OK. I got home at 9:45, in time to catch the whole season premiere, right? well, only sort of. My son got injured at his soccer game, so time had to be spent scrounging around the house for Ace bandages, not to mention making eggrolls for the G** D**** potluck I had today. So, as a consequence, I missed (wouldn’t you know) the last 5 minutes.
So, pretty, pretty please, could some one tell me how the show ended?
thankyew, here’s an eggroll.
The guy in prison was ‘threatened’ into testifiing against the dogs owner if need be so it went to trial. Typical trial ensues with the exception of the fact that Jack brought the dog into the court room. The owners freaked. They all went to the judges chamber. The judge requested that Jack make them an offer. They took it. They pulled jail time.
I suspect you are asking because the trailers said something like ‘you won’t believe this ending!’.
It was anti-climactic and dissapointing. You really didn’t miss much.
I didn’t like the new assistant either. The two kids on the loading dock were better actors.
Ummmm…crunchy. Could you pass the sauce…?
The two lawyers who ran the dog-training scheme ended up on trial. Their whole case hinged on whether they had advance knowledge the dog was deadly, if so, they’d be liable. They claimed their pit bull was gentle, and the incident was provoked by the victim. They claimed that their pit bull was attacked by the victim’s little dog, and the woman was killed because she tried to save her dog. The usual blame-the-victim stuff. To discredit their case, McCoy brings the muzzled pit bull into the courtroom, snarling and barking and obviously violent, causing the defendants to shy away in fear from their own “gentle” pet. The defense calls for a mistrial. In chambers, the judge refuses the mistrial and tells the defendants to accept a deal. IIRC, it was Manslaughter 2, 2 to 6 years.
Thanks!! I knew I could count on this place to help out.
I agree about the new DA, but I wasn’t a real fan of Angie’s character either. I don’t worry too much about it 'tho 'cause they seem to do a good job all 'round.
Given what you’ve told me, nope, it wasn’t any ‘big special ending’ (and generally I look to them to come up with interesting twists - you can’t always assume they’ll win in court) one of my favorite twists was the comedy club owner charged w/killing his wife, trial ended when they discovered a dead junkie had done it, then '(sound effect bong), they found a tape of said junkie with said comedy club owner. (sigh, and of course the follow up episode where he tried to do it again)
I missed the credits. Was that Melissa Leo, late of Homicide, as the woman lawyer?
From IMDB: Elisabeth Rohm … Assistant District Attorney Serena Southerlyn (2001-).
She previously played the detective with daddy issues on Angel.
I liked her sassing the judge. She’s gonna be a tough cookie, a loose cannon, a side thorn, a chops buster, a real bundle of energy. A good addition to the best hour on TV after SportsCenter.
I have to differ Billy. I found her acting quite unconvincing. I wasn’t a huge fan of Angie but I think she was twice the actress this one is. I hope she “gets more into it” but I’m not holding my breath.
BIG thumbs down on the new Assistant.
[side note]
I still prefer Jill Hennesey the best out of all of the past ones.
[/side note]
While I’m sure Billy is correct about the new ADA’s identity, I believe jcgmoi was asking about the lawyer on trial. That was Melissa Leo of Homicide.
God I miss that show.
Claire was my favorite ADA with the first guy running a close second. (Too bad Jill Hennessey is on that piece of crap “Crossing Jordan” now. She could really be good in something.)
I was really disappointed with the ads for the “you’ll never believe it” ending. Although I do enjoy a TV show that throws me for a loop at the end, L&O tries to do it on every show. Hey Dick Wolf: it’s not that surprising anymore!
I haven’t made up my mind about the new ADA yet. I hated Jamie at first but ended up liking her.
Oh hell, I guess they’re all my favorite - even Angie.
The thing that’s really starting to bug me is that the role of ADA apparently is “office hottie.” I realize they don’t put people on TV who break the cameras, but the only believable female character on that show is the Lieutenant, and she has been ever since they’ve started cycling babes through through the “emergency back up lawyer” role.
It’s like the Prosecutor’s Office has the same criteria for female lawyers as the firm on Allie McBeal.
Did this episode have that little notice L&O sometimes puts at the end saying that the story is fictional and any similarity to real people is coincidental? Because the story was obviously based on those people in NYC who were caring for some prisoners’ dogs, one of which ran down a neighbor woman in the hallway and mauled her to death. L&O usually puts that notice up when the story IS obviously based on a true crime but, I guess, they want to avoid lawsuits.
Thanks Rez for clarifying my question. Sorry it was vaguely worded. Good to see ML again though.
missbunny: I thought the premise for the show came from the California (Bay area?) case.
Nah, you forgot the cynical pathologist. I think she’s funny.
missbunny, I didn’t see it. I think the actual event happened in San Francisco.
I loved ‘Angie’ - tough, smart (ass), hard. Not what I consider the office hottie type.
Jill Hennessey…wasn’t she a ‘Bond’ girl?
L&O is the best hour on TV!
Mrs.B is a L&O addict-- and the damn show is on all teh friggin time.
Not that I’m aware of. Any idea which movie you’re thinking of?
:o
I don’t know what made me think it was NY. The brain cells are getting old, I guess.
:o
Carey Lowell was a Bond girl.
Which Bond movie was she in?
I love L&O but I am getting sick and tired of their promos declaring each episode with a “shocking ending” “ripped from today’s headlines” “You don’t want to miss”. This week was especially bad since the episode could not have been more standard L&O, with no suprise ending, or whatever.
Standard L&O episode
Brutal murder, detectives come by, discuss case, make some pun, cut to commercial
Detectives get a lead, but it isn’t the right person
Detectives try a different investigative route, get someone involved in the crime, however…
a) they gather evidence in a suspect manner
b) this person isn’t the real mastermind, but won’t rollover on who is
Interregation scene, with or without lawyer…someone comes in to the room on the other side of the one-way mirror saying “The gun matches”. “Book him”
The prosecuters start the case, but…
a) key evidence thrown out
b) strong defense flummoxes prosecutors
The D.A. rubs his/her brow and wonders what kind of mess his prosecuters have gotten themselves into.
Meaning the case is in jeopardy and the accused may go free so, after debating the ethical merits, the prosecuters either,
a) throw together some tertiary charge that is better than nothing
b) threaten an accomplice with jail time if they don’t confess and give up the person they are really after
Prosecuters win…somtimes settling for less than they wanted.
Of course some episodes escape this formula and they are usually the best ones.
Well, there is the other formula.
Start investigating one crime and it leads to another totally different crime.
I love the show, but these two plots pretty much sum up the show. I think the shows strong point is unlike, say, Perry Mason the bad guy sometimes gets off. You never know til the end. IIRC, Miami Vice started the bad-guy-gets-away thing.
**bernse, Don’t know. I was channel surfing one day and saw her (missed the credits). But at the end she and Bond escape in some kind of submarine…I think.