Law & Order: "Strike" (spoilers)

[The Nth Doctor]

While the case wasn't all that interesting, I loved the second half of tonight's episode. Forced into representing the defendant because of a legal aide strike (first House, now Law & Order...who next?), Connie is pitted against Cutter and proves to be quite the match (she was taught by the best after all!).

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

While the case wasn't all that interesting, I loved the second half tonight's episode. Forced into representing the defendant because of a legal aide strike (first House, now Law & Order...who next?), Connie is pitted against Cutter and proves to be quite the match (she was taught by the best after all!).

There was a disclaimer at the beginning of the episode, which suggests it was ripped from a real headline. Anyone know what headline that may have been?

I thought it was a pretty good episode. I definitely didn't know that a prosecutor could just be drafted into service as a defense attorney at a moment's notice.

I have one other question: Towards the end, Connie is seen reading a typed note that says something about how Dresner did not have asthma, doctors did not know for sure what he had, etc. etc. The note also said that Dresner's breathing problems prevented him from diving and that it put him in a bad mood. How could he have been diving buddies with Sanderson if he couldn't dive?

 

[The Nth Doctor]

I have one other question: Towards the end, Connie is seen reading a typed note that says something about how Dresner did not have asthma, doctors did not know for sure what he had, etc. etc. The note also said that Dresner's breathing problems prevented him from diving and that it put him in a bad mood. How could he have been diving buddies with Sanderson if he couldn't dive?

Because, as mentioned by his widow earlier in the episode, he only started developing breathing problems in the past year. Scuba diving was his big hobby before that.

 

[Christopher]

There was a disclaimer at the beginning of the episode, which suggests it was ripped from a real headline. Anyone know what headline that may have been?

WRITERS GO ON STRIKE.

I thought it was a pretty good episode. I definitely didn't know that a prosecutor could just be drafted into service as a defense attorney at a moment's notice.

Well, don't assume something can happen just because it happens on L&O. Sometimes -- okay, often -- they bend the law for dramatic effect. I don't know that it can't happen in real life, but its use in this show is not proof that it can.

I have one other question: Towards the end, Connie is seen reading a typed note that says something about how Dresner did not have asthma, doctors did not know for sure what he had, etc. etc. The note also said that Dresner's breathing problems prevented him from diving and that it put him in a bad mood. How could he have been diving buddies with Sanderson if he couldn't dive?

Because he used to be an active diver, as his widow told Lupo and Bernard. The camera even made a point of focusing on Dresner's old scuba tank for a moment to make sure we noticed it for later. Dresner and Sanderson dove together over a decade ago, before Sanderson's conviction; the note presumably came from a later time, within the past year or two, based on the widow's earlier comments about when Dresner had to give up diving.


I liked this episode because I like any episode that features a lot of Connie (and those incredible, magnificent eyes). She really came off well here. In fact, maybe a little too well; I was left wondering, if she's such an incredibly good lawyer, why is she second banana to this Cutter jerk? Why isn't he working for her? Especially since she was there first.

I would've preferred it if Sanderson had actually been innocent and she'd proved it, but I guess that would've been a bit too conventional. And come to think of it, this was valuable because it showed the responsibilities of a defense attorney in a more sympathetic light than usual. Representing the guilty as zealously as the innocent is a necessary part of making a fair and unbiased legal system work.

I'm a little unsure about how Bernard was portrayed here. Two weeks ago he was an Internal Affairs officer, and now he's playing fast and loose with the rules and giving improper opinions on the witness stand? Given his former posting, shouldn't he know what's allowed and what's inappropriate? Or is the idea that he's eager to cut loose and break the rules now that he no longer has to enforce them? Either he's inconsistently written or he's a total creep.

 

[witchie]

I enjoyed Cutter and Connie sniping at each other. She got him a number of times. Hell, she had me convinced the guy was innocent until he admitted he actually did it. When she found out it was one big conspiracy between the guy and Dresner, I wanted her to fry his ass.

I'm not liking Anthony Andersen's character. He was better on K-Ville. They should have let him be the same character from SVU.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

I'm a little unsure about how Bernard was portrayed here. Two weeks ago he was an Internal Affairs officer, and now he's playing fast and loose with the rules and giving improper opinions on the witness stand? Given his former posting, shouldn't he know what's allowed and what's inappropriate? Or is the idea that he's eager to cut loose and break the rules now that he no longer has to enforce them? Either he's inconsistently written or he's a total creep.

I think McCoy made a good point about Bernard: He's not accustomed to being a witness. Maybe that can be applied to being a homicide detective, too?

And I agree that Connie was a little too good. She also reminded me a bit of Jamie Ross tonight, especially when Cutter said he was afraid of her switching sides.

 

[Christopher]

I enjoyed Cutter and Connie sniping at each other. She got him a number of times.

After they had that really heated argument in chambers over the planted nail and all that, I thought, "Yep, they definitely want to sleep together."

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

it showed the responsibilities of a defense attorney in a more sympathetic light than usual. Representing the guilty as zealously as the innocent is a necessary part of making a fair and unbiased legal system work.

I agree, but I question the decision of taking a *prosecutor* and suddenly forcing her to switch sides. How can somebody do that? An attorney who has made a career out of proving the state's case, and all of a sudden she's expected to be working against it? It's as if, shortly before a big Yankees/Red Sox game, one of the Yankees suddenly takes sick and so they draft Manny Ramirez to switch teams and replace him.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

there's a massive conflict of interest there, so I doubt it can happen.

In some states, attorneys can be forced to represent a client pro bono for a certain amount of time a year, but I doubt that applies to prosecutors (and I'm pretty sure NY State is not one of those). Also, are public defenders even unionized? I'm kinda surprised that they could even go on strike. I figured professional obligation would prevent that.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

there's a massive conflict of interest there, so I doubt it can happen.

Indeed. In fact, I was surprised Cutter didn't use this argument against Connie being assigned.

 

[DanCPA]

there's a massive conflict of interest there, so I doubt it can happen.

Indeed. In fact, I was surprised Cutter didn't use this argument against Connie being assigned.

Would have killed the story.

I loved seeing Connie show her teeth... As for being trained by the best, she did start working there when Fred Thompson was still there

 

[The Nth Doctor]

I believe Jack was referring to himself.

 

[A beaker full of death]

there's a massive conflict of interest there, so I doubt it can happen.

Indeed. In fact, I was surprised Cutter didn't use this argument against Connie being assigned.

It was absolutely ridiculous.
This show really tried to get the law right. Ten years ago. It's sad.

 

[Christopher]

^^I recently caught a rerun -- I don't recall how old it was (EDIT: web search says 2003) -- where the plot was built around a murderer who was convicted of murdering his wife years before despite the absence of a body, and when his wife turned out to be alive and he actually did murder her, he claimed he couldn't be tried for it because of double jeopardy. This seems to be a popular myth (there was also an Ashley Judd movie built around the conceit), but it's very bad law. It's true you can't be tried for the same crime twice, but the legal definition of a single crime includes its date, location, and other specifics, not just who did what to whom. It would obviously be ridiculous to say that a conviction for assaulting or robbing a person would exempt you from prosecution if you assaulted or robbed them again at a later time. And it's no different when the crime is homicide. It's not double jeopardy if the two prosecutions are for acts taking place at different times.

And L&O routinely plays fast and loose with courtroom procedure. Defense attorneys almost always put the defendants on the stand, something which is very rarely done in real life, and not necessary because defendants are not obligated to prove their innocence. Indeed, for a prosecutor even to suggest that a defendant has any such obligation is enough to taint the jury and get a mistrial, yet I've heard Jack McCoy make such insinuations on several occasions, asking defendants things like "Why should we believe you?" or "Then how else can you explain it?"

Also, for the sake of drama, they often have Jack and other DAs violate the first rule of cross-examination: never ask a question you don't know the answer to. Too often, they have prosecution witnesses shockingly reveal things on the stand that really should've been discovered during trial preparations.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

To be fair, in the double jeopardy case, McCoy said he would charge him (he implied it was difficult but doable, although real life it shouldn't be that difficult). Besides, that was a fairly light-hearted episode anyway.

 

[Christopher]

Actually I thought the Ashley Judd movie was more credible, because the characters expressing their belief in the "double jeopardy lets you get away with murder" myth were not lawyers, and since we never actually saw the claim put to the test (it was really irrelevant to the story, despite providing the title of the film). In the L&O episode, the lawyers and a judge were taking the claim seriously rather than debunking it right off the bat as any competent criminal lawyer would have.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

To be fair, in the double jeopardy case, McCoy said he would charge him (he implied it was difficult but doable, although real life it shouldn't be that difficult). Besides, that was a fairly light-hearted episode anyway.

Which episode was that?

 

[TGTheodore]

I liked this episode because I like any episode that features a lot of Connie (and those incredible, magnificent eyes).

We are on exactly the same page here!

--Ted

 

[A beaker full of death]

I liked this episode because I like any episode that features a lot of Connie (and those incredible, magnificent eyes).

We are on exactly the same page here!

She has eyes??

http://cdn.maximonline.com/girls/alana_delagarza/alana-delagarza-gm_l3.jpg

http://cdn.maximonline.com/girls/alana_delagarza/alana-delagarza-gm_l1.jpg

 

[Christopher]

^^Meh... there are plenty of women with bodies that nice. But not many with eyes as sleek and exotic and extraordinary as hers. Her lips are fantastic too.