Re: What Did You Watch? 2025-04-18 (Friday)

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

Apr 19 2025 4:33:14 PM PDT, Arthur Lipscomb <arthur@alum.calberkeley.org>:

Law & Order - "Play with Fire Part 1" - In the annual cross over
episode, Benson show up at the regular police department and starts
trying to throw her weight around.  But the commander of the regular
unit isn't having it.

 

Law & Order: SVU - "Play with Fire Part 2" - Picking up where the last
episode ended, Team SVU is investigating sex trafficking involving a
priest.  I think.  I kind lost track of what was going on.  But Stabler
showed up at the end to threaten someone.

These shows just keep on getting more and more ridiculous on the "Order" side
of things. These trials are approaching a 10-year-old's view of how things
work.

In this episode we find Benson and Brady teamed as investigators, even
though they both have entire divisions full of investigators that they
supervise, and they find a witness who not only knows who did the murder
but was a victim of rape from the guy as well from back when she was
a drug addict. Except she's an illegal who has somehow managed to not
only detox herself but find a job and get married and she won't testify
because doing so would blow up her new life.

I got lost with this witness. Was she trafficked? The villain committed
a phenomenal number of crimes that he simply lacked the time to commit,
given that he was a full-time cop and had no henchmen. (I'm not sure what
the priest's role was.) White slavery and a brothel. I assume there was
trafficking. She might have been a protected witness because of that.

(I forgot to mention that ICE is portrayed and they always are on Dick Wolf
shows as malevolent evil stormtroopers.)

Isn't the not-evil side of ICE supposed to investigate and protect
victims of human trafficking?

So the entire team, from D.A. Baxter on down to both prosecutors (one from
each show) decide to leave her out and go with the evidence they have. But in
typical L&O fashion, the trial does not go well for the state and so Baxter
decides the hidden witness has to testify after all.

Ahem. Price must go to court with as little evidence as possible, If
they have better evidence available, he shouldn't use it because
REASONS. I don't recall the name of the character of the prosecutor from
SVU. I couldn't figure out which one was first chair.

Except she couldn't. In reality, you can't leave someone off your witness
list and then reverse course mid-trial and call them to testify.

Confrontation clause, Sixth Amendment (I checked to make sure it's not
the Fifth). The judge ruled on the law over the commercial break; we
never heard Elizabeth Marvel argue against discovery.

Is right of discovery in criminal cases from common law only? I'm never
sure if that's inferred from the confrontation clause.

Worse still, SHE HAD NO EVIDENCE TO OFFER. Nearly her entire testimony
was hearsay! No objection from Elizabeth Marvel! See my other followup.

. . .