Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
dttruman

S20.E17: Missing or We've Got something

Recommended Posts

Episode description from Googling "SVU Missing"

The SVU pursues a suspect when a child is discovered in the trunk of an abandoned car.

Little bit of a quandary here. The "All Things Law & Order" website and Googling SVU episode 17 mentions the title as "Missing". The SVU Channel on Youtube is calling this episode "We've Got Something".

 

 

Edited by dttruman
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think the episode is titled Missing, that’s from everything I’ve seen.

The episode looks and sounds promising, hopefully it will deliver.

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, Xeliou66 said:

I think the episode is titled Missing, that’s from everything I’ve seen.

The episode looks and sounds promising, hopefully it will deliver.

Does this channel on Youtube need to be more specific when it comes to labeling a title for these "Sneak Peek" clips? IMO, they need to include the title of the episode. I don't have the brightest light bulb upstairs, so when I see and read the "Sneak Peek", it looks like the title is (in this case) "Big Bird".

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Yes they need to list the title of the episode IMO. “We’ve got something” was the title of the promo, and “Big Bird” is the title of the sneak peek, but the episode is titled Missing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

But of course, Benson just barges in and bust the Perp.

:runs to stop my eyeballs from rolling out the door:

  • Like 7
  • Laugh 2

Share this post


Link to post

Bad omen to start. Benson is freaking out and complaining why the detectives can't find any witnesses. I think it's going to be one of those episodes, where Benson goes on one of her own little crusades. If another detective does the same thing, she would be ripping them a new one.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

My TV calendar shows this:

S20:E17 Missing

The SVU pursues a suspect when a child is discovered in the trunk of an abandoned car.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, MrsRafaelBarba said:

But of course, Benson just barges in and bust the Perp.

:runs to stop my eyeballs from rolling out the door:

Well at least they didn't do the usual where Benson calls off SWAT and assumes command of the situation.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, dttruman said:

Well at least they didn't do the usual where Benson calls off SWAT and assumes command of the situation.

My sister screamed for the Perp to knock Benson  out.

  • Like 5
  • Laugh 4

Share this post


Link to post

Does anyone else think that puppet guy may have something to do with this case in the end (or surprise ending)?

  • Like 1
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

I had a feeling that Emerson would be the missing boy. 

Didn't they do one like this already? 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Gigglepuff said:

I had a feeling that Emerson would be the missing boy. 

Didn't they do one like this already? 

Yeah.

With the Reality Doc and his wife.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, MrsRafaelBarba said:

Oh Shut up Olivia! 

Why is Benson trying to get him to remember? I thought his sister should be in there with Benson and also Fin or Carisi just in case the guy gets violent. I thought the sister would be better at trying to jog his memory.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

Once again a episode with a good premise, with Fin and Carisi doing a good job of investigating the case. But as usual, there were a couple of twists or actions that didn't make sense.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, dttruman said:

Why is Benson trying to get him to remember? I thought his sister should be in there with Benson and also Fin or Carisi just in case the guy gets violent. I thought the sister would be better at trying to jog his memory.

I was glad when the Sister shut her self righteous ass down.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post

I actually liked Benson's take down of a perp for the first time in more than a decade.
And Carisi's take down too.
A+ for directing?
And writing (Matt Klypka)? --including the sister's line at the end to Olivia: "not some broken vase you can put together with a little Krazy glue."
And great casting of the little girl.

But.
The blue eyes - brown eyes crap bugged me.
Sure, 2 brown eyed parents are "statistically" more likely to have a brown eyed kid than a blue eyed kid,
because, like they said, blue is recessive.
But, also, since blue is recessive, each brown eyed parent could have one blue and one brown gene, so potentially their kid could inherit a blue gene from each and have blue eyes.
But what they really should have done (IMO), was to have 2 blue eyed parents and a brown eyed (kidnapped) kid.
Because that would be impossible. 
If they did it the other way to make it improbable rather than impossible, then yay for science writers. I guess. 
But did they?

ETA: Or what @rhys said below in far fewer words.

And Chloe Webb (Rowan Mauer) age 62, can play 42-52 with all that "work," but for this part she should've laid off the botox. IMO. 

Edited by shapeshifter
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

This had more of an old school feel in which the case in the beginning lead to a different one. Kids were involved not a he said she said rape. Wacky potential suspect puppet guy that could be a leftover of Neal Bear ideas. The dialog was good for the most part.

I LOVED Finn calling puppets "arrogant bastards."  

The mother was suspicious from the beginning. The switch was sloppy. I'm going to have to rewatch probably I got distracted reading some news on my phone. I liked the sister shutting Benson down. She is going through a lot too and not everyone can deal with the same level of stuff. Honestly if I found out the brother I'd been missing was alive but was a pedophile, I wouldn't rush to see him. Not right away at least.  Glad she stood her ground

Good effort, Meh execution. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

The sister should have had blue eyes.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
46 minutes ago, shapeshifter said:

And Chloe Webb (Rowan Mauer) age 62, can play 42-52 with all that "work," but for this part she should've laid off the botox. IMO. 

Chloe Webb played Monica Gallagher on Shameless.

Why wasn't fake Emerson being interviewed by a psych person? Or has St. Olivia expanded her "talents"  to include psychiatry/psychology?

She's been in law enforcement for how long, 22 years, and still questions the way the law works. Hard evidence usually works, Olivia.

Edited by preeya
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, preeya said:

Chloe Webb played Monica Gallagher on Shameless.

Well Fuck me sideways! That's who that was. Thank you. Her name meant nothing but I recognized her face. Her voice was off, too.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Not an awful episode, the premise itself was pretty good, but I saw pretty quickly where it was going when they found the body of the kid, and they still hadn't found the ID as to who he was. That woman was a horrible person, like holy crap. "I deserved to be a mother!" Well, no, you drunkenly killed your kid, dumped him in the lawn because you didnt want to get in trouble, and kidnapped another kid, screwing him up so much that he kidnapped and traumatized yet another kid. You deserve a whole lot of jail, lady. And I thought Monica Gallagher was a shitty mom!

Really, the highlight of the episode to me was the random puppet guy, and Fin and Carisi bantering about puppets. That whole scene was like we just wandered into some kind of weird dark comedy, like all of the sudden in this serious case, theres a guy talking to the police with his puppet. 

How many times have we listened to Olivia rant about about how much the justice system sucks like its her first day as a cop? And was she serious when she said that a mother wouldn't testify against her own son? Seriously, has she never seen this show?!? She has seen what awful stuff moms can do to their kids, including in this very episode! I did love Stones "...seriously?" expression when she said that. Or maybe I was projecting.

Edited by tennisgurl
  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post

I liked this episode, it was one of season 20’s better outings. 

I really liked seeing a female criminal mastermind, it’s so rare to see a woman perp now and I really liked the twist of Rowan being the mastermind and the male being more sympathetic than the female, and a truly dislikable perp. 

I loved that it was detective work from Fin and Carisi that cracked the case, they are an awesome duo and the more screentime they have the better. There was also some good legal stuff from Stone, and I liked how he was the one who came up with the idea to get Rowan to turn on her “son” at the grand jury. 

I also liked that the episode didn’t end with Benson saving the day and that it had something of a depressing but realistic ending. 

There were some funny moments in the episode, mainly with Fin and Carisi, which I appreciated, the puppet scene made me laugh.

My only issues with the episode were: the scene of Benson entering the convenience store and taking down Emerson/Kevin all by herself without waiting for ESU, Benson snapping at Fin and Carisi for no reason at the start, Benson overdramatically bitching about the system (I liked Stone seeming exasperated with her crap) and Fin disappearing towards the end.

Overall this was a very solid episode, one of the season’s best, with many things I found refreshing: a female perp, a focus on detective work, some legal stuff, humor sprinkled in, an ending that isn’t Benson saving the day, no personal soapy shit, and a strong plot with good twists. Pretty strong episode overall.

Edited by Xeliou66
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

  Did anyone else think it was so disingenuous when the parents didn't want Bailey to testify. I thought that moment may set this "Victims Narrative" (of SVU) back to the square one, because the last thing they want to do is to deter victims from coming forward. But as usual Benson was leading Stone through the legal aspects of the investigation.

On 3/15/2019 at 12:44 AM, Xeliou66 said:

the scene of Benson entering the convenience store and taking down Emerson/Kevin all by herself without waiting for ESU, Benson snapping at Fin and Carisi for no reason at the start, Benson overdramatically bitching about the system (I liked Stone seeming exasperated with her crap) 

This episode was set up more for Benson to go off on her many rants, but I just thought it was so ill conceived and contrived even though it did have a good beginning. When Benson went into that hostage situation alone, I knew this is where the manipulation begins. Since the police had already been there, wouldn't the perp assume that Benson was a cop when she entered? Just a lame set up for mock heroics for Benson again.

Edited by dttruman
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, rhys said:
7 hours ago, preeya said:

Chloe Webb played Monica Gallagher on Shameless.

 That's who that was. Thank you. Her name meant nothing but I recognized her face. Her voice was off, too.

She is also adept at comedy. Picture her sort of dancing on a table, singing the Batman theme from the 60's drunk. Then she lifts her dress over her head. Can you guess where that is from?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

If they did it the other way to make it improbable rather than impossible, then yay for science writers. I guess. 

Just another stain on the research aspect of this episode. As long as they can come up with an excuse to take it down the path they want.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

The Good:
An episode all about the entire squad investigating an actual SVU casr, followed by the prosecution and further investigation without any extraneous nonsense.
The whole squad below the rank of Lieutenant. Fin and Carisi  were great as usual, but this was a bounce back week for Rollins too.
The guest cast and directing. This is the kInd of plot that can derail really easily if it's not handled well. But nobody hammed it up and as somebody already mentioned the action scenes really flowed well. The comic relief also did a good job of lightening things up while staying grounded.
Stone and the legal side. Not only was it handled well, but it was nice to see them working together without any bar scenes or Benson trying to give orders to an ADA.
The sister telling off Benson at the end when she tried to make it all better as usual by whispering platitudes while making constipated faces. The cherry on the sundae of a really good episode.

The Bad:
Benson. For all the usual reasons. Even a script that avoided so many of the usual pitfalls still had to have her charge in to a hostage situation. And Mariska's overacting was even more noticeable in a week of really sold performances.

Overall this was a really good episode. Maybe the best since early Season 17. We have had higher highs, but what makes this a standout is the lack of glaring flaws except for the one they can't get rid of. This is one I can see myself happily watching In reruns which puts it above about half of the last decade or so. I've said since Chernuchin came on board that they seem to be trying to go back to basics and fix the writing and it seems like they might finally be there. Now let's keep it up and give us a solid final season...

Edited by wknt3 · Reason: ducking autocorrect...
  • Like 4
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

This one annoyed me.   My fault, I've been watching old episodes so the utter lack of cohesion really stood out.

The suspect is holed up in a store and not one person thinks to check for a back door until Benson asks?   

They are looking for a missing child and Fin doesn't understand the significance of a 3x5 ground disturbance.   Please.

And tge whole crime.   He was kidnapped at 6 so he took a 6 year old girl?    First, he should have been kidnapped at 4 or 5.   Didn't teachers notice the huge change in Emerson?   Then he should have kidnapped a 10 year old girl to cuddle with.   And exactly what caused him to suddenly need to do this?   

Don't even get me started on Benson telling him he's Kevin.   Maybe taking a few of the pictures of Kevin with his sister would have helped?   Maybe Liv leaving that to professionals?  

Sorry,  this episode just sucked.    

Edited by watcher
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

I didn’t get the point of telling the sister that they found the remains of he brother when they weren’t even sure it was him! Don’t they usually wait for s positive ID before notifying the family? Surely DNA would have been taken when kEvin disappeared 17 years ago? 

and just as she’s trying to grapple with her brother being dead, she discovers that he’s very much alive and a pedophile. I’d rather think he was killed 17 years ago. But I absolutely LOVED her putting St. Olivia in her place at the end. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, wknt3 said:

Stone and the legal side. Not only was it handled well, but it was nice to see them working together without any bar scenes or Benson trying to give orders to an ADA.

When Benson mentioned to Bailey's parents that they should want their kid to testify so as to prevent this guy from abducting another child. I thought Benson gave up pretty fast and was going to secretly release that info to the newspapers anonymously so the parents would then (more or less) be forced to have their daughter testify. Wasn't it Benson who suggested the grand jury idea to Stone and just kept leading him down the jurisprudence trail?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
51 minutes ago, watcher said:

The suspect is holed up in a store and not one person thinks to check for a back door until Benson asks?   

51 minutes ago, watcher said:

Don't even get me started on Benson telling him he's Kevin.   Maybe taking a few of the pictures of Kevin with his sister would have helped?   Maybe Liv leaving that to professionals?   

These hardly subtle inconsistencies, are mainly setups for the Benson character to look good, but most of the other parts were set up well.

Edited by dttruman
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, dttruman said:

These hardly subtle inconsistencies, are mainly setups for the Benson character to look good . . .

or not

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, dttruman said:

I thought the sister would be better at trying to jog his memory.

They HAD a picture of him & the sister taken TWO WEEKS before he was kidnapped!! I kept saying "show him the picture", which would probably be the best way to jog his memory. Not Olivia's words, not the 27 year old sister, but a picture of him & the sister the way he would remember her!

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, watcher said:

This one annoyed me.   My fault, I've been watching old episodes so the utter lack of cohesion really stood out.

The suspect is holed up in a store and not one person thinks to check for a back door until Benson asks?   

They are looking for a missing child and Fin doesn't understand the significance of a 3x5 ground disturbance.   Please.

And tge whole crime.   He was kidnapped at 6 so he took a 6 year old girl?    First, he should have been kidnapped at 4 or 5.   Didn't teachers notice the huge change in Emerson?   Then he should have kidnapped a 10 year old girl to cuddle with.   And exactly what caused him to suddenly need to do this?   

Don't even get me started on Benson telling him he's Kevin.   Maybe taking a few of the pictures of Kevin with his sister would have helped?   Maybe Liv leaving that to professionals?  

Sorry,  this episode just sucked.    

Yeah, I didn't care for this one either.  So much bad writing.  The points you mention, plus I didn't like what they did with Carisi.  He's too dumb to extrapolate where Benson is going when asking about a back door or where Rollins is going with the blue eyes, without being hit with a two-by-four - My intuitive, talented, smart Carisi! - but... he extrapolates in an instant when he sees the grass.  While... Fin needs to be hit with the two-by-four to get the significance of the grass.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Rollins glances at three pictures and makes the leap that Emerson is Kevin.  We get it, Show:  Men - dumb; women - smart.

And don't get me started on Benson going into that bodega.  Yeah, that's the way it would work.  Two detectives right there, but let's send in the Lieutenant, that makes sense.  What do they need with ESU in NY, when they have Olivia Benson on the job?  They really ought to get rid of them, save money in the budget.  

3 hours ago, Sake614 said:

I didn’t get the point of telling the sister that they found the remains of he brother when they weren’t even sure it was him!

That was completely irresponsible and, I'd wager, completely against department protocol.  The one thing I did like was Emerson's refusal to believe he was Kevin and the sister, at the end, letting Benson know that her brand of one size fits all resolution is not the reality for everyone.

It's interesting they brought up the point about Emerson/Kevin having blue eyes, since they cast brown-eyed twins to play blue-eyed Amanda and blue-eyed Declan's kid.  Maybe the casting department should take note.  But, hey, I've always wanted them to retcon Jesse's father.  Here's their opening!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

He's too dumb to extrapolate where Benson is going when asking about a back door or where Rollins is going with the blue eyes, without being hit with a two-by-four - 

No, it's the assumption that the audience is so stupid these things have to be spelled out to them. 

I didn't understand why the sister was able to go face to face with the mother (Webb's character). What was the point of that? And shouldn't the two have been better separated, especially considering the horrible things Webb was saying? The daughter could have managed at least one nice roundhouse punch before anyone stepped in. (Of course, Webb did deserve it.) And then there isn't a face to face between the sister and brother. Strange.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Sandrine Holt.

What was the point of announcing she was recurring, then barely use her?

Not a fan of the actress,  but her character should've been in this one.

Also.a few previous episodes.

SMDH. 

  • Like 5
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, rhys said:

The sister should have had blue eyes.

It is possible for siblings to have different color eyes. We never saw the real parents. One could have had blue eyes and one could have had brown eyes. I get what you mean though in terms of the show to make it more realistic that he was Kevin.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, MrsRafaelBarba said:

Sandrine Holt.

What was the point of announcing she was recurring, then barely use her?

Not a fan of the actress,  but her character should've been in this one.

Also.a few previous episodes.

SMDH. 

I thought the same thing, Dr Abernathy should’ve been in this episode, both to interview Bailey and to talk to Emerson/Kevin. This show needs a psych expert on on a semi regular basis, and I don’t really get why the introduced Abernathy only to have her in 3 episodes, it makes me wonder if we will ever see her again, I hope we do. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
22 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

Not an awful episode, the premise itself was pretty good, but I saw pretty quickly where it was going when they found the body of the kid, and they still hadn't found the ID as to who he was. That woman was a horrible person, like holy crap. "I deserved to be a mother!" Well, no, you drunkenly killed your kid, dumped him in the lawn because you didnt want to get in trouble, and kidnapped another kid, screwing him up so much that he kidnapped and traumatized yet another kid. You deserve a whole lot of jail, lady. And I thought Monica Gallagher was a shitty mom!

Sounds like something Monica and Frank would have done. Only they would have tried to scam money off someone after kidnapping the boy.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, Xeliou66 said:

I thought the same thing, Dr Abernathy should’ve been in this episode, both to interview Bailey and to talk to Emerson/Kevin. This show needs a psych expert on on a semi regular basis, and I don’t really get why the introduced Abernathy only to have her in 3 episodes, it makes me wonder if we will ever see her again, I hope we do. 

I miss when BD Wong was recurring/series regular.

Huang's  insight and expertise was one the best things about the Golden Yrs of SVU.

Same for Skoda and Olivet throughout the franchise.

Same with Warner as M.E. , cheap asses barely have trial scenes now.

Despite Winchester being a Series regular.

SVU was once more layered and a true ensemble.

Edited by MrsRafaelBarba
  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
21 hours ago, dttruman said:

She is also adept at comedy. Picture her sort of dancing on a table, singing the Batman theme from the 60's drunk. Then she lifts her dress over her head. Can you guess where that is from?

Friends? Not sure, but she'll always be Nancy Spungeon to me.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 3/14/2019 at 11:13 PM, shapeshifter said:

I actually liked Benson's take down of a perp for the first time in more than a decade.
And Carisi's take down too.
A+ for directing?
And writing (Matt Klypka)? --including the sister's line at the end to Olivia: "not some broken vase you can put together with a little Krazy glue."
And great casting of the little girl.

But.
The blue eyes - brown eyes crap bugged me.
Sure, 2 brown eyed parents are "statistically" more likely to have a brown eyed kid than a blue eyed kid,
because, like they said, blue is recessive.
But, also, since blue is recessive, each brown eyed parent could have one blue and one brown gene, so potentially their kid could inherit a blue gene from each and have blue eyes.
But what they really should have done (IMO), was to have 2 blue eyed parents and a brown eyed (kidnapped) kid.
Because that would be impossible. 
If they did it the other way to make it improbable rather than impossible, then yay for science writers. I guess. 
But did they?

ETA: Or what @rhys said below in far fewer words.

And Chloe Webb (Rowan Mauer) age 62, can play 42-52 with all that "work," but for this part she should've laid off the botox. IMO. 

True. It would have been more realistic to have two blue-eyed parents and a brown-eyed child. That is rare. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, DangerousMinds said:

Friends? Not sure, but she'll always be Nancy Spungeon to me.

Two and a Half Men. When Alan is bought a Porsche by his mother, and she demands that Alan takes out the daughter of a client (I think?) on a blind date.

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, MrsRafaelBarba said:

I miss when BD Wong was recurring/series regular.

Huang's  insight and expertise was one the best things about the Golden Yrs of SVU.

Same for Skoda and Olivet throughout the franchise.

Same with Warner as M.E. , cheap asses barely have trial scenes now.

Despite Winchester being a Series regular.

SVU was once more layered and a true ensemble.


True, but unfortunately that's not coming back. We might get something similar at times, and I would argue that we have on occasion recently, but the economic and creative reality is that this no longer a true ensemble, but a series centered around a single lead with a small supporting cast. We can still have good weeks (and I stand by the opinion that this was one) but it will never be as good as it was with Belzer, Meloni, Wong and the large supporting cast of recurring characters as well as the larger budget for location shoots etc. It just isn't possible. I think as fans we need to either accept the reality and expect them to do good work within those constraints, or drop the show. They certainly should use their resources better (add a recurring detective to the sqaud and more CSI/ME/TARU types instead of using the cast budget on soapy subplot characters) and keep up the improvement in the writing (it's actually more important now that they can't cover up some of the flaws that have always been there) and it's another reason why they should agree to end it gracefully while they still can, but if we are expecting them to go back to Season 6 all that can result is disappointment.

Edited by wknt3
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, wknt3 said:

They certainly should use their resources better (add a recurring detective to the sqaud and more CSI/ME/TARU types instead of using the cast budget on soapy subplot characters) and keep up the improvement in the writing (it's actually more important now that they can't cover up some of the flaws that have always been there) and it's another reason why they should agree to end it gracefully while they still can, but if we are expecting them to go back to Season 6 all that can result is disappointment.

Well said!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Overall I liked this episode, though I think it would have been better if there was 75% less Olivia. Everywhere we looked, there was another dramatic Olivia speech trying to force people to do the things she wanted them to do. It got tedious after a while. 

I also wish the writers wouldn't continually go to the well of parents refusing to let their children testify. It happens way too often on these episodes. 

Good Fin and Carisi, and there should be more of them. 

We didn't really get any handle of HOW Rowan managed to brainwash little Kevin into becoming her son, or why nobody around her ever questioned this. I mean, they might have looked similar, but you would think anyone who actually knew Emerson would see that it wasn't him. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, ForeverAlone said:

Overall I liked this episode, though I think it would have been better if there was 75% less Olivia. Everywhere we looked, there was another dramatic Olivia speech trying to force people to do the things she wanted them to do. It got tedious after a while. 

What has been consistently better this season, is that they start out with a good premise and throw in a twist or two to keep it interesting, but then they have to ruin it with some holier-then-thou Benson moments, poorly timed social or political issues, or badly researched information concerning the cases.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
On 3/16/2019 at 7:31 PM, wknt3 said:

It just isn't possible. I think as fans we need to either accept the reality and expect them to do good work within those constraints, or drop the show. They certainly should use their resources better (add a recurring detective to the sqaud and more CSI/ME/TARU types

You would think they could add a character or two for very short periods of time and it would cost very little as long as they wouldn't use a major name. You'd think for maybe 30 seconds or a minute at most would be enough to give a no name some exposure. Instead, what have we seen, relatives getting some parts.

Edited by dttruman
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Detective Carissi seems to be the working forensic archaeologist. This season   he uncovered 3 bodies long concealed on residential properties, first stumbling onto the yiddish family matriarch.. Plus he analyzed the contents of the Starbucks cup recovered from the parking garage early in this episode . He gave that herbology analysis of the suspect's lawn, later in this episode.

Edited by Welcome5431
  • Like 2
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×