Nice Law and Order Ending

[stevew]

We find the defendant
(spoiler space cause im an EST Elitist)

















"Produced by Dick Wolf"


Fuck this shit, im not going out of my way to watch this anymore.

[DaddyTorgo]

i missed it. what was the context of that? I mean I get that it didn't give you a guilty/not guilty but what was the case? What were they trying him for? It might make sense somewhat, if it was something controversial...

[stevew]

It was a rape trial. Still, i invest all the time in the episode, which wasnt even that great IMO, and you cant tell me what the fuck the jury verdict is? L&O can lick my ass.

[stevew]

is it because she's a lesbian?


Hell, even that would be okay. Just none of this no jury verdict bullshit.

[stevew]

Youd think the president would be able to get on the right Dynamic server BTW

[Joe]

is it because she's a lesbian?

[DaddyTorgo]

well that does sound pretty stupid then. i have no idea since i didn't see it.

[Peregrine]

I thought it was one of the better SVU episodes I've seen. The point was to show how so many rape cases just boil down to he-said, she-said, and there isn't a lot of definitive proof to go one way or the other. So in that episode (I saw it the first time it was on, a while ago) they just played up the kind of things that happen in a normal rape trial, instead of the usual Law and Order "everything's nicely tied up" at the end. Pretty neat idea. All the way up to the end the cops, and the viewers were unsure who was really telling the truth and what happened, so when it came to the verdict they just didn't show it.

[JonInMiddleGA]

IIRC, this is a gimmick that has been used at least once in the series before (the original L&O, in the Sam Waterson era if memory serves).

[vex]

That was an old one.

[DaddyTorgo]

oh wait. i feel like i might have seen this one. it didn't really bother me at all.

[stevew]

Wait, this was SUV. Okay, its not Wednesday then, after all.

[Tigercat]

In the original airing they had people go online to vote innocent or guilty. Basically they were trying to play the possibilities down the middle to make the viewer part of the jury and to show how difficult such cases can be.

Personally, I think a notguilty verdict would seem to be pretty obvious based on the evidence given and the way the two presented themselves in the courtroom(although not necessarily based on if one thinks he did it or not), but in a case like it will come down to jury makeup.

[Schmidty]

Ok, I'll be deleting this one from Tivo before my wife can force me to watch it. I dislike the show as it is.

[kingnebwsu]

There's no way they could have voted guilty. When I watched it the first time I bet that he did it, but no way I could convict him. But yeah, now that it's a rerun they should definitely show an ending of some kind.