. Jamie wanted to send him to therapy. Great, Jamie, what exactly is that going to do? How exactly do you decide he's 'cured'? Your so worried about school shootings, you tell those parents that the boy who murdered their child and three others that he's not going to jail for it. Yes, he was bullied and I feel sorry for him I was too but that ended when he shot up the school. When he killed four kids. They changed Jamie the way they changed Robinette, there's no way the Jamie we know would argue that.  Also, there was a time I think in the 90s that we tried that with kids who were violent. Instead of sentencing them to jail sent them to shrinks and doctors to see if we could 'save' them or 'fix' them. And it failed. They often went off to commit even bigger crimes or repeat their crimes. 

The mom who enabled is so infuriating and pretty accurate. Eric Harris's father was one too. No matter what his boy did he never believed he did it or the cops even when it was clear he was escalating. 

Nora and Serena were just so bad. They always seemed shocked and horrified at convicting the murderer. But we never saw that same shock and horrified towards the victims. So many times I really wondered why they were at the DAs office since they really didn't seem like they wanted to prosecute crimes. "Your going to try the kid?" Yes, Nora, he shot four people. Or wondering why not let doctors treat the suspect. Despite it not working Nora, it shows that rich parents can get their kids off anything while poor parents kids go to jail. Serena was pretty much the same.  

[GHScorpiosRule]

Jamie was mostly redeemed when she showed up as a judge in L&O: Trial by Jury. It was the one where Aasif Mandvi--he of the many roles in this universe and in all franchises--played a jackass jerkwad Judge Patel. But he and Jamie were colleagues and friends of sorts, and she was trying to find out why he was being such a hardass.

And Rohmbot revealed her whininess and immaturity in "Prejudiced" I think it was, when Nora asked her what she thought of the case. And she responds petulantly, "I'm only second chair." She really was butthurt that Nora suggested that Ron take over as second chair. I'm glad that Jack nixed it for the reasons he stated, though I would have LOVED to have seen such opposing styles of prosecution, working the same case together.

Oh!Oh!Oh! Did you recognize the judge in Season 11's "Swept Away...A Very Special Episode"???? When she shut down the defense attorney, played by Tom O'Rourke, who was just being an ass. She was actually tough on this when it looked like the kid was the killer. Granted he was late teens early 20s and a ripoff of MTV's The Real World or something, but this is the SAME judge who REFUSED to punish that sociopathic killer in "Killerz." Where was this decisive, tough demeanor in "Killerz"? 

4 hours ago, blondiec0332 said:

The show did this sometimes. They need something to be known for a plot point and they insert it sloppily. While this show had some good plots none of the writers were Agatha Christie. 

I don't think any of the writers were trying to be Dame Christie. Plus, this show didn't try to pretend to be Poirot or a murder mystery show. It was a straight up procedural, and it had a good number of good writers and episodes. It never pretended to be something it wasn't. Dick Wolf straight up said it was a Ripped from the Headlines type show. The first season was so very different because he wanted it to be a "docu-drama", hence the different film used and the shaky camera work. But I love the first season. We got some very good episodes out of there.

Edited October 28, 2019 by GHScorpiosRule

[balmz]

On 10/25/2019 at 10:05 PM, Xeliou66 said:

The defense from Angel about god wanting the mom to kill her baby was quite memorable and ridiculous, and also Dworkin’s defense in Chosen about the killer sending money to Israel, while still not admitting guilt to the murder, was bizarre. I was glad neither jury fell for those defenses, they were both involved ridiculous.

i remember the angel one, i smell a successful appeal and retrial for the woman in the future because of ineffective counsel 

[GHScorpiosRule]

14 hours ago, balmz said:

i remember the angel one, i smell a successful appeal and retrial for the woman in the future because of ineffective counsel 

Not me. She admitted her guilt while she was on the stand. That was good enough for me.

UGH.UGH.UGH. Just watched "Undercovered" and WHAT THE FUCK? I can't believe there was a hung jury over this! Garcia deserved to get a guilty verdict. He didn't kill someone who was evuhl or who was a bad person. 

And maybe I'm stoopid, but since when do INSURANCE COMPANIES tell the insured what treatment they or their dependents need? Isn't that something the DOCTOR would recommend? And then on top of that, they go to a different doctor for a second opinion? HUH? The episode implied they never got a first opinion from a DOCTOR.

And I don't understand why, in these mid-seasons, why Jack isn't talking about retrying the cases. A hung jury isn't equal to "Not Guilty", dammit. Stone retried those raping bastards in "The Violence of Summer" with much less evidence!

[Ailianna]

9 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Not me. She admitted her guilt while she was on the stand. That was good enough for me.

UGH.UGH.UGH. Just watched "Undercovered" and WHAT THE FUCK? I can't believe there was a hung jury over this! Garcia deserved to get a guilty verdict. He didn't kill someone who was evuhl or who was a bad person. 

And maybe I'm stoopid, but since when do INSURANCE COMPANIES tell the insured what treatment they or their dependents need? Isn't that something the DOCTOR would recommend? And then on top of that, they go to a different doctor for a second opinion? HUH? The episode implied they never got a first opinion from a DOCTOR.

And I don't understand why, in these mid-seasons, why Jack isn't talking about retrying the cases. A hung jury isn't equal to "Not Guilty", dammit. Stone retried those raping bastards in "The Violence of Summer" with much less evidence!

Insurance companies don't tell you what you need--they tell you what they will pay for.  And if you need something they won't pay for, then you have only two choices--pay for it yourself or don't get the treatment.  Insurance companies do have doctors to review coverage and treatments recommended by the patient's doctor, to ensure that the treatment is really needed and the most cost-efficient, but most of those doctors have limited practical clinical experience, and are hired for the insurance company's bottom line versus patient care.

[GHScorpiosRule]

1 hour ago, Ailianna said:

Insurance companies don't tell you what you need--they tell you what they will pay for.  And if you need something they won't pay for, then you have only two choices--pay for it yourself or don't get the treatment.  Insurance companies do have doctors to review coverage and treatments recommended by the patient's doctor, to ensure that the treatment is really needed and the most cost-efficient, but most of those doctors have limited practical clinical experience, and are hired for the insurance company's bottom line versus patient care.

Right. I was more or less being facetious, because I do know that-what with being diagnosed with Breast cancer and going through the mastectomies, chemo and reconstruction surgery. But this episode actually had those “executives” or whoever they were, tell the cops that THEY recommended Garcia have his daughter get the Bone Marrow Transplant. 🙄🙄🙄🙄

[Spartan Girl]

On October 29, 2019 at 8:59 AM, GHScorpiosRule said:

UGH.UGH.UGH. Just watched "Undercovered" and WHAT THE FUCK? I can't believe there was a hung jury over this! Garcia deserved to get a guilty verdict. He didn't kill someone who was evuhl or who was a bad person. 

THANK YOU! And I'm equally pissed that he would be allowed to live with his little daughter after bludgeoning a guy to death. His wife was obviously stoopid if she would even consider it.

[Xeliou66]

14 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

THANK YOU! And I'm equally pissed that he would be allowed to live with his little daughter after bludgeoning a guy to death. His wife was obviously stoopid if she would even consider it.

Yes, the fact that his wife would let him come back home and live with her and their daughter after bludgeoning a man is disturbing. He should’ve been convicted.

[balmz]

since we are talking about uncovered, what are some other episodes where you felt the perp got off too easy or should have been convicted

one is killerz clearly

another is flight with the company walking away despite having sold very dangerous microbes, i hope the mother of the boy who died won the case, one thought is if adam was willing, jack tells the company he will drop the charges if they give the mother an acceptable settlement, otherwise he will continue the prosecution, he doesn't have to mean it, a good bluff can work wonders, i recall an episode of svu had novak tell a company she would drop charges if they paid for everyone's medical bills for life

[Xeliou66]

2 hours ago, balmz said:

since we are talking about uncovered, what are some other episodes where you felt the perp got off too easy or should have been convicted

one is killerz clearly

another is flight with the company walking away despite having sold very dangerous microbes, i hope the mother of the boy who died won the case, one thought is if adam was willing, jack tells the company he will drop the charges if they give the mother an acceptable settlement, otherwise he will continue the prosecution, he doesn't have to mean it, a good bluff can work wonders, i recall an episode of svu had novak tell a company she would drop charges if they paid for everyone's medical bills for life

Manhood immediately comes to mind. That ending was more infuriating than Killerz or Undercovered IMO, those shitstain cops who let the gay cop die because of their homophobia should’ve been convicted, that was a great episode but those cops should’ve been convicted. There have been several episodes where I feel like this but Manhood has the most anger inducing ending in L&O history. 

[WendyCR72]

1 hour ago, Xeliou66 said:

Manhood immediately comes to mind. That ending was more infuriating than Killerz or Undercovered IMO, those shitstain cops who let the gay cop die because of their homophobia should’ve been convicted, that was a great episode but those cops should’ve been convicted. There have been several episodes where I feel like this but Manhood has the most anger inducing ending in L&O history. 

This was redone by Law & Order: UK in Season 1, titled "Samaritan". (All L&O: UK episodes were remakes of the American series' episodes, with the original title and writers included in their opening credits.) I forget if the UK version had that end differently or not, though.

ETA: Apparently, Sundance Now, a subsidiary of the Sundance TV channel, has all of the UK episodes available to stream - providing one signs up. But they have a free trial option.

[Xeliou66]

26 minutes ago, WendyCR72 said:

This was redone by Law & Order: UK in Season 1, titled "Samaritan". (All L&O: UK episodes were remakes of the American series' episodes, with the original title and writers included in their opening credits.) I forget if the UK version had that end differently or not, though.

ETA: Apparently, Sundance Now, a subsidiary of the Sundance TV channel, has all of the UK episodes available to stream - providing one signs up. But they have a free trial option.

I remember seeing the UK version, in the UK version, it was just one homophobic cop who let his partner die and yes it did end in the same way with him being acquitted. 

[balmz]

sorry if this comes off as overly pc or sjw but i wanted to ask another question, what things or episodes in law and order do you think have not aged well?

one is the episode burden, it treated the kid who was killed as a pain or useless since he was severely disabled and that it was best to kill the child,even the title was rather questionable, i have several bad disabilities in my life and the way it was portrayed made me rather uncomfortable

that said it did had one of my faviorite lines that was funny

mccoy to defendant: mr sutter wasn;'t the first severally handicapped patient you have treated was he?

defandant: no of course not

mccoy: did you kill them all?

defense: Objection!

[Ailianna]

I disagree with your read of that episode.  While some of the characters treated the victim as a burden (hence the title), the whole point of the episode and the prosecution of his killer(s) was that no matter how disabled, his life had value and he deserved to live that life.  On the other hand, he was essentially a vegetable.  He was mentally and physically gone, just not yet dead.  so I thought it was easy to empathize with a family that was drained mentally, emotionally, and financially, caring for someone whose flesh was there, but who had no person left in him, no mental ability, no ability to communicate or interact with them.  If you can post on a message board, you have an infinitely greater capacity than the boy did after the crash in this case.  I thought it did a good job of showing both sides, with the despicable, "I am God" doctor on the side.

[shapeshifter]

On 11/2/2019 at 4:41 PM, balmz said:

. . . things or episodes in law and order do you think have not aged well?

one is the episode burden, it treated the kid who was killed as a pain or useless since he was severely disabled and that it was best to kill the child,even the title was rather questionable . . .

I'm glad that you brought up "Burden" as an example of an episode that hasn't aged well, even though, like @Ailianna, I interpreted the episode almost exactly opposite of how you did.
I too saw a family that loved Michael even though he was a financial, emotional, and physical "burden."
However, I can also see, @balmz, how you arrived at your interpretation given that the father admits in court that he would not have saved his son's life if he had known then what his son's future would be, and, even more, the stuff that came up about the daughter's resentment of her brother --especially since it was presented in tandem with the situation of her college funds having been depleted to care for Michael
--and, especially since there was no B plot of able-bodied, similarly-aged siblings voicing equally cruel resentments (as happens --at least in my family).
What struck me as outdated was the characterization of the "serial killer"/Doctor Death as cold and uncaring, and McCoy's opinion of him, and, even more importantly, McCoy's opinion of assisted suicide in general (although that wasn't really clear, given the characterization of the "serial killer").

Without making this post even longer by detouring into personal situations, I will just mention that I am currently considering a move to Oregon because of the opportunity to die with dignity. 

Edited November 4, 2019 by shapeshifter

[Xeliou66]

On 10/26/2019 at 7:49 AM, MarylandGirl said:

Blood Libel, where they try to claim there was a Jewish conspiracy to frame the defendant.

One thing I’ve always thought about Blood Libel is the episode would’ve been stronger if Briscoe hadn’t been one of the people accused in the conspiracy by the defense. We obviously know that Lennie would never tamper with evidence or protect a murderer, so we knew the defense was bullshit. I think the episode would’ve been better if they had allowed a sliver of doubt in the viewers mind, the defense was ridiculous but I would’ve liked it more if we didn’t know for certain. I was glad that at least it appeared the defendant was going to prison as his new lawyer was apparently going to accept a plea deal since the Klan lawyer wouldn’t represent him in a retrial. That episode was also one of the only times where Schiff being Jewish was alluded to which I remember. 

[txhorns79]

I was watching the second season episode, Blood is Thicker..., on WE.  From Nancy Marchand's cold as ice, casually anti-Semitic, society matron to her son's god awful mullet, this was a satisfying episode.  Just the look of shock at the end when Nancy Marchand realized the daughter in law had secretly customized her pin was wonderful, along with the coda where the lesson was both parents were disposable when it came to raising the next generation of the family.   

[GHScorpiosRule]

I'm going to be cautiously yahooing! here. While the episodes during the week jumped from Season 3 episode 4 of "The Corporate Veil" to Season Five, a few weeks ago; the episodes on the weekend are continuing from that, so "Helpless" and "Self-Defense" was on. I LOVE "Helpless" for how Melnick that hideous asshole, gets her mouth gaping like a goldfish, when Paul pulls out the stacks of complaints from women her client "molested, assaulted or raped." And how Ben tells her he gets NO DEAL. And "Self-Defense" is another wonderful episode. Costas DESERVED to go to prison. Asshole RELOADED and ran after Garland, to make sure he was DEAD. That's NOT Self-Defense. Phil annoyed me in this episode.

On the other hand, it seems like we won't get to see Foghorn Leghorn. Sundance jumped from the last episode in Season 12, "Patriot" to Season Five. I'm glad the jury found his ass guilty. I HATED and hate these kind of episodes, where the defense attorney uses FEAR and FEAR MONGERING to get the jury to try and acquit. Though I couldn't tell by Jack's last line, whether he agreed with the defense or not.

[andromeda331]

10 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

I'm going to be cautiously yahooing! here. While the episodes during the week jumped from Season 3 episode 4 of "The Corporate Veil" to Season Five, a few weeks ago; the episodes on the weekend are continuing from that, so "Helpless" and "Self-Defense" was on. I LOVE "Helpless" for how Melnick that hideous asshole, gets her mouth gaping like a goldfish, when Paul pulls out the stacks of complaints from women her client "molested, assaulted or raped." And how Ben tells her he gets NO DEAL. And "Self-Defense" is another wonderful episode. Costas DESERVED to go to prison. Asshole RELOADED and ran after Garland, to make sure he was DEAD. That's NOT Self-Defense. Phil annoyed me in this episode.

On the other hand, it seems like we won't get to see Foghorn Leghorn. Sundance jumped from the last episode in Season 12, "Patriot" to Season Five. I'm glad the jury found his ass guilty. I HATED and hate these kind of episodes, where the defense attorney uses FEAR and FEAR MONGERING to get the jury to try and acquit. Though I couldn't tell by Jack's last line, whether he agreed with the defense or not.

Yes! Costas reloaded and went after him! That is not self defense. I do love Stone asking Phil if he wanted citizens to be doing that. Self-defense ended once the suspect left the store. Costas was clearly after a face off against someone with all his preparation. And yet Phil was still on his side. I'm glad the jury found him guilty. I hate these cases too. 

[andromeda331]

30 minutes ago, txhorns79 said:

I was watching the second season episode, Blood is Thicker..., on WE.  From Nancy Marchand's cold as ice, casually anti-Semitic, society matron to her son's god awful mullet, this was a satisfying episode.  Just the look of shock at the end when Nancy Marchand realized the daughter in law had secretly customized her pin was wonderful, along with the coda where the lesson was both parents were disposable when it came to raising the next generation of the family.   

I love the shock on her face too when she learns the pin had been customized. Its such a weird episode. The husband/murderer is so...pathetic. A grown man with a family of his own and he's still completely under mommy's thumb. His sister was too. I love comment made at the end when Stone and Robinette watch the kids getting into the car. Their going to end up so screwed up. 

[Spartan Girl]

5 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

I love the shock on her face too when she learns the pin had been customized. Its such a weird episode. The husband/murderer is so...pathetic. A grown man with a family of his own and he's still completely under mommy's thumb. His sister was too. I love comment made at the end when Stone and Robinette watch the kids getting into the car. Their going to end up so screwed up. 

The lover was pathetic too. Asshole had to be dragged in to testify. Dude, your wife knew about the affair and she was going to dump your ass whether or not you testified. Sack up and tell the truth.

[andromeda331]

1 minute ago, Spartan Girl said:

The lover was pathetic too. Asshole had to be dragged in to testify. Dude, your wife knew about the affair and she was going to dump your ass whether or not you testified. Sack up and tell the truth.

Yeah, he really was. Poor girl had bad taste when it came to men. How disappointing it must have been to have an affair with a man as pathetic as her husband. Its really hard to have any sympathy for him when he'd rather let her murderer go free then testify. That's cold for someone he supposedly cared about. 

[catlover79]

On 10/25/2019 at 6:22 PM, balmz said:

what are some of the most memorable defenses you can remember on the show? it doesn't have to have worked or you agreed with it, just ones you recall stand out

the black rage defense in rage is one, also the ending of the episode suggested it might really have some merit

Don't forget "cultural insanity" ("Securitate", Season 3).

[Xeliou66]

On 11/2/2019 at 5:41 PM, balmz said:

sorry if this comes off as overly pc or sjw but i wanted to ask another question, what things or episodes in law and order do you think have not aged well?

one is the episode burden, it treated the kid who was killed as a pain or useless since he was severely disabled and that it was best to kill the child,even the title was rather questionable, i have several bad disabilities in my life and the way it was portrayed made me rather uncomfortable

that said it did had one of my faviorite lines that was funny

mccoy to defendant: mr sutter wasn;'t the first severally handicapped patient you have treated was he?

defandant: no of course not

mccoy: did you kill them all?

defense: Objection!

For the most part L&O episodes hold up incredibly well, even though the show started almost 30 years ago. But one episode that has not aged well is Embedded,  it feels like a blatant pro Iraq War propaganda piece designed to make critics of the war look bad by having the anti war journalist stage his own shooting and frame a soldier. Now that we know that the Iraq War was based on lies from the pro war side, the episode just doesn’t hold up well, it was an unusually heavy handed episode that is just hard to watch. One of the very worst episodes in L&O history IMO. 

[wknt3]

On 11/2/2019 at 5:41 PM, balmz said:

sorry if this comes off as overly pc or sjw but i wanted to ask another question, what things or episodes in law and order do you think have not aged well?

one is the episode burden, it treated the kid who was killed as a pain or useless since he was severely disabled and that it was best to kill the child,even the title was rather questionable, i have several bad disabilities in my life and the way it was portrayed made me rather uncomfortable

that said it did had one of my faviorite lines that was funny

mccoy to defendant: mr sutter wasn;'t the first severally handicapped patient you have treated was he?

defandant: no of course not

mccoy: did you kill them all?

defense: Objection!

I think that the show actually holds up pretty well. I would say that some of the episodes from the earlier seasons do feel rather dated today - particularly the portrayal of homosexuality and technology, but they were usually on the right side and accurately depicting what was going on at the time. The only exception IMHO is race which is more a matter of being poorly written and being behind the times when the episodes were aired than not aging well although they look even worse today than they did at the time.
 

1 hour ago, Xeliou66 said:

For the most part L&O episodes hold up incredibly well, even though the show started almost 30 years ago. But one episode that has not aged well is Embedded,  it feels like a blatant pro Iraq War propaganda piece designed to make critics of the war look bad by having the anti war journalist stage his own shooting and frame a soldier. Now that we know that the Iraq War was based on lies from the pro war side, the episode just doesn’t hold up well, it was an unusually heavy handed episode that is just hard to watch. One of the very worst episodes in L&O history IMO. 

I'm not sure that was the intended message - I'm pretty sure it was meant as anti-Geraldo Rivera propaganda and that is both righteous and timeless...

[Xeliou66]

35 minutes ago, wknt3 said:

I think that the show actually holds up pretty well. I would say that some of the episodes from the earlier seasons do feel rather dated today - particularly the portrayal of homosexuality and technology, but they were usually on the right side and accurately depicting what was going on at the time. The only exception IMHO is race which is more a matter of being poorly written and being behind the times when the episodes were aired than not aging well although they look even worse today than they did at the time.
 

I'm not sure that was the intended message - I'm pretty sure it was meant as anti-Geraldo Rivera propaganda and that is both righteous and timeless...

Could you give some examples of episodes dealing with race that are poorly written? I always thought the show dealt with homosexuality well, even in early seasons. It is interesting to see how the technology changed over the course of the show. 

As for Embedded, I stand by thinking it was pro Iraq War propaganda, especially in hindsight it doesn’t look good. Yes it took a swipe at Geraldo for sure but it’s just an episode I don’t like. 

[catlover79]

1 hour ago, wknt3 said:

I'm pretty sure it was meant as anti-Geraldo Rivera propaganda and that is both righteous and timeless...

Yup!! Unfortunately for us Clevelanders, he decided to make our city his home base. 😠😠😠😠😠

[wknt3]

On 11/11/2019 at 5:50 PM, Xeliou66 said:

Could you give some examples of episodes dealing with race that are poorly written? I always thought the show dealt with homosexuality well, even in early seasons. It is interesting to see how the technology changed over the course of the show.

First off I agree that the show did well with gay issues. Some of the earlier episodes feel a bit dated to me, because of how far we've come as a society since then. It's a good thing that AIDS is no longer an automatic death sentence, that so many institutions no longer force people into the closet, etc. As much as I love this show I wouldn't mind if more episodes felt less relevant than they currently do due to us making progress on the issues they are portraying.

As far as episodes that were poorly written, "Out of the Half-Light"  and "Sanctuary" come immediately to mind as examples that feel clunky to me. I know that it's not necessarily a view that's widely shared, but they come across to me a bit shallow and patronizing and feel rather 70's/80's with a very tribal, polarized view of race relations.

Edited November 13, 2019 by wknt3

[catlover79]

What was the episode where Randy Dworkin was using racial slurs as part of his defense argument in court? Jack's shocked and then angered "OBJECTIONS!" were the best part of the episode. I'm trying to track it down. Thanks in advance!!

[GHScorpiosRule]

32 minutes ago, catlover79 said:

What was the episode where Randy Dworkin was using racial slurs as part of his defense argument in court? Jack's shocked and then angered "OBJECTIONS!" were the best part of the episode. I'm trying to track it down. Thanks in advance!!

"Chosen" 

[wknt3]

3 hours ago, catlover79 said:

What was the episode where Randy Dworkin was using racial slurs as part of his defense argument in court? Jack's shocked and then angered "OBJECTIONS!" were the best part of the episode. I'm trying to track it down. Thanks in advance!!

I believe you may have your theatrical defense attorneys confused. Although that is totally the type of stunt Dworkin would have pulled the description sounds more like Ron Silver's Bernie Adler in "Talking Points" the Season 17 episode where the grad student with Parkinson's tries to kill Ann Coulter with the serial numbers filed off.

The scene in question -

Quote

Adler: Okay! Show of hands. Are there any kikes here? How about spics?
McCoy: Objection!
Adler: Okay, now I know there are a couple of coons...
McCoy: Your Honor!
Judge: Enough, Mr. Adler.
Adler: Pisses you off, doesn't it?
Judge: Mr. Adler!
Adler: Actually I'll bet it pisses you off so bad you just threw your reason out the window and all you're thinking about is smacking me upside the head.
McCoy: Objection!
Judge: Counselor!
Adler: Now, I tell you, if I were black and some honkie called me a coon...
Judge: Mr. Adler!
Adler: I'd actually think about killing the son a bitch.
Judge: In my chambers. Now!

Edited November 13, 2019 by wknt3
fixed formatting

[catlover79]

2 hours ago, wknt3 said:

I believe you may have your theatrical defense attorneys confused. Although that is totally the type of stunt Dworkin would have pulled the description sounds more like Ron Silver's Bernie Adler in "Talking Points" the Season 17 episode where the grad student with Parkinson's tries to kill Ann Coulter with the serial numbers filed off.

The scene in question -

Adler: Okay! Show of hands. Are there any kikes here? How about spics? McCoy: Objection!
Adler: Okay Now I know there are a couple of coons.
McCoy: Your Honor!
Judge: Enough, Mr. Adler.
Adler: Pisses you off, doesn't it?
Judge: Mr. Adler!
Adler: Actually I'll bet it pisses you off so bad you just threw your reason out the window and all you're thinking about is smacking me upside the head.
McCoy: Objection!
Judge: Counselor!
Adler: Now, I tell you, if I were black and some honkie called me a coon...
Judge: Mr. Adler!
Adler: I'd actually think about killing the son a bitch.
Judge: In my chambers. Now!

Yes!! Thank you!! This is indeed the one I meant. 

[Xeliou66]

5 hours ago, catlover79 said:

What was the episode where Randy Dworkin was using racial slurs as part of his defense argument in court? Jack's shocked and then angered "OBJECTIONS!" were the best part of the episode. I'm trying to track it down. Thanks in advance!!

4 hours ago, wknt3 said:

I believe you may have your theatrical defense attorneys confused. Although that is totally the type of stunt Dworkin would have pulled the description sounds more like Ron Silver's Bernie Adler in "Talking Points" the Season 17 episode where the grad student with Parkinson's tries to kill Ann Coulter with the serial numbers filed off.

The scene in question -

Yes it was Talking Points with the defense attorney being Bernie Adler, not Dworkin. That was a bad episode, extremely cliched and clunky, it felt more like an attempt to cash in on political controversy and be “edgy” without there being a point or a reason for it. Season 17 was filled with episodes like this, the writing was just all around weaker and clunkier than in other seasons that season, and having Detective Beauty Queen on didn’t help. But Talking Points was one of the worst episodes of that season and one of the weakest L&O episodes ever IMO. 

[txhorns79]

On 11/12/2019 at 8:04 PM, wknt3 said:

First off I agree that the show did well with gay issues. Some of the earlier episodes feel a bit dated to me, because of how far we've come as a society since then.

True.  Manhood, which was on the other day on WE, is a prime example of that.  It is the episode where the cops purposefully don't provide backup to a gay cop who is pinned in by gunfire, and he is killed.  At first the cops deny the environment at their precinct was homophobic, but after persuasive evidence of the environment is offered at trial and it becomes clear the cops are guilty, they switch to a gay panic defense, which the jury buys, and the cops are let off.  I can't imagine that type of episode today.         

[Xeliou66]

5 hours ago, txhorns79 said:

True.  Manhood, which was on the other day on WE, is a prime example of that.  It is the episode where the cops purposefully don't provide backup to a gay cop who is pinned in by gunfire, and he is killed.  At first the cops deny the environment at their precinct was homophobic, but after persuasive evidence of the environment is offered at trial and it becomes clear the cops are guilty, they switch to a gay panic defense, which the jury buys, and the cops are let off.  I can't imagine that type of episode today.         

Gay panic defenses have been banned in NY now so yeah now the cops wouldn’t have a defense. Unfortunately I think the homophobic culture still exists in the police at least in some places though I’m certain it’s less so today than it was then. However L&O always had a progressive take on gay issues, for example in Manhood all of the characters were appalled by the cops bigotry and Stone was very upset when they were acquitted. Before that in the episode Silence with the homophobic politician who wouldn’t accept that his murdered son was gay, Schiff berated the guy for being ashamed of his gay son. 

[balmz]

3 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

Gay panic defenses have been banned in NY now so yeah now the cops wouldn’t have a defense. Unfortunately I think the homophobic culture still exists in the police at least in some places though I’m certain it’s less so today than it was then. However L&O always had a progressive take on gay issues, for example in Manhood all of the characters were appalled by the cops bigotry and Stone was very upset when they were acquitted. Before that in the episode Silence with the homophobic politician who wouldn’t accept that his murdered son was gay, Schiff berated the guy for being ashamed of his gay son. 

i find it highly debatable law and order has always been progressive on lgbt issues

this maybe come off as overly pc or sjw but i don't care

gov love where jack nullies a bunch of same sex marriages just to try to win a case is one prime example, after that episode i stopped seeing jack as a good person, what was he going to do next, nullify laws that have poc have the same rights as white people so he could win more cases? let's see how van buren would like it if jack nullified her rights

aint no love is another one where they randomly threw in that serena was a lesbian. i read that dick wolf put that in the episode because he thought it'd be good ratings or amusement that she was a lesbian, like seriously, we of the lgbt group are not props or things that you can use for your attempt at shock value, we are a person, a human being damn it

[txhorns79]

6 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

However L&O always had a progressive take on gay issues, for example in Manhood all of the characters were appalled by the cops bigotry and Stone was very upset when they were acquitted.

Honestly, I thought Stone's prosecution was kind of weak.  I realize they have limited time to tell the story, my understanding of that particular defense is that the defendant is supposedly reacting in the spur of the moment to something the victim has done, like hit on them or otherwise "flaunt" his gayness before them.  With this particular episode, what the cops did took planning, and basically up until the middle of trial, they were pretending it never happened.  However, Stone never really noted that, even when the gay panic "expert" was on the stand.    

[Xeliou66]

7 hours ago, balmz said:

i find it highly debatable law and order has always been progressive on lgbt issues

this maybe come off as overly pc or sjw but i don't care

gov love where jack nullies a bunch of same sex marriages just to try to win a case is one prime example, after that episode i stopped seeing jack as a good person, what was he going to do next, nullify laws that have poc have the same rights as white people so he could win more cases? let's see how van buren would like it if jack nullified her rights

aint no love is another one where they randomly threw in that serena was a lesbian. i read that dick wolf put that in the episode because he thought it'd be good ratings or amusement that she was a lesbian, like seriously, we of the lgbt group are not props or things that you can use for your attempt at shock value, we are a person, a human being damn it

Both examples you gave were just done for shock value and controversy I agree, I didn’t like either plot, and I liked when McCoy nullifying the gay marriage didn’t even help him win his case because the guy refused to testify, served McCoy right. One of the few times I disliked McCoy. That whole episode was really bad. 

On the other hand, McCoy did come out in support of gay marriage in the episode Married With Children, before it became mainstream to support same sex marriage. Overall I felt like L&O handled gay issues well. 

It’s an interesting discussion to have about how L&O handled different social issue and how the episodes hold up over the years. 

[wknt3]

20 hours ago, balmz said:

i find it highly debatable law and order has always been progressive on lgbt issues

this maybe come off as overly pc or sjw but i don't care

gov love where jack nullies a bunch of same sex marriages just to try to win a case is one prime example, after that episode i stopped seeing jack as a good person, what was he going to do next, nullify laws that have poc have the same rights as white people so he could win more cases? let's see how van buren would like it if jack nullified her rights

aint no love is another one where they randomly threw in that serena was a lesbian. i read that dick wolf put that in the episode because he thought it'd be good ratings or amusement that she was a lesbian, like seriously, we of the lgbt group are not props or things that you can use for your attempt at shock value, we are a person, a human being damn it

12 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

Both examples you gave were just done for shock value and controversy I agree, I didn’t like either plot, and I liked when McCoy nullifying the gay marriage didn’t even help him win his case because the guy refused to testify, served McCoy right. One of the few times I disliked McCoy. That whole episode was really bad. 

On the other hand, McCoy did come out in support of gay marriage in the episode Married With Children, before it became mainstream to support same sex marriage. Overall I felt like L&O handled gay issues well.

I think we should be careful in conflating poor execution with bad intent. In the case of "Gov Love" I think it was clear that Jack was in the wrong and it was an example of him going to far in his quest to convict someone he knew was guilty. He was told he was wrong and as @Xeliou66 points out his actions were self defeating. I would also point out that episode dramatized how civil rights are not truly secure until they are rooted in legislative actions,  not judicial rulings, and how fragile the then recent gains for marriage equality really were,  and I don't think that observation is somehow reactionary. I much prefer the way the series always attempted to portray its protagonists as flawed and didn't put advancing a progressive agenda above all else.

As far as Serena is concerned there is a better case there of a lack of understanding or appropriate concern. That was just indefensible. On the other hand I don't think it was random - I really believe she was always intended to be lesbian, since there is nothing to contradict it and plenty to support it in previous episodes and it fits the series' previous MO of developing backstories and never explicitly mentioning them on screen. My personal theory is that they wanted to give us a moment to match the McCoy/Kincaid relationship reveal, but thoroughly botched it and I've never seen an interview that suggests it was something thrown in to the episode by Wolf for titillation or amusement. I would certainly be willing to believe it if anyone could provide a citation, but the preponderance of the evidence on screen suggests otherwise.

As I said the earlier episodes on gay issues can feel a bit dated given that there really was a lot of progress in mainstream society's attitudes during the shows two decades on the air. It's remarkable to see the shift from "we shouldn't actively discriminate" to "full equality in all respects". But on the whole I agree that the show can be proud of its handling of the topic.
 

Quote

It’s an interesting discussion to have about how L&O handled different social issue and how the episodes hold up over the years. 

Agreed and on a lighter note it occurs to me that in our earlier posts we missed the biggest area of all where the show is now dated and has not held up. There are a lot of episodes where the Knicks are portrayed as a good team and a hot ticket. Green even talks about having tickets to see TWO first place teams at MSG! Talk about your dated references! I think pay phones will come back before the Knicks...

[catlover79]

On 11/4/2019 at 8:01 PM, Spartan Girl said:

The lover was pathetic too. Asshole had to be dragged in to testify. Dude, your wife knew about the affair and she was going to dump your ass whether or not you testified. Sack up and tell the truth.

THANK YOU!! That guy always bugged me, and you perfectly described why. He was a sniveling little wimp.

[shapeshifter]

On 11/4/2019 at 12:35 PM, Xeliou66 said:

One thing I’ve always thought about Blood Libel is the episode would’ve been stronger if Briscoe hadn’t been one of the people accused in the conspiracy by the defense. We obviously know that Lennie would never tamper with evidence or protect a murderer, so we knew the defense was bullshit. I think the episode would’ve been better if they had allowed a sliver of doubt in the viewers mind, the defense was ridiculous but I would’ve liked it more if we didn’t know for certain. I was glad that at least it appeared the defendant was going to prison as his new lawyer was apparently going to accept a plea deal since the Klan lawyer wouldn’t represent him in a retrial. That episode was also one of the only times where Schiff being Jewish was alluded to which I remember. 

Rather than not have an episode in which Briscoe was absurdly accused (because I appreciate the absurdity of him being accused and how it turns the ancient trope of Jewish scapegoating⭐️ on its head), I would have liked to additionally have had another similar but different episode in which no Jewish main characters were accused, which would, as you suggested, have made the audience speculate more on the outcome, and could have even had Briscoe wondering.

————————-

⭐️ Just a note to anyone who might not know, Jewish scapegoating is literally known as “Blood Libel” because of this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_libel and “scapegoating” is a biblical reference (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scapegoat).

</end-history+scripture-lesson>
.  
 

On 11/15/2019 at 5:16 PM, balmz said:

i find it highly debatable law and order has always been progressive on lgbt issues

this maybe come off as overly pc or sjw but i don't care

gov love where jack nullies a bunch of same sex marriages just to try to win a case is one prime example, after that episode i stopped seeing jack as a good person, what was he going to do next, nullify laws that have poc have the same rights as white people so he could win more cases? let's see how van buren would like it if jack nullified her rights

aint no love is another one where they randomly threw in that serena was a lesbian. i read that dick wolf put that in the episode because he thought it'd be good ratings or amusement that she was a lesbian, like seriously, we of the lgbt group are not props or things that you can use for your attempt at shock value, we are a person, a human being damn it

On 11/16/2019 at 2:36 PM, wknt3 said:

I think we should be careful in conflating poor execution with bad intent. In the case of "Gov Love" I think it was clear that Jack was in the wrong and it was an example of him going to far in his quest to convict someone he knew was guilty. He was told he was wrong and as @Xeliou66 points out his actions were self defeating. I would also point out that episode dramatized how civil rights are not truly secure until they are rooted in legislative actions,  not judicial rulings, and how fragile the then recent gains for marriage equality really were,  and I don't think that observation is somehow reactionary. I much prefer the way the series always attempted to portray its protagonists as flawed and didn't put advancing a progressive agenda above all else

Yes, I agree with @wknt3 that “Gov Love” does not show convicting a killer as being more important than (gay) civil rights, but rather the opposite, as evinced by Jack’s obvious lack of joy over winning his case, and, more importantly, that in having Saint Jack have to choose between getting a conviction and supporting civil rights, the script gives a strong argument for having laws that protect civil rights, which becomes the point of the story in the end IMO.  However, to get to that end, the script stirs up feelings of outrage in the viewer which prevents some viewers from being able to see that the writers are on their side —a choice perhaps made to stir the offended viewers into legislative action (voting, etc.) while perhaps making more right wing viewers question their own stance —a pretty tall order for a half hour TV episode. 
 

On 11/16/2019 at 2:36 PM, wknt3 said:

As far as Serena is concerned there is a better case there of a lack of understanding or appropriate concern. That was just indefensible. On the other hand I don't think it was random - I really believe she was always intended to be lesbian, since there is nothing to contradict it and plenty to support it in previous episodes and it fits the series' previous MO of developing backstories and never explicitly mentioning them on screen. My personal theory is that they wanted to give us a moment to match the McCoy/Kincaid relationship reveal, but thoroughly botched it and I've never seen an interview that suggests it was something thrown in to the episode by Wolf for titillation or amusement. I would certainly be willing to believe it if anyone could provide a citation, but the preponderance of the evidence on screen suggests otherwise

Recently one of the affiliate stations on which I watch L&O (so either ION or Bounce, but likely ION) has been showing short bits, recently recorded, featuring a few of the main actors talking about their roles on the show. Elisabeth Röhm had a bit which she actually uses (or likely was hired to use the bit) to defend the “Is it because I’m a lesbian?” eleventh hour (and 59 minutes) reveal as being cool. 🙄 I would have appreciated it if it included a mention of how it could have been written better, but Elisabeth Röhm is not the person to do that. 

Edited November 18, 2019 by shapeshifter
because in a post this frickin long there’s gonna be stuff