» Old Law & Order: Special Victims Unit Thread Options

[Learned Hand]

Am I on crack? Or has the studying finally broke you and you're confusing Alex with Serena? (The horror!) I mean, ER wasn't within 10 miles of this episode, unless I'm completely, shallowly mistaken...

You're on Ironbone Crack, baby, just like all of us. No, sorry, I was talking about "Monogamy" but remembering the way ER monotoned "theory of the crime" a couple weeks ago on the Mothership and I just expected all of you to follow my train of thought.

As for mixing up Serena and Alex, perish the thought! Unless it's the thought of Cesar Valez's men doing just that. Oops, was that mean?

So why couldn't they just modify that theory? He was an insane control freak who wanted his wife dead because she cheated, and he wanted the baby dead as well? Even if they didn't actually believe that, it's not like they've never pursued a theory they didn't believe in just to get a conviction.

Yeah, I don't know. [/Casey] Maybe they couldn't charge him with a satisfying offense for attempted murder on the wife, since it would be so hard to establish his intent, but could prove he intended to kill the baby? Ugh. Back to the batting cages for me.

ETA: not sure that works b/c if he had simply killed his wife, the baby would have died too. So I think it would harder to convince the jury he wanted to kill them both, so even if they didn't believe it but wanted a conviction, I don't think it would have helped them. I think they wanted to build the case around his needing the wife alive and the baby dead to convince the jury. Maybe?

This post has been edited by Learned Hand: Jan 21, 2004 @ 2:46 pm.

[add_duck]

Someone, please tell me I misunderstood that or that "tart" is actually a polite, compassionate police term?

I don't have the episode on tape, but it's not season five, so there has to be a misunderstanding, yes? What the hell kind of sex crimes captain calls a victim a "tart"?! On the other hand, everyone was pissing me off in that episode, so I guess it fits...

No, sorry, I was talking about "Monogamy" but remembering the way ER monotoned "theory of the crime" a couple weeks ago on the Mothership and I just expected all of you to follow my train of thought.

Phew! Okay, I feel better now. I didn't see that mothership episode, I guess. Or, maybe I blocked out the horrible, horrible memory.

not sure that works b/c if he had simply killed his wife, the baby would have died too. So I think it would harder to convince the jury he wanted to kill them both, so even if they didn't believe it but wanted a conviction, I don't think it would have helped them. I think they wanted to build the case around his needing the wife alive and the baby dead to convince the jury. Maybe?

I get that this was the most plausible theory (because it was, in fact, what happened) but if Alex was willing to totally invent a theory when she thought she couldn't get him on murder, why not invent a new theory that covered both? It might be a little sketchy, but I think the jury would have gone for attempted murder on the wife even if they hadn't proven that the baby was alive, because of the outrage factor.

Oh, who the hell knows. Back to the shallow end of the pool...Sick!Alex is just too hot for words. Why is it that I don't get hotter as I get sicker? Not fair.

This post has been edited by add_duck: Jan 21, 2004 @ 2:52 pm.

[Learned Hand]

It might be a little sketchy, but I think the jury would have gone for attempted murder on the wife even if they hadn't proven that the baby was alive, because of the outrage factor.

I don't think Alex can bring those charges if she doesn't think she can prove them or that they're (somewhat?) true, or at least that's what she argues about w/Petrovsky in "Denial." Then again, she's thrown in jail for that, so I'm not sure. But I can't see Alex bringing an attempted murder charge in the hopes the jury would just find it because they were outraged if she can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Meanwhile, the shallow end is way more fun. How do we think Alex got sick? Maybe she left her Scarf of Uselessness at Olivia's one night, and caught a draft on her neck? Maybe Elliot had a quick-moving cold virus when he crashed at her place the night before? Maybe Liz Donnelly slipped something in her coffee?

This post has been edited by Learned Hand: Jan 21, 2004 @ 2:59 pm.

[spacedog]

Sick!Alex is just too hot for words. Why is it that I don't get hotter as I get sicker? Not fair.

Alex is unbelievably hot when she's sick and disheveled. *swoon* The woman quite simply defies the laws of nature.

As for mixing up Serena and Alex, perish the thought! Unless it's the thought of Cesar Valez's men doing just that. Oops, was that mean?

Mean? Maybe. Hilarious? Absolutely!

[bella1013]

Execution

I maybe the only one, but did anyone else laugh when that guard shoved Alex and the defense attorney into the jail cell or safety cell, not sure what it was. It looked like he rolled them along, rather then push them, just remembering it makes me laugh. The guard just grips their shoulders, like holding two sacks of flower. Oh, yeah, Alex smiled while talking to the defense attorney, i'm pretty sure. Watch when she responds with "aah".

How do we think Alex got sick?

Working too hard in a sleeveless top! Oh, and abovementioned absence of scarf.

[DEM]

Okay, no one shared my outrage yet and I'm seriously disturbed to think that Cragen actually referred to two rape victims as "Brooklyn tarts." Someone, please tell me I misunderstood that or that "tart" is actually a polite, compassionate police term?

For me, the thing is, I'm pretty sure there have been plenty of times that detectives have called prostitutes -- including those whose assaults they're investigating -- hookers, and I'm pretty sure whore has been tossed about. Hasn't it? To me, tart is preferable to hooker and signficantly better than whore.

The following is only somewhat related to the Monogamy scene because I haven't looked at it again and, thus, still don't have a strong opinion about it. Anyway, I have this theory that Olivia sometimes seems harsh and dismissive because she's female. That is, IMO, Olivia is the prototypical highly androgynous person (in the original Bem sense of the word) and, thus, I think that 'masculine' (e.g., blunt) responses coming out of her female mouth seem way harsher than if they had come out of a male mouth.

This post has been edited by DEM: Jan 21, 2004 @ 3:41 pm.

[Brandon]

For me, the thing is, I'm pretty sure there have been plenty of times that detectives have called prostitutes -- including those whose assaults they're investigating -- hookers, and I'm pretty sure whore has been tossed about. Hasn't it? To me, tart is preferable to hooker and signficantly better than whore.

I always thought "tart" was British term for prostitute. I'd watch cop shows on like BBCAmerica and stuff and they would use that term alot. But I never really thought it was used a lot in America though.

[UltraViolet730]

Essentially telling Elliot to "snap out of it" doesn't help the situation at all. It was so obvious that he was having a difficult time articulating what was bothering him.

Exactly, spacedog! And Olivia knows him well enough to realize how painful even that small admission had to be for him. "Snap out of it" perfectly sums up her less than adequate response.

Anyway, I have this theory that Olivia sometimes seems harsh and dismissive because she's female. That is, IMO, Olivia is the prototypical highly androgynous person (in the original Bem sense of the word) and, thus, I think that 'masculine' (e.g., blunt) responses coming out of her female mouth seem way harsher than if they had come out of a male mouth.

That could very well be true, but I would have been equally horrified if Elliot had been as callous to Oliva, after attempting to draw her out, as she was to him.

I didn't mind her bluntness in getting him to admit something was wrong - I was happy she called him on it. What surprised me was her complete inability to deal with it when he did finally open up.

Maybe Elliot had a quick-moving cold virus when he crashed at her place the night before?

That gets my vote!

As for mixing up Serena and Alex, perish the thought! Unless it's the thought of Cesar Valez's men doing just that. Oops, was that mean?

Mean? Maybe. Hilarious? Absolutely!

Ditto from me. I don't even watch the Mothership and I want Serena gone.

[runnerbird]

Because I'm desperately trying to avoid work at the moment, I did a little research on the March/Mitchell/Harmon Dallas connection (yep, there is definitely something in the water). Elizabeth Mitchell lived in Highland Park, Dallas, Texas, but graduated from Booker T Washington High School for the Performing and Visual Arts located in the Arts District of downtown Dallas, Texas. Stephanie March and Angie Harmon went to Highland Park High School, but I'm not sure if either lived in the upscale neighborhood. Stephanie was a freshman when Angie was a senior. Harmon graduate in 1990, March in 1994. And if just to add another piece of useless trivia, E! Ted Casablanca also went to Highland Park High School, but he went by Bruce Bibby back then.

[pla725]

Stephanie is from University Park which is definitely upscale. It's named University Park because South Methodist University is located there. I watched "City Confidential" as well. I believe the area is actually referred to as the Park Cities.

I found that info in the Dallas Morning News. There were several articles where her name appeared. Some of those were from her high school days. Very smart woman.

Stephanie actually graduated from Highland Park High in 1992. She graduated from Northwestern in 1996.

I maybe the only one, but did anyone else laugh when that guard shoved Alex and the defense attorney into the jail cell or safety cell, not sure what it was. It looked like he rolled them along, rather then push them, just remembering it makes me laugh.

Bella I laughed at that scene too. It looked like the guard herded them along. Wonder how many takes that scene took with out someone falling or laughing?

This post has been edited by pla725: Jan 21, 2004 @ 4:46 pm.

[spacedog]

Because I'm desperately trying to avoid work at the moment, I did a little research on the March/Mitchell/Harmon Dallas connection...

Nice work, runnerbird. I know you're only as good as your information, but I think Harmon and March's graduation years may be off. If 1994 is the correct year, that means Stephanie didn't graduate from high school until she was almost 20. Yes, I nitpick too much. I can't help it. I have a history degree, so I have a thing about dates and places. Sorry and carry on.

ETA: pla725 beat me to it.

This post has been edited by spacedog: Jan 21, 2004 @ 4:46 pm.

[Learned Hand]

For me, the thing is, I'm pretty sure there have been plenty of times that detectives have called prostitutes -- including those whose assaults they're investigating -- hookers, and I'm pretty sure whore has been tossed about. Hasn't it? To me, tart is preferable to hooker and signficantly better than whore.

DEM, I never even thought of that. I wonder if it's generational, or regional? I've only heard tart used as a synonym for slut or tramp-- like, describing how someone looks or behaves rather than their "profession." Whereas I think of "hooker" as reasonably mild cop-slang for prostitute (like junkie, which isn't particularly polite, but the cops seem to throw it around on these shows). So to my ears, "Brooklyn tarts" sounded like "Brooklyn sluts." Also (so much about that show confused me!), were both of those women actually prostitutes?

Stephanie March and Angie Harmon went to Highland Park High School, but I'm not sure if either lived in the upscale neighborhood. Stephanie was a freshman when Angie was a senior.

This high school was also immortalized (or at least depicted!) in this Judy Blume-wannabe book called "Conditions of Love." You know, the sheer volume of trivial information running around my brain probably explains my Caseyesque performance last semester...

If 1994 is the correct year, that means Stephanie didn't graduate from high school until she was almost 20.

Clearly that site mixed up Stephanie and Casey. Ah, now I feel better.

This post has been edited by Learned Hand: Jan 21, 2004 @ 4:46 pm.

[runnerbird]

If 1994 is the correct year, that means Stephanie didn't graduate from high school until she was almost 20.

Maybe Stephanie rode the short bus to school. Hee. I'm sure she graduated in 1992 as pla725 pointed out.

[add_duck]

Ive only heard tart used as a synonym for slut or tramp-- like, describing how someone looks or behaves rather than their "profession." Whereas I think of "hooker" as reasonably mild cop-slang for prostitute

Ya beat me to it! Those are exactly the connotations I think of when I hear those two words. (Mental connection -drink!) But weren't the women in "Disapearing Acts" not, in fact, prostitutes? At least one of them was the sister of a mob boss, right? Would she really need to prostitute herself? Or am I making up my own plots again?

Maybe Stephanie rode the short bus to school.

Now somebody else is mixing up Stephanie and ER!!!

Ditto from me. I don't even watch the Mothership and I want Serena gone.

Just so we'll shut up about her, huh? :)

But I can't see Alex bringing an attempted murder charge in the hopes the jury would just find it because they were outraged if she can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Normally I would leave this clearly deceased horse alone, but I think I'm not explaining myself correctly, so let me try again. Here are the choices, as Alex presented them:

1) Charge John Ritter with Attempted Murder (of the wife) and Illegal Abortion
2) Charge John Ritter with Assault (wife) and Murder (baby)

In the office Civics Lesson scene Alex was arguing in favor of choice #1. So even though she didn't believe that he was trying to murder his wife, she was willing to charge him with attempted murder. So she was willing to go for a charge that she didn't technically believe was true. But why were the charges mutually exclusive?

Also, even if the doctor wasn't trying to murder his wife, he cut her open and left her bleeding on the garage floor, with no attempt to save her. If she had died, that would be some kind of murder, yes? Felony murder? Depraved indifference? So can you charge someone with Attempted Depraved Indifference? No, that doesn't sound right. Damn.

This post has been edited by add_duck: Jan 21, 2004 @ 5:41 pm.

[spacedog]

I found that info in the Dallas Morning News. There were several articles where her name appeared. Some of those were from her high school days. Very smart woman.

I came embarrassingly close to pulling out my credit card in order to read those articles in their entirety. I also got way too excited when I read Stephanie participated in Odyssey of the Mind. The thought that March was possibly a bit of a geek in high school gives me a warm fuzzy feeling. Yeah, I was a geek in school. Why do you ask? Although, I was also a big slacker and quit the Odyssey of the Mind team [/too much information].