Law & Order Discussion Topic (2019 - 2021)

[andromeda331]

17 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

I think that Jack did what he did in his closing because the Judge refused the sidebar, refused to strike Garnett’s theory that Cecilia had killed her sister. So he did what he did so that the judge would declare a mistrial. Not one of Jack’s finest moments, and proof that he refused to believe he was wrong. He was proven wrong about Ken attacking Cecilia, but wouldn’t concede that she killed her sister because she wanted Ken for herself. I hated how that episode ended.

Yeah, that's why he did that. Because the Judge refused to strike Garnett's theory. I do hate that he wouldn't concede that she killed her sister or even be open to the possibility. Cecelia put a huge dent in her credibility by framing Ken in such an elaborate way. Going to the extreme of getting the condom is crazy. That should have put doubt in his mind. The next one really should have been what the co-worker/friend said. That was from someone who liked Cecelia. If she though Cecelia should see a therapist that really should have been when Jack stopped or ask for a continuous and look into the possibility just in case. He's done so before when new information came to light or someone on the stand said something he wasn't expecting. So why is it so hard for him this time to think he's wrong? But nope he keep going after Ken and its not until Abby tells him about the hairs found in the trunk that Jack's open to the idea but says they'll have to wait until Cecelia wakes up or if she does. 

Quote

And the show made a mistake in airing ”Justice” and not having Jack be happy to see her and inquire about David and what she was up to. Because when she appeared again in 2001, in ”School Daze”, it’s as if they hadn’t seen each other since she left the DA’s office. And “Marathon” was another stupid episode, with Jack coming down on VanBuren for Lennie “prematurely” arresting Sabo. Though I appreciate the nod to continuity for his lying in ”Stalker” when the victim was murdered.

The Jamie guest episode are as bad as Robinette guest episodes.  I hate that Jack doesn't ask how she is, how's David or anything.  That's not how you greet and old friend and co-worker. I don't like Jamie getting all mad at him about the case when it turns out he apparently was the only one who didn't know the suspect in the old case wasn't guilty. The Judge knew and so did the cop. That wasn't Jack's fault. I hate that the Judge gets off and refuses to accept that he could possibly be wrong. Ah, you kept getting tips that you were and ignored it to put a man on death row. I hate Jack trying to blackmail Jamie into a plea for her current client I do like instead she resigns as his lawyer. I just hate the episode. I hate the one she's in about the schooler shooters wanting to put the kid in some program even though he killed four kids. Not to mention its favoritism since he's rich parents could afford it and shooter of poor parents' couldn't. That's not the same Jamie when she was on. 

Quote

But man, was Ed an asshole. As was the Chief of Dicks at 1PP. I think there was another guy who was chief of detectives in the final season-the one who suggested she use marijuana to deal with effects of chemo. Because THIS DICK? was holding a grudge against her for having the guts to file a discrimination suit against the department. And he was acting as if the victim was one of those ultra wealthy important people that they normally get in cops’ faces for not solving fast enough. And the victim was just a regular person. Exhibit A- “Merger” where Anne Twomey’s character murdered her granddaughter, and Adam wouldn’t let Jack file. And when Abby said that the laws were different for the rich, His line at the end said it all: ”What laws for the rich?”

Yeah, that guy was a dick. All because she sued the department which yes she was being discriminated against. I hate Merge too so its okay that the woman murders her granddaughter and gets away with it. Her mother is just going to let it go and still marry the man? She can just get over the murder of her daughter and everything that's happened?

Quote

I hate when realism like this seeps in! I wanted her ass arrested and found guilty!!!

I really hate when that happens too. I want to see her found guilty. I wanted to see the Judge found guilty in Justice. I hate murderers go free.

[wknt3]

2 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

Watching back to back episode with Serena is a bad idea. It makes it even easier to see how annoying she is.  She lectures Jack that they can't pick and chose laws in Asterisk. Funny that seems to be what she wants to do in Tragedy on Rye when Branch decided he wanted to use the death penalty on the three men who they thought murdered the woman for her TV. She gets mad at Branch and Jack who goes along with it. Jack points out it does fit the criteria for the death penalty. She doesn't care and gets all mad. Oh, so its okay then for her to pick and chose the laws to follow. Only when its something she doesn't like.  

I'm going to have do something I've never done before - defend Serena. There is a difference between a prosecutor disregarding the spirit, while following the letter of the law and ethics rules regarding false testimony and pursuing the death penalty when you are not convinced the circumstances of the case justify it even if it meets the statuary requirements. There simply isn't the same discretion in following the laws restricting what a prosecutor can do that there is in determining the penalty you seek for a crime. This isn't like "Teenage Wasteland" where the case clearly fit the death penalty guidelines and not seeking it could be fairly considered as putting personal values over the consistent enforcement of the law. I don't think it's fair to consider erring on the side of caution and personal morality  when it comes to executing somebody as the same thing as allowing a jury to reach conclusions you know to be untrue to convict someone you know is guilty.

[GHScorpiosRule]

Bleagh! The  Rohmbot years! Aside from my dislike for Rohmbot, and Especially DA Foghorn Leghorn  AND Nora, season 13 retconned the the years McCoy’s farther had been a cop. He was one for 31 years in “Competence” and really, the end scene proved Jack and Anita were okay, so I don’t see any animus between them for how Jack handled her case. But in “True Crime” Jack says his dad was a beat cop for “22 years.”  

Just saw “Open Season.” This was the last we saw of Melnick, wasn’t it? 

Watching ”Asterisk” now and Anita to Lennie :

“Oh please, like you’re any better” (impersonating Lennie) “Maybe he’ll sign his Rookie Card for me” 

Had me 😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂🤣

And on a sad note, in Season 13, I can see that Jerry Orbach wasn’t looking well. I know he left at the end of 14, and joined Trial By Jury, but he passed away shortly thereafter.😔😔

Edited March 4, 2019 by GHScorpiosRule

[andromeda331]

1 hour ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Just saw “Open Season.” This was the last we saw of Melnick, wasn’t it? 

Watching ”Asterisk” now and Anita to Lennie :

“Oh please, like you’re any better” (impersonating Lennie) “Maybe he’ll sign his Rookie Card for me” 

Had me 😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂🤣 

No there's still at least one more episode with her I think in season 16 the one where Jack awesomely yells at her "Who cares what you think?" Still I wish this was the last one with Melnick. She should have been disbarred and charged. She disregard a direct order from a Judge that got a man killed. She didn't care that her client was dangerous. All she cared about was she didn't like the ruling. Instead of being horrified she gets upset about being arrest. 

Quote

And on a sad note, in Season 13, I can see that Jerry Orbach wasn’t looking well. I know he left at the end of 14, and joined Trial By Jury, but he passed away shortly thereafter.😔😔

I never noticed that before but it makes sense. I do remember how bad he looked in his last episode of Trial By Jury 41 Shots. One thing I did like was seeing Jamie end up becoming a Judge. 

[GHScorpiosRule]

And since Sundance also threw in Season 13--so I'm not sure if this person was introduced in Season 11, because he sure as hell wasn't in Season 10, I really, really, really don't care for the new, socially awkward forensics tech the show hired. I like the original dude, with his dry sense of humor! I'm just tempted to just NOT watch until Season 18 comes around, when we get Mike Cutter.

[Xeliou66]

I was irritated with McCoy in Patsy and I’m glad I’m not the only one who was, he was unwilling to admit that he could be wrong up until the very end. There is obviously no way they could retry Taylor with the new evidence they discovered IMO, with the hair fibers in the trunk of the car Garnett could easily create reasonable doubt and it was pretty clear to me that Cecelia did kill Julie, but McCoy wouldn’t acknowledge it was possible until the end, in other episodes he would acknowledge other theories of the crime given the evidence, it didn’t make sense why he wouldn’t acknowledge that Taylor was likely innocent in this one. It’s not one of McCoy’s best moments and the ending is somewhat frustrating, but I do enjoy the episode a lot. 

Merger pissed me off as well with those rich snobs getting away with everything in the end, they should’ve been prosecuted for something even though the chance of them being convicted of murder was near zero. McCoy was right “what laws for the rich?”

Melnick appeared 3 more times after Open Season: In City Hall, when it was shown she was using a cane after being shot in Open Season, America Inc (the episode where McCoy explodes at her) and Good Faith, she also had a cameo in the final episode of Criminal Intent.

[GHScorpiosRule]

I can’t believe that Chris Noth wrote the story for TMTNH. That he thought it made for good drama to fuck over the Character he’d played for five years. How Pod!Lennie! didn’t think Mike punching a councilman WHO WAS THE MURDERER, was worth giving his partner loyalty or sticking up for him. But he was more than willing to give what’shisface, the CROOKED ASS COP played by Kevin Conway, his loyalty and benefit of the doubt.

Or that Van Buren accused Mike of being “self-absorbed as always.”

DA FUCK?

OR that Profaci had a partner named Sammy played by Paul Guilfoyle, who none of us had seen EVER since Mike was booted to Staten Island. I’m still bitter that it was Profaci that ended up dirty (Because there were CLUES and “evidence” of that since day one!😒😒😒), But it miiiiight have made a better mystery as to who it could be if his partner had been another supporting character we knew. EXCEPT I’ll never believe that Van Buren would run a precinct that had dirty cops, let alone Cragen. And her defending Sam made my 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄 SO HARD.

Less said about Jack, the better.

I guess I should be grateful that Schiff didn’t appear.

Edited March 6, 2019 by GHScorpiosRule

[WendyCR72]

"Point of View", a.k.a. Lennie's very first episode, is on now on WE.  🙂 (Midnight, 03/06)

[GHScorpiosRule]

17 hours ago, WendyCR72 said:

"Point of View", a.k.a. Lennie's very first episode, is on now on WE.  🙂 (Midnight, 03/06)

Yeah, well, I don't have WE anymore, so.

[Xeliou66]

23 hours ago, WendyCR72 said:

"Point of View", a.k.a. Lennie's very first episode, is on now on WE.  🙂 (Midnight, 03/06)

I found hope Lennie to be somewhat different in his first episode than he was in all other ones. He was easily irritated, a bit smug and made the one racial comment about “micks” killing for different reasons than Italians, which was highly OOC for Lennie and Cragen jumped him for it. Fortunately Briscoe wasn’t like that in any other episode.

Edited March 7, 2019 by Xeliou66

[WendyCR72]

6 minutes ago, Xeliou66 said:

I found hope Lennie to be somewhat different in his first episode than he was in all other ones. He was easily irritated, a bit smug and made the one racial comment about “micks” killing for different reasons than Italians, which was highly OOC for Lennie and Cragen jumped him for it. Fortunately Briscoe wasn’t like that in any other episode.

As @wknt3 said before, Lennie was seriously toned down after his debut as were others in the franchise. (As was discussed elsewhere, Alex Eames on CI was a lot more rigid early on and softened, too, among others...) I think it was a good move to smooth Lennie's rough edges and have him be the wiseass with a heart instead of the half-mean vibe he had in his debut. Or I'm not sure he would have ended up as beloved a character as he was,

One could say Fontana was what Lennie could have been character wise without the shift. And we see how Fontana worked out.

[GHScorpiosRule]

10 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

I found hope Lennie to be somewhat different in his first episode than he was in all other ones. He was easily irritated, a bit smug and made the one racial comment about “micks” killing for different reasons than Italians, which was highly OOC for Lennie and Cragen jumped him for it. Fortunately Briscoe wasn’t like that in any other episode.

10 hours ago, WendyCR72 said:

As @wknt3 said before, Lennie was seriously toned down after his debut as were others in the franchise. (As was discussed elsewhere, Alex Eames on CI was a lot more rigid early on and softened, too, among others...) I think it was a good move to smooth Lennie's rough edges and have him be the wiseass with a heart instead of the half-mean vibe he had in his debut. Or I'm not sure he would have ended up as beloved a character as he was,

One could say Fontana was what Lennie could have been character wise without the shift. And we see how Fontana worked out.

Well I read on his IMDB page that Orbach originally tested for the roles of both Max AND Phil! I just can't picture him as either one of them. And though Lennie was more rough around the edges in his first episode, I can hand wave that Mike wasn't all rainbows and sunshine having to work with him, while he was hoping (unrealistically) for Phil to come back. I would have liked to have seen their first meeting, but at the same time, it was good we didn't. And his first scene, another hand wave that he was probably sleeping when they got the call. I did like Lennie ripping a new one to the CSI or uni who almost contaminated the crime scene.

I 🙄 that Wolf or the casting director couldn't find another actress to play Elaine. No, they had to get the SAME actress who played Frank Masucci's wife.

Lennie would NEVER be Fontana even if those rough edges hadn't been smoothed out.

Oh! And because I'm not sure if everyone here also watches Criminal Intent, but next week "Stress Positions" will air on the Oxygen channel! That's right! The return of the REAL MIKE LOGAN. And here's where we learn that VanBuren had tried to get him back to the 2-7. Would someone who thought he was "self-absorbed as always" want him in her House?

[GHScorpiosRule]

It's so very odd. Sundance just skipped from Season 13's "Absentia" which aired last Friday, I think? to "Bitch.", skipping over episode 14-"Star-Crossed." 

I hate that Lucie Arnaz is playing the defendant, instead of a good person. Sigh...

And since Season Five started airing last Sunday, I'm just going to vent my spleen about how I just 😒 at the women who thought Haas was a "Godsend" in "Second Opinion" because I'm a survivor myself, and reconstructive surgery was available. As one of the women, whose husband sued Haas said. Of course this being in syndication, they edited out a third patient.

And I will admit, I don't know if surgeons were that condescending in the 90s, or if biopsies/mastectomies were filmed, like the third woman said, when she told Claire the surgeon told her "Don't worry, dear..." and being photographed and filmed. Because that certainly wasn't MY experience four and a half years ago. Or if the person who wrote the episode just thought it would add more drama. No additional drama was needed, as far as I'm concerned.

And hey! Haas would return to play the mother in Season 7's "Denial." You know, where those narcissistic teens killed their baby, and the girl's father buried his OWN GRANDCHILD in a quarry, and her MOTHER couldn't decide who to believe when she was on the stand.

[Xeliou66]

On 3/6/2019 at 11:35 PM, WendyCR72 said:

As @wknt3 said before, Lennie was seriously toned down after his debut as were others in the franchise. (As was discussed elsewhere, Alex Eames on CI was a lot more rigid early on and softened, too, among others...) I think it was a good move to smooth Lennie's rough edges and have him be the wiseass with a heart instead of the half-mean vibe he had in his debut. Or I'm not sure he would have ended up as beloved a character as he was,

One could say Fontana was what Lennie could have been character wise without the shift. And we see how Fontana worked out.

Good point about Fontana, he was even more abrasive than Lennie was in his debut episode and he remained that way. I can definitely understand Logan and Briscoe getting off to a rocky start since Logan didn’t like change, Cragen said as much in the episode, but Briscoe was just slightly different at the start than he was in any other episode.

On 3/7/2019 at 10:17 AM, GHScorpiosRule said:

Oh! And because I'm not sure if everyone here also watches Criminal Intent, but next week "Stress Positions" will air on the Oxygen channel! That's right! The return of the REAL MIKE LOGAN. And here's where we learn that VanBuren had tried to get him back to the 2-7. Would someone who thought he was "self-absorbed as always" want him in her House?

I’ll always be thrilled that they brought Logan back to CI after that disaster of a movie, Stress Position was a great reintroduction to Logan. While I wish that at some point Logan had interacted with Mothership characters again, I loved hearing from Deakins that Van Buren had tried to get him back to Manhattan Homicide.

[GHScorpiosRule]

DAMMIT. Sundance pulled the rest of Season Five from their Sunday schedule!🤬🤬🤬🤬

They’re reairing Season 13 from the beginning! Which is STUPID since they aired it LAST WEEK during the week! Then it jumps to 16 next Sunday! GAAAAH!!!!!🙇🏻‍♀️🙇🏻‍♀️🙇🏻‍♀️🙇🏻‍♀️

[Xeliou66]

31 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

DAMMIT. Sundance pulled the rest of Season Five from their Sunday schedule!🤬🤬🤬🤬

They’re reairing Season 13 from the beginning! Which is STUPID since they aired it LAST WEEK during the week! Then it jumps to 16 next Sunday! GAAAAH!!!!!🙇🏻‍♀️🙇🏻‍♀️🙇🏻‍♀️🙇🏻‍♀️

Sundance shows the episodes so early that I’m usually not up, and Season 5 has never been one of my favorites for some reason. I like the characters, but for some reason the season doesn’t seem as high quality as a lot of other seasons. There are some very strong episodes but overall it just isn’t quite as good as most other seasons IMO.

[GHScorpiosRule]

On 3/8/2019 at 10:13 PM, Xeliou66 said:

Sundance shows the episodes so early that I’m usually not up, and Season 5 has never been one of my favorites for some reason. I like the characters, but for some reason the season doesn’t seem as high quality as a lot of other seasons. There are some very strong episodes but overall it just isn’t quite as good as most other seasons IMO.

I know Season five isn’t one you like, but I do because it does have some really good episodes and reunions. We have the reunion of Sam Waterston with Regina Taylor, who starred together in I’ll Fly Away, Don Cragen returning in “Bad Faith” which was also a very good episode for Mike; and a handful of others. But my problem is that the network just went from Season 4 to the first four of Season Five-which should have aired during the week, to dropping it entirely. And from season 10 episode 10, to 13. ”In Loco Parentis” was the last season 10 episode aired two weeks ago. I’m not sure why they decided to drop the rest of Season 10 and Abby’s last season, or why they’re reairing Season 13 on Sundays.

Edited March 10, 2019 by GHScorpiosRule

[Xeliou66]

The Sundance scheduling is weird I agree. 

I don’t dislike season 5, it’s still good, every L&O season is, but it’s just not as great as other seasons, there are more mediocre episodes than in most seasons IMO. I do like Bad Faith and the return of Cragen, even though the line about Cragen having a kid was a terrible lapse of continuity in a franchise that was always great regarding continuity. The best episode of season 5 is Purple Heart IMO. 

[Spartan Girl]

Watching "Promises to Keep" on WE. I don't care how damaged or brainwashed Danny was by the shrink, he deserved to go to jail. Not only did he cheat on his fiancée with the shrink and murder her, he and his precious DIAANNE tried to cover their asses by painting her as a drunk slut. Not to mention the bastard pretended to grieve with her parents after he killed her. What kind of person does that?

[Xeliou66]

46 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

Watching "Promises to Keep" on WE. I don't care how damaged or brainwashed Danny was by the shrink, he deserved to go to jail. Not only did he cheat on his fiancée with the shrink and murder her, he and his precious DIAANNE tried to cover their asses by painting her as a drunk slut. Not to mention the bastard pretended to grieve with her parents after he killed her. What kind of person does that?

I agree, I didn’t feel sympathy for Danny at all. He deserved to be locked up, he strangled his fiancé to cover up his affair with his shrink and then he staged a cover up, and he never showed much remorse for it. I found him to be pathetic, whiny, cowardly as well as a cold blooded killer. Diane was slimy and deserved punishment but Danny was the one who actually strangled the life out of his fiancé. 

[andromeda331]

2 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Watching "Promises to Keep" on WE. I don't care how damaged or brainwashed Danny was by the shrink, he deserved to go to jail. Not only did he cheat on his fiancée with the shrink and murder her, he and his precious DIAANNE tried to cover their asses by painting her as a drunk slut. Not to mention the bastard pretended to grieve with her parents after he killed her. What kind of person does that?

1 hour ago, Xeliou66 said:

I agree, I didn’t feel sympathy for Danny at all. He deserved to be locked up, he strangled his fiancé to cover up his affair with his shrink and then he staged a cover up, and he never showed much remorse for it. I found him to be pathetic, whiny, cowardly as well as a cold blooded killer. Diane was slimy and deserved punishment but Danny was the one who actually strangled the life out of his fiancé. 

I don't either. He killed her to cover up his affair with his shrink. He deserved to go to jail for it. Yeah, the shrink was horrible and should go to jail too. But he apparently had no problem when his shrink suggested his fiancé had to die? Seriously? Who just agrees and goes along with it? I don't care how messed up you are. That's not something you'd do. That's something you'd realized was messed up. He killed her, he had zero remorse, zero problems trashing his fiancé or anything. It reminds me of the episode with the guy who turns out to be sleeping with his mother. He could send her to jail. But for some reason is torn. He won't do it. Can't do it. 

[GHScorpiosRule]

OT—Great. Now Sundance is bleeping words from movies. Watching First Blood and they bleeped out “Shit.”

And the devolving of Danny and other defendants like him piss me off. They’re shown to be normal when informed of their victim’s murder. Then toward the middle end, they’re turned into people who are exhibiting signs of mental illness. Unless they were on meds and stopped taking them, you would think the shock of killing would have them exhibit some sign, or have them show signs to begin with. It’s like killers on other shows acting all normal when talking about the people they killed and when confronted at the end with evidence that they killed them, they break down, confessing it “was an accident” or they “didn’t mean to kill” her or him. Like, where was all this guilt and signs of remorse from the get go? Yeah, yeah, PLOT.🙄😒 But they act as if they have NO IDEA what happened. I expect and accept that from stone cold killers and sociopaths.

[shapeshifter]

1 hour ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

OT—Great. Now Sundance is bleeping words from movies. Watching First Blood and they bleeped out “Shit.”

Today on another legal-crime show rerun, when they bleeped what I'm sure must've been the most inoffensive of words, my brain inserted the F word. Heh.

[zillabreeze]

I've kind of changed lanes on Orbach.  I quit the show years ago and just started rewatching because I went to NYC.😁

At first,I really dug Orbach for his smartass remarks and the "in your face" stuff.  Now, I've noticed his very subtle empathy for victims.  He winces at their pain. He pats them on the back.  He seems to feel their hurt.  It's understated and you kinda have to look for it, but IMO it's a sign of a very good actor.

[shapeshifter]

18 minutes ago, zillabreeze said:

At first,I really dug Orbach for his smartass remarks and the "in your face" stuff.  Now, I've noticed his very subtle empathy for victims.  He winces at their pain. He pats them on the back.  He seems to feel their hurt.  It's understated and you kinda have to look for it, but IMO it's a sign of a very good actor.

And a great character. I don't think they make 'em like that anymore. I suppose Finn on SVU is close, but I can't think of any newer characters that have Lennie's dry humor and compassion, and it seems most casting is with younger, prettier faces.

Edited March 11, 2019 by shapeshifter

[GHScorpiosRule]

1 hour ago, zillabreeze said:

I've kind of changed lanes on Orbach.  I quit the show years ago and just started rewatching because I went to NYC.😁

At first,I really dug Orbach for his smartass remarks and the "in your face" stuff.  Now, I've noticed his very subtle empathy for victims.  He winces at their pain. He pats them on the back.  He seems to feel their hurt.  It's understated and you kinda have to look for it, but IMO it's a sign of a very good actor.

Orbach was really good. I was totally unaware of his talent on Broadway, so was shocked, in a very good way, when I learned he played Lumiere in the animated Beauty and the Beast. And watching and burning through the later seasons, the show actually put in the seeds of why Green would leave, though I think it was a just in case, because I don't think Wolf thought that far ahead. His gambling. I remember some folks over on TWoP thought it came out of nowhere, but we saw in his very first episode, him placing bets; then again, getting ready to head to Atlantic City in another, before changing his mind to help Lennie. And comments here and there about how he liked to gamble.

These Rohmbot years really SUCK. It doesn't help that I recognize the name of one the writers, who was also "executive producer" to "producer" in seasons 13 and 14. I don't know about 11 and 12 because Sundance FUCKINIG SKIPPED over them: MarcHackisthynameGuggenheim. In these seasons alone, we no longer have a cold open where the victim is already dead. No, we have to have ridiculous chatting and see the victim die or get killed. Maybe it's petty, anal-retentive of me, but that's how I feel. I know I'll not be watching the Fontana years, and ESPECIALLY the "Soprano" episodes, where Jessie L. Martin took time off to perform Rent.

57 minutes ago, shapeshifter said:

And a great character. I don't think they make 'em like that anymore. I suppose Finn on SVU is close, but I can't think of any newer characters that have Lennie's dry humor and compassion, and it seems most casting is with younger, prettier faces.

Finn? Eh. I find Ice T a mediocre actor, at best. Unless you meant Munch?

[shapeshifter]

58 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Finn? Eh. I find Ice T a mediocre actor, at best. Unless you meant Munch?

Yes, Orbach was a more serious actor than just playing a character.
And I agree that Ice-T isn't the actor Jerry Orbach was (nor do I think he strives to be), but the character writing is similar.
The character of John Munch (Richard Belzer) could have been a prototype for Orbach's Lennie Briscoe, since Munch appeared in Homicide before Briscoe, although I suppose writers for both characters may have borrowed from each other over the years.
Reading about Belzer, I suspect for him that the roles serve as a means of expression rather than vehicles to perfect a craft.

[zillabreeze]

5 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

And comments here and there about how he liked to gamble.

Clearly, the character was meant to have an addictive personality, having quit drinking earlier.  I'm trying to remember if Briscoe still went to OTB though or if that was only in the drinking days.

[WendyCR72]

3 hours ago, zillabreeze said:

Clearly, the character was meant to have an addictive personality, having quit drinking earlier.  I'm trying to remember if Briscoe still went to OTB though or if that was only in the drinking days.

I think @GHScorpiosRule was referencing Ed Green there, not Lennie.

[wknt3]

12 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

And a great character. I don't think they make 'em like that anymore. I suppose Finn on SVU is close, but I can't think of any newer characters that have Lennie's dry humor and compassion, and it seems most casting is with younger, prettier faces.

Yeah they really seem to be moving more and more in that direction even though when you think of the most beloved characters on procedurals most of them are older or quirkier than the young conventionally attractive types the networks want.
 

11 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Orbach was really good. I was totally unaware of his talent on Broadway, so was shocked, in a very good way, when I learned he played Lumiere in the animated Beauty and the Beast. And watching and burning through the later seasons, the show actually put in the seeds of why Green would leave, though I think it was a just in case, because I don't think Wolf thought that far ahead. His gambling. I remember some folks over on TWoP thought it came out of nowhere, but we saw in his very first episode, him placing bets; then again, getting ready to head to Atlantic City in another, before changing his mind to help Lennie. And comments here and there about how he liked to gamble.

I don't see how you can say that it came out of nowhere. The gambling issues were one of his defining character traits along with his family moving around a lot. I would say it came up almost as often as Lennie's alcoholism or Curtis being a sanctimonious prick. In fact I remember Lennie having a line about cops not being perfect that went something like " You built a new wing on some casino in Atlantic City, I like the liquid refreshment a little too much..." I don't think it was necessarily laying the groundwork for him to leave anymore than Logan's temper was all a long game to set up him punching a politician and getting sent off to Staten Island. It was just part of the background that they came up with they developed the character.

[GHScorpiosRule]

2 hours ago, WendyCR72 said:

I think @GHScorpiosRule was referencing Ed Green there, not Lennie.

Yes, I was talking about Ed, not Lennie.

3 minutes ago, wknt3 said:

I don't see how you can say that it came out of nowhere. The gambling issues were one of his defining character traits along with his family moving around a lot. I would say it came up almost as often as Lennie's alcoholism or Curtis being a sanctimonious prick. In fact I remember Lennie having a line about cops not being perfect that went something like " You built a new wing on some casino in Atlantic City, I like the liquid refreshment a little too much..." I don't think it was necessarily laying the groundwork for him to leave anymore than Logan's temper was all a long game to set up him punching a politician and getting sent off to Staten Island. It was just part of the background that they came up with they developed the character.

Oh, I didn't believe that at all. I just remember folks grumbling about it when Jessie left the show.

And you're right, I shouldn't have said it was laying the groundwork for him leaving (when he did), but that it was part of his background. *meep*

[Spartan Girl]

23 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

OT—Great. Now Sundance is bleeping words from movies. Watching First Blood and they bleeped out “Shit.”

And the devolving of Danny and other defendants like him piss me off. They’re shown to be normal when informed of their victim’s murder. Then toward the middle end, they’re turned into people who are exhibiting signs of mental illness. Unless they were on meds and stopped taking them, you would think the shock of killing would have them exhibit some sign, or have them show signs to begin with. It’s like killers on other shows acting all normal when talking about the people they killed and when confronted at the end with evidence that they killed them, they break down, confessing it “was an accident” or they “didn’t mean to kill” her or him. Like, where was all this guilt and signs of remorse from the get go? Yeah, yeah, PLOT.🙄😒 But they act as if they have NO IDEA what happened. I expect and accept that from stone cold killers and sociopaths.

Preach it, sister. I am SO OVER the 11th hour remorse from the perps.

[wknt3]

22 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Oh, I didn't believe that at all. I just remember folks grumbling about it when Jessie left the show.

And you're right, I shouldn't have said it was laying the groundwork for him leaving (when he did), but that it was part of his background. *meep*

Yeah I was agreeing with you. I can understand people being unhappy with Green's exit, wanting something happier, but saying there wasn't any grounding or set up is just plain wrong. Personally I would have loved if they used the other main part of his background and had him going over to Intel at Lupo's suggestion. I was dsagreeing about the laying the groundwork thing because I've seen the idea before that they tried to set up escape hatches to make it easier to write off characters and make it clear that the actors were expendable, but I don't think you need much familiarity with L&O to know that they weren't afraid of getting rid of anyone at any time if they weren't willing to toe the line and were quite happy to do it with any explanation or none. Perhaps it's just that the writers were so good that it often looked like it was planned all along?

[MoistestCake]

On 2/21/2019 at 6:44 PM, andromeda331 said:

One episode that drives me is Bad Girl everyone's reaction that the murderer may have changed. I have no problem with criminals changing even if its not that common and hers seems quick. She finds Jesus and all that. But would any of them be jumping through the hoops if she found Alla and was ready to accept her fate? If she was Jewish? Or Hindu? Or any other religion? Would anyone be leaping to save the poor repented Muslim or Jewish girl if she found those religions, confessed and was going to be executed? Would anyone in the DA's office be troubled about still executing her? And why the hell is finding Jesus means then you shouldn't be executed for your crimes? You still committed them. If you were a real Christian you are suppose to confess your crimes and face the consequences for them. That is a big part of being Christian. It is not a get out of jail or consequences free card.  

I wonder if it is because prison sentence for a crime is also an attempt at  rehabilitation, that's why they have parole hearings etc. If you are immediately rehabilitated and will not commit crimes again then you are kind of on the express lane to parole. But prison is also punishment and I agree that that component still needs to be a consequence of the crime. Otherwise everyone pretty much will find jesus or other acceptable deities to get out of prison. Personally am very sceptical about such revelations in any religion and since there's no proof she truly found jesus (unlike evidence used to prove her guilt) I'd be reluctant to let her off.  As for the death penalty, as an opponent of it, I have a general issue with it regardless of the crime or finding jesus. But if one supports the death penalty, maybe it should really be kept for the unrepentant and unredeemable, which this girl is not. Or is she just fooling everyone? Perhaps that's where they were coming from? 

[MoistestCake]

On 2/23/2019 at 6:56 PM, andromeda331 said:

it drives me crazy if you commit a crime or sin and you are a Christian you are not suppose to get out of the crime. Yes, you repent but you still have to accept the consequences and any punishment that comes from what you did, then your forgiven. Anything short of that then you didn't really repent.  Its actually a pretty big part of the faith. But of course all of those types Christians conveniently forget.  

There are numerous episodes in the various L&Os when the perp confesses to a priest and the priest can't/won't tell the authorities. If accepting the consequences is crucial to forgiveness, the priest is derelict in his duty by not making sure the perp is tried (and could be found not guilty). If the priest is complicit in the holding of evidence and that means the perp avoids the consequences, the priest is also to blame for the perp not being fully forgiven. I am not a Christian but I am familiar with the privilege of confession in both the church and the civil law in the USA, so the law allows religious ministers to obstruct justice, which as a rule is a crime, which is the threat the police/DA use in almost every episode to get people to talk. 

Edited March 14, 2019 by MoistestCake

[shapeshifter]

6 minutes ago, MoistestCake said:

There are numerous episodes in the various L&Os when the perp confesses to a priest and the priest can't/won't tell the authorities. If accepting the consequences is crucial to forgiveness, the priest is derelict in his duty by not making sure the perp is tried (and could be found not guilty). If the priest is complicit in the holding of evidence and that means the perp avoids the consequences, the priest is also to blame for the perp not being fully forgiven. I am not a Christian but I am familiar with the privilege of confession in both the church and the civil law in the USA, so the law allows religious ministers to obstruct justice, which is the threat the police/DA use in almost every episode to get people to talk. 

The privilege of the confessional was the premise behind both drama and comedy in episodes 2.9-10 of Boston Legal that aired yesterday morning and also on a recent rerun of The Closer. It is so common of a plot point in many crime shows that I never really thought too much about it—probably because I'm old enough to have pretended familiarity with Christian prayers and holidays that were part of public schools in the 1960s. Anyway, I just skimmed this Wikipedia article and realize it makes no sense to me at all.

[MoistestCake]

On 2/27/2019 at 1:46 PM, GHScorpiosRule said:

But he was reprimanded. He had to appear before the ethics committee; was taken off from prosecuting a case when he refused to obey Schiff. For all his bombastic and cutting corners, it wasn’t just about winning, he did those things because he believed the defendant was guilty. He didn’t suborn perjury; or try cases that would fall under prosecutorial misconduct.

I loved how he went after Haas. And the Navy Pilot. The Russians and Radford in ”Refuge”

But, potato/potahto.

The law isn't black and white and Jack was extremely good at bending it to get a trial and ideally a conviction. That's his job. He messed it up with the Colombian stewardess but he paid for it, and in later years advised someone else against such shenanigans, so he learned the lesson. Besides he's only human, and humans get carried away, emotional and make mistakes, but I think that winning was his job. That's what the people of New York pay him for. I thought he was just the right amount of pushy. 

[MoistestCake]

On 3/2/2019 at 2:24 PM, Scarlett45 said:

I think I’ve seen almost every episode of the mothership but I do not recognize episode titles like you guys! I don’t know what episode you’re talking about until I get the plot. I’ll pay more attention so I can contribute to this thread. 

Same here, I've seen them all more than once, but no good with the names. Can we also get the episode number if you know it, or a brief brief reminder of the plot? Thanks so much. 

My most memorable Ben moment is "Collateral estoppel", I love it when the good guys win... 

[shapeshifter]

11 minutes ago, MoistestCake said:

On March 2, 2019 at 8:24 AM, Scarlett45 said:

I think I’ve seen almost every episode of the mothership but I do not recognize episode titles like you guys! I don’t know what episode you’re talking about until I get the plot. I’ll pay more attention so I can contribute to this thread. 

Same here, I've seen them all more than once, but no good with the names. Can we also get the episode number if you know

The IMDb "TV Episode" search option is my friend: https://www.imdb.com/find?ref_=nv_sr_fn&q=&s=ep

—although for titles that are very common to many series, I then have to do an Edit Find (Ctrl+F or on a Mac Cmd+F) or  Find in Page on a tablet to locate the series' link to the  episode. This is especially useful to figure out who the guest stars were.

There's also: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Law_%26_Order_episodes

[Scarlett45]

2 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

The IMDb "TV Episode" search option is my friend: https://www.imdb.com/find?ref_=nv_sr_fn&q=&s=ep

—although for titles that are very common to many series, I then have to do an Edit Find (Ctrl+F or on a Mac Cmd+F) or  Find in Page on a tablet to locate the series' link to the  episode. This is especially useful to figure out who the guest stars were.

There's also: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Law_%26_Order_episodes

Thank you. 

[Ailianna]

3 hours ago, MoistestCake said:

There are numerous episodes in the various L&Os when the perp confesses to a priest and the priest can't/won't tell the authorities. If accepting the consequences is crucial to forgiveness, the priest is derelict in his duty by not making sure the perp is tried (and could be found not guilty). If the priest is complicit in the holding of evidence and that means the perp avoids the consequences, the priest is also to blame for the perp not being fully forgiven. I am not a Christian but I am familiar with the privilege of confession in both the church and the civil law in the USA, so the law allows religious ministers to obstruct justice, which as a rule is a crime, which is the threat the police/DA use in almost every episode to get people to talk. 

3 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

The privilege of the confessional was the premise behind both drama and comedy in episodes 2.9-10 of Boston Legal that aired yesterday morning and also on a recent rerun of The Closer. It is so common of a plot point in many crime shows that I never really thought too much about it—probably because I'm old enough to have pretended familiarity with Christian prayers and holidays that were part of public schools in the 1960s. Anyway, I just skimmed this Wikipedia article and realize it makes no sense to me at all.

The idea of confession is that the person is getting right with God, not with secular authority.  And I think most priests do encourage penitants to go to the police, but they can't force someone.  The reason that the secular law allows the privilege in court is because we have separation of church and state, and so we don't force people to violate religion in order to provide information that may or may not be used in court anyway.  A confession to a priest may have no corroboration, which is required to convict--you can't just convict someone on their admission of doing a crime,  you have to have other proof that they in fact did commit the crime.  And then to make it a second hand confession--it's definitely not enough to convict.  So it doesn't really pose the problem to conviction that L&O sometimes portrays.  Likewise, the obstruction threats on the show are often unrealistic and done for plot purposes, rather than because that's the way the law actually works.

[MoistestCake]

4 hours ago, Ailianna said:

The idea of confession is that the person is getting right with God, not with secular authority.  And I think most priests do encourage penitants to go to the police, but they can't force someone.

A confession to a priest may have no corroboration, which is required to convict

Likewise, the obstruction threats on the show are often unrealistic and done for plot purposes, rather than because that's the way the law actually works.

Absolutely 

[topanga]

On 2/26/2019 at 11:07 PM, Passepartout said:

Meant that Jack crossed in line in that of going to win instead of caring about cases, but only to win. And had been reprimanded.

As not with Jamie but started mellowing out after she left. Jack the Jerk I called him for a few years. Until he started to becoming more of a team player.

Yes, this was Jack. Which is why ‘Compassion’ is one of my favorite episodes. It was one of the few times I’ve seen Jack become emotionally moved by someone’s testimony. When the oncology doctor burst out in tears and said she was a failure because she couldn’t save her dying pediatric patients, Jack looked like he was on the verge of tears himself. 

[Xeliou66]

19 minutes ago, topanga said:

Yes, this was Jack. Which is why ‘Compassion’ is one of my favorite episodes. It was one of the few times I’ve seen Jack become emotionally moved by someone’s testimony. When the oncology doctor burst out in tears and said she was a failure because she couldn’t save her dying pediatric patients, Jack looked like he was on the verge of tears himself. 

Compassion was interesting, as by the end I was unsure what to make of the doctor, I think she may have had a complete mental breakdown brought on by the emotional toll of her work and might’ve gone insane, although Skoda seemed to disagree. While I think it was probably a good idea to work out a plea deal, I thought McCoy was very soft regarding the sentence, I agreed with Arthur’s last line telling him not to make it a habit.

Compassion also has one of my favorite Briscoe one liners, when he’s talking about the fake psychic victim and how they had no clue who he was: “if he was still alive I would hire him to talk to himself!”

What does everyone else think of that episode?

[WendyCR72]

Apparently, Chris Noth is in the final season of Amazon's series, Catastrophe.

[Passepartout]

Really Jack I had a love-hate relationship with. And as much as I can't believe I am saying this. Glad he was back on S.V.U. Noticing that when Olivia called him Mr McCoy and he says to call her Jack. Kind of seem he had a bit of his ego intact. A long way from when we first met him.

[GHScorpiosRule]

Man, I wish I had kept the previous recording of "Indifference" on my dvr so I could have watched that and "Fixed" back to back. That way I could be 100% certain of what I'm about to post.

First, I really wish Wolf had tried to get Robert Palm to write this, as he wrote "Indifference" which is one of the BEST episodes of the entire series.

Here are my issues with "Fixed":

1. No one EVER believed Carla or took her side; but I can handwave that way as part of Lowenstein's narcissism, in thinking that "everyone" took Carla's side.
2. Carla was never beaten to the point where she couldn't talk. So that's the first thing that had me 😒 at the words out of Cragen's mouth.
3. The "redemption" of Carla is another one that had me 😒 because she was as much of a narcissist and abuser (physical) of her children as Lowenstein, and it's beyond my suspension of disbelief that she would have such self-awareness, considering how "Indifference" ended. And that she was allowed near children too. 
4. Shut up, Foghorn. From what I can recall, I don't think Lowenstein got a plea deal*. He was found guilty of manslaughter, so Foghorn can shut up about how Stone "settled" and "agreed" to charge him for Manslaughter. The fact that he was paroled is on the parole board and not Ben Stone.

And I had NO SYMPATHY for Draper or whatever the hell her name was, who had killed Lowenstein. That the writers, in 2004, could think that DNA "magically" appeared on her car's grill, or that "anyone" could have taken her car, would also know about Lowenstein makes me STABBY. That the stupid jury fell for her crocodile tears just INFURIATES me. Jack hit her over and over again, tearing down her pathetic excuses about how she was "waiting" for a good reason to call the police if Emily would be hurt further. Who the HELL made her JUDGE and JURY? She's just as much of a narcissist, thinking she KNEW how to FIX Lowenstein. Okay, maybe not a narcissist, but certainly ARROGANT. What? She was waiting for Emily to end up like Deedee?

I really wish that this episode would have shown that even if the victims aren't nice or good, that the system does work. And having this cold fish of a woman, who didn't react to the verdict, and couldn't even bother to return her husband's embrace, deserved to go to jail.

*I'm 99.999% sure, that the jury found his ass guilty, and that the judge at the sentencing phase, said he wished he could have put him in jail for LIFE. And then we hear Carla asking her "Poookie" what was going to happen to them now? CARLA made a plea deal and testified against Lowenstein.

I'm not watching any other Season 15 episodes, but I did fast forward to "Ain't No Love" better known as the "Is this because I'm a Lesbian" episode. Good Lord; could Branch sound any more insincere and not believable that Rohmbot's sexual orientation had nothing to do with it? He's never been able to keep his own personal politics out of the decisions he's made or bleed into his job; And also I 🙄 when he said how the job of ADA can't be passionate but can be zealous. Really? Oh Really? And Jack hasn't let his passions get in the way? This was such a poor and lazy way to get rid of the actress (assuming she was fired and didn't quit; I can't remember). And only a third into the season, instead of the end. And then her meek "Good, good" in gratitude that her being a Lesbian wasn't the reason. Like we even knew, or the show never revealed. And her actions/attitude did expose that she was better off as a defense attorney, but she never showed any "passion" I could ever see. Just her constant questioning and defense of suspects and defendants.

To end on a more...bittersweet episode...Lennie's/Jerry's last episode/SCENE, had me tearing up. And then Googling to find out if the first episode after his passing ever had a "Dedicated to Jerry Orbach" but I couldn't find it. I only recall mentions in passing seasons--in 2008, by Ed, and of course, Logan mentioning him over on Criminal Intent.

[andromeda331]

1 hour ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Man, I wish I had kept the previous recording of "Indifference" on my dvr so I could have watched that and "Fixed" back to back. That way I could be 100% certain of what I'm about to post.

First, I really wish Wolf had tried to get Robert Palm to write this, as he wrote "Indifference" which is one of the BEST episodes of the entire series.

Here are my issues with "Fixed":

1. No one EVER believed Carla or took her side; but I can handwave that way as part of Lowenstein's narcissism, in thinking that "everyone" took Carla's side.
2. Carla was never beaten to the point where she couldn't talk. So that's the first thing that had me 😒 at the words out of Cragen's mouth.
3. The "redemption" of Carla is another one that had me 😒 because she was as much of a narcissist and abuser (physical) of her children as Lowenstein, and it's beyond my suspension of disbelief that she would have such self-awareness, considering how "Indifference" ended. And that she was allowed near children too. 
4. Shut up, Foghorn. From what I can recall, I don't think Lowenstein got a plea deal*. He was found guilty of manslaughter, so Foghorn can shut up about how Stone "settled" and "agreed" to charge him for Manslaughter. The fact that he was paroled is on the parole board and not Ben Stone.

And I had NO SYMPATHY for Draper or whatever the hell her name was, who had killed Lowenstein. That the writers, in 2004, could think that DNA "magically" appeared on her car's grill, or that "anyone" could have taken her car, would also know about Lowenstein makes me STABBY. That the stupid jury fell for her crocodile tears just INFURIATES me. Jack hit her over and over again, tearing down her pathetic excuses about how she was "waiting" for a good reason to call the police if Emily would be hurt further. Who the HELL made her JUDGE and JURY? She's just as much of a narcissist, thinking she KNEW how to FIX Lowenstein. Okay, maybe not a narcissist, but certainly ARROGANT. What? She was waiting for Emily to end up like Deedee?

I really wish that this episode would have shown that even if the victims aren't nice or good, that the system does work. And having this cold fish of a woman, who didn't react to the verdict, and couldn't even bother to return her husband's embrace, deserved to go to jail.

*I'm 99.999% sure, that the jury found his ass guilty, and that the judge at the sentencing phase, said he wished he could have put him in jail for LIFE. And then we hear Carla asking her "Poookie" what was going to happen to them now? CARLA made a plea deal and testified against Lowenstein.

That pissed me off too. They made so many changes from what actually happened in the first episode. No way in hell Carla was a victim. She was every bit as much of abusing her kids as her husband. Hell she was arrested as she was about to burn her son's hand. She definitely could speak because she did. There was no reason to suddenly make her the "victim" in this episode. Who the hell gave him parole and for what? He was found guilty but not for life because that's exactly what the Judge said he wished he could give him life. But I can't see anyone not even the parole board just deciding to let him go no matter what he said. And on the off chance he was released there would be a huge uproar in the papers, on the news and everyone (which is why I still doubt it would happen because it would destroy who ever made that decision completely).  I did like seeing the son and he ended up with nice adoptive parents. Good. 

I agree about the woman who murdered Lowenstein she really wasn't any better. If she had any concerns why didn't she call his parole officer or the police that would have gotten him thrown back in jail in a second. I don't buy that she wouldn't be convicted either. Juries have had no problem in convicting someone even if they did murder someone who was really bad. 

[WendyCR72]

5 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

• Carla was never beaten to the point where she couldn't talk. So that's the first thing that had me 😒 at the words out of Cragen's mouth.
• The "redemption" of Carla is another one that had me 😒 because she was as much of a narcissist and abuser (physical) of her children as Lowenstein, and it's beyond my suspension of disbelief that she would have such self-awareness, considering how "Indifference" ended. And that she was allowed near children too. 

These two examples bugged the hell out of me. "Indifference" is still shown fairly often, so why the writers of "Fixed" thought this would fly baffles me. And I know he was around for it, but I also disliked how the writing made it sounds like Cragen was one of the original investigators and...no. It was nice to have follow up on some cases. But perhaps the original episode's details should be remembered when doing so.

And I liked both Ben and Jack, so this is not really meant as a slight to McCoy, but I wish Stone could have made some sort of appearance (yes, I know; Michael Moriarty was persona non grata and why) as he was the one to feel such loathing and rage for Lowenstein and his pathetic wife.

And another final thing: Lowenstein got 25 to life. In 2005, during "Fixed", that made only 15. I know, I know. But maybe mention why Lowenstein was out a decade early. Good behavior (ha!), overcrowding, clerical error...SOMETHING. Oh, well.

[Xeliou66]

Watching Family Values on WE, and I think this has to be one of the dullest episodes in L&O history, a bland case with a generic bunch of characters, for some reason this episode has never been able to hold my interest whatsoever. I find season 5 overall to be very bland, there are a lot of dull episodes IMO, for some reason it just doesn’t seem to be as strong as a lot of other seasons.