C-E-O-3, H-N-I-C
- "Damaged." Amoral Judge William Wright callously overturns a jury's guilty verdict against three boys accused of raping a mentally disabled girl with the reasoning that McCoy hadn't been able to prove the state's case (even though he had). Wright and all three of the boys pull a Karma Houdini, with the implication that the boys would continue harassing/raping girls at their school. Also, Lenny's daughter is murdered after testifying against drug dealers (Even worse, the case against the drug dealers ended in mistrial... although the next season would briefly revisit this issue, with a somewhat worse ending for the drug dealer).
I gotta go to work in a little bit, so I'm not going to edit this right now, but it does need edited for a couple reasons. a) Overturning a verdict does not make a judge amoral b) Mc Coy didn't, in fact, prove his case (the mentally challenged "victim" in the case kept saying, over and over, she wasn't raped (her big line close to the end was something along the lines of "I went into that music room (where these guys were having sex with girls) because I WANTED TO!") c) Mc Coy also didn't prove the defendants raped or harassed any other girls
I'm Charlie Owens, good night and good luck. PSNID: CEOIII 1117 Hide / Show Replies
b.)the fact that the mentally challenged victim said she wanted to is irrelevant. She didn't have the mental capacity to know the consequences of what she was getting in to. Under Article 130 of New York's Rape Laws (Paragraph 5): ""Mentally disabled" means that a person suffers from a mental disease or defect which renders him or her incapable of appraising the nature of his or her conduct." Mc Coy DID prove she didn't have the mental capacity to legitimately consent. When Judge William Wright dismisses the jury verdict, he just brings up that "she said she had the time of her life" having no regard for her mental disability.
notreallyatroper: To whoever put up the new picture: You are freaking brilliant! It's hilarious!
Gamer From Jump: Seconded! That's a Crowning Moment Of Funny in itself.
Edited by GamerFromJump Hide / Show Replies
Professor Raine: Funny, yes. But it does rather undermine the mood of the show.
Oh, man, it's been so long I don't even remember what the picture was. Anyone remember?
An anime likeness of Jack Mc Coy yelling "OBJECTION!" ala Phoenix Wright.
I'm Charlie Owens, good night and good luck. PSNID: CEOIII 1117
Keeper of Porn
- Mc Coy's refusal to give to other jurisdictions is a bit justified. He did once hand over a major case against a mob boss to the FBI, who dropped the charges, and charged the WITNESSES in the case, who were expecting witness protection.
This doesn't quite fit. McCoy had done the "prosecute this ourselves" bit before. If fact, it was McCoy doing that that provoked the Feds screwing over his witnesses in the cited example: In DWB (e 9.2)), Mc Coy made a deal with the feds to hand over a trio of murdering cops (in a case that was pretty much ripped straight from the James Byrd case), only to renege on the deal when the defendants copped a plea rather than face a sure death penalty conviction in federal court.
When "Ambitious" (9.21) came along, the US Attorney McCoy jacked over in "DWB" got payback by asserting jurisdiction over McCoy's case then voiding the deals he made with the conspirators, assuring they'd go to jail with their testimony known and no protection.
Can't claim "Once bitten, twice shy" when you're teh one who took the first bite.
My name is Freezer and my anti-drug is porn.
Removed this, as the trope was deleted:
- Big Brother Is Your Friend
- Played straight, averted, subverted, and just generally played with depending on how many big police or public corruption scandals were in the news in Real Life over the course of a given season.
C-E-O-3, H-N-I-C
Dragging my first edit war here.
Brainbin:Okay, when you type the words in without hitting "enter", is "Aftershock" not the first several links you see on the auto-complete screen below? Also, to rebut your earlier point, what episode DOES jump immediately to mind? I mean, I'm a fan, but the episodes can get pretty same-y and formulaic. Part of the reason "Aftershock" is so famous, as noted, is that it stands out like a sore thumb. Also, were they ranked on the official site according to popularity? Because that's not the same thing as fame - it's how much people liked them, and I didn't say "most liked".
1. When I type "law and order a" in google, I get a Law and Order cast page. 2. For me, the ep that comes to mind is "Sanctuary". For you, apparently, it's "Aftershock". But that's the bottom line here: "Aftershock" is the most famous ep TO YOU. Putting your opinion on a wiki and pretending it's fact? Frowned upon. 3. They were, in fact, ranked by "most liked". But are you honestly saying that a famous episode of a show shouldn't be liked a little more than 10th?
I'm Charlie Owens, good night and good luck. PSNID: CEOIII 1117 Hide / Show Replies
Actually, fame is not subjective. I've heard more about "Aftershock" than any other episode. But we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. How about a compromise? ONE OF the most famous episodes. I think that's fair. (And as for 10th place? Hey, out of over 400, that's very good.)
Edited by Brainbin
I would wonder whether how famous the episode is has any bearing on how much it is an example of the trope it's listed under.
The point I was making was "This is episode is Something Completely Different, and it's famous for being so." Obviously, using the superlative was a little excessive.
Edited by Brainbin
And we got a compromise everyone can live with, without getting nasty about it.
Plus, MY FIRST EDIT WAR! *breaks out the celebratory Jack Daniels*
I'm Charlie Owens, good night and good luck. PSNID: CEOIII 1117
Keeper of Porn
Removed the following from Anvilicious:
One unintentionally hilarious meta example was the episode Illegal. At a protest honouring illegal immigrants, an auxillary policeman shot a protestor. Then a guest star, Lethem, appeared, a member of the evil pro police faction. He was on the prosecution with Mccoy, and wanted to not prosecute the cop too hard. In an argument, he accused Mccoy of being liberal, and anti cop, citing Mccoy's history. To show he is a tolerent, respectful liberal, Mccoy immediately fired Lethem. Later, Lethen reappears on the defence side, and accuses Mccoy of being biased. Mccoy rushes to defend himself The defence attorney questions him, going over the recent history of law and order, and notes that they've been prosecuting a "Liberal Hit list" of conservatives. Mc Coy then goes into a very self righteous rant ending in "and where there’s a victim, I’ll speak for the victim." but doesn't contest that he only prosecutes conservatives. The jury then convicts the cop, and hurrah, law and order's undying hate of conservatives vindicated! The episode ends with Mc Coy receiving a Bobby Kennedy democrat campaign tie pin from his coworker Cutter. The episode speaks for itself.
The episode may be as anvilicious as advertised, but this write-up completely misses the point. Lethem didn't want to go easy on the auxiliary cop; he didn't want to prosecute at all. And when he sandbagged the Grand Jury, and McCoy called him on it, he basically called McCoy a trophy-hunting, untrustworthy, liberal crusader (Basically throwing up a "Fire me, now" sign). And when McCoy defended himself from Lethem's near-slander, he pointed out that he'd gone after just as many liberal targets as conservative.
I also note that missing from the write-up was the fact that Cutter was passive-aggressively just as big a Straw Conservative as Lethem (But, being an actual professional, he prosecuted as ordered).
Complain about Dick Wolf's liberal bias all you want, just not here.
Um — about that opening narration . . . am I the only one who realizes how dangerous it is to the concept that should stand above both law and order — justice?
Not all offenders are prosecuted.
Not all who are prosecuted are offenders.
To imply — to *say* — that these two categories are identical is, to quote that eminent legal theorist Eric Cartman, just *wrong*.
~ jalp
Removed the example of "Mother's Milk" from Hanlon's Razor. IN Mother's Milk, the defendant - an inexperienced first-time mother - allowed her child to starve to death due to an inability to breast feed her child and a refusal to give the child formula. A refusal reenforced by a crusading breast feeding councilor and the failure of her husband to step in and feed the child himself. The write-up made it sound like the defendant killed her child for convenience's sake.
My name is Freezer and my anti-drug is porn.