Thursday, May 12, 2022

Law & Order “The Great Pretender” Recap, Review, Discussion



Law & Order “The Great Pretender” was what I call a “bait and switch episode” – when you start watching you think you’ll be seeing the usual murder case and trial, but then it takes a left turn.  That left turn: putting a big pharma CEO on trial for manslaughter for someone other than the first victim and for someone the man never met nor directly gave him any drugs. 

Price appears to be the kind of prosecutor who is always looking to up the ante and feels he is invincible.  I can see how he'd feel that way, as he keeps winning cases with flimsy evidence, as in this case. Even when the direct evidence is thrown out, he still gets a guilty verdict, based on the testimony of just two people (excluding the defendant).  Maybe it’s just me, but if I was on a jury, I’d want more than what Price offered before I handed someone a guilty verdict for manslaughter.  During the trial, we find that Price’s brother died of an overdose 9 years before, which explains why he was so focused on getting justice, despite him saying he's just following the law. 

Maroun also behaves questionably when she makes sure that her key witness has the drugs he needs to get through the testimony.  I understand she wanted to support Price but why on earth she’d risk her own career is beyond me.  It was also strange to see her look surprised that the defense had a pretty good idea of what happened here.  She’s naïve if she didn’t think the defense would be watching anyone involved in this case. 

The detective work was crisp and efficient and Bernard and Cosgrove seemed to really click here. 


Here is the recap: 

Ella Whitlock, who is starting up her own nightclub, is found murdered.  Bernard and Cosgrove do their usual investigating, and while doing so, find that the murder victim is not a rich heiress but a scam artist, Mary Costello, who has cheated more than one person out of thousands of dollars.  Even the parents are clueless to her scam, and  they explain someone just gave her a diamond necklace worth $200,000.  The detectives later find she is up to her eyeballs in debt and owes a lot of people a lot of money.  The detectives get a photo of her wearing that necklace that night but it was not on the body.  Mary also used a “matchmaker" who connected her with Wyatt Ackman, who denies any involvement.  They continue to track down others who Mary scammed.  Matthew Dooley made some threats to her after she scammed him out of $48,000, and there were others.   Eventually they end back with Wyatt Ackman, who lawyers up right away.  He also gave her that expensive necklace. 

Wyatt, heir to a $200 billion pharmaceutical fortune, is arraigned and despite arguing that that he’s battling a severe opioid addiction, gets remanded to Rikers.  Later, Maroun and Price explain to Jack that Wyatt is using a “settled insanity” defense, which is  variation of a not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect.  It claims the defendant's drug addiction is so severe he/she can’t form the requisite intent to commit murder.  Maroun investigates Wyatt’s addition; she speaks to  a treatment counselor who worked where Wyatt had gotten treatment –  Eric Howe,  a former addict himself.  He explains Wyatt was going to propose to Ella/Mary.   

The judge denies any motion for the defense to use the settled insanity defense, which pushes Wyatt’s attorney to a plea deal of Man 1, 15 years. The defense has a recording which implicates Wyatt’s uncle Charles Ackman,  the founder and CEO of Northwestern Pharma, indicating Charles is getting rich by getting people addicted to his drugs and this is his whole marketing strategy.  They want to trade this information for a deal.  Price and Maroun hear that Wyatt’s treatment counselor who Maroun had just spoke to had relapsed the night before and died that morning of an overdose.  Wyatt wants to hold his uncle accountable. 

Later, Price and Maroun have differing opinions on how to proceed; Maroun wants to reject the plea abut Price wants to forge ahead, and manages to convince Jack to give Wyatt the plea and let him pursue a case of manslaughter against the Charles Ackman. 

Problems ensue for Price when the audio recording Wyatt had of Charles gets thrown out as evidence.  Price seems very driven on this case and when Maroun presses him on why, he deflects by telling Maroun to find out who Eric Howe was, before he got addicted to the drugs. 

Later, they have Eric’s doctor on the stand who was taking the Oxy made by Northwestern Pharma and the defense makes is evident that Charles never directly offered the doctor any money and the doctor wrote the prescriptions himself.  The doctor also got immunity. 

Maroun preps Wyatt for his testimony  but when he seems off, he admits he’s got back on the drug in Rikers and is in withdrawal as his hookup just got released. He can’t testify in this condition so he asks Maroun to go to his house, and pick up a package from his housekeeper and bring it to court in the morning. 

The next day, Wyatt testifies and seems lucid.  He explains his uncle knew about how the drug was being used and abused and that he knew some doctors were selling prescriptions. He said Charles knew this and aggressively marketed the drug anyway,  and that Charles says addicts make the choice to do drugs, they are not victims, they are victimizers.   The defense brings up the reduction in charges for Wyatt for killing his girlfriend.  They also bring  up that Wyatt is an addict and asks if he is high right now.  Wyatt says no.  But the defense attorney said a private investigator spoke to Wyatt’s housekeeper last night and that someone came to his home and picked up a prescription for him – and the judge sustains Price’s objections on this matter. 

Outside the courthouse, Price knows what Maroun did and she argued that Price told her to make sure Wyatt was an effective witness and that he was a mess last night.  Price said he could have overdosed and Maroun says he didn’t.  She know the case is important to Price which mean it is important to her and she did what she had to do. 

Charles Ackerman testifies in his own defense and that he never met Eric  Howe.   Price cross examines him about his marketing strategy and that the drug is dangerous and he withheld information.  Charles says the drug is legal and Price says so are handguns but you can’t shoot someone and get away with it.  The defense wants to be heard in chambers. 

In chambers, Price's potential bias about the drug comes out as he must explain his brother died of an Oxy overdose 9 years ago.  Price insists that he has been following the facts and the law and the judge finds the defense’s bias allegations troubling but does not agree to a mistrial. 

Price makes an impassioned closing argument – and later gets a guilty verdict for manslaughter.  The judge adjourns and Price looks relieved as we fade to black. 

9 comments:

Valens Hawke said...

"Oh, sometimes I feel like I'm beatin' a dead horse and I don't know why you'd be bringin' me down..."

The writers continue to do Price a disservice.

That said, a lot better than last week? The "Law" half was solid and it seems like Cosgrove and Bernard are friendly colleagues now. Maybe they'll be solid friends, maybe not, but there's a lot less antagonism. And hey, any scene with food in it is usually a winner and this one was.

The "Order" half was... kinda all over the place? It turned into a weird combination of "Under the Influence" and "Gunshow." I wasn't terribly surprised that Jack went for trading-up in this case (he can't be Adam all the time, gotta mix in some old Jack there and we appreciate it!), but I am surprised he didn't pick up on the fact that this was weirdly personal for Price and press him on it. Especially, since you know, the entire case in "Under the Influence."

Where I do object to the Price and the writers for him is: He's supposedly a former defense attorney who comes off as both expensive and very good. You'd think a very good defense attorney would dig through everything. So, did it never once occur to Price that this bit of information regarding his brother MIGHT come up? I don't know, I feel like the writers make Price dumber than he should be.

Second main objection: I was livid when he threatened to fire Ms. Maroun at the end of "Fault Lines." Here, to me, he actually had a reason to threaten her with firing if not actually do it. Like Jesus Christ, you brought him drugs? He doesn't get one phone call to call his damn maid? His lawyer? Really? REALLY? Come on. Well, he had a reason to threaten until the Judge's chambers.

Still, overall, it felt like a Mothership episode, minus the Criminal Intent-style opening. So, solid like.. B outing. Would have been stronger had the second half been stronger.

Can't wait for next week. At least know it isn't Bernard that bought it like I actually feared and that we're getting a season 22!

ChiTownGal said...

Am I the only one who noticed that, when they arrested Wyatt, they did not announce "You have the right to remain silent, etc. " that was always a standard part of arrest scenes on all cop shows including L&O?

M. Forrest said...

Long time L&O watcher here... It took me a while to warm up to this reboot. I also think that it took the producers and writers some time to warm up too!

Anyway, I think that the "detective" part of the episodes is starting to come together quite well. They found a tone that suits the show, less preachy than the first couple of episodes for sure. I'm starting to like Cosgrove.

But the "trial" part has been very weak from the start and is not improving. There's zero chemistry between Price and Maroun. I even wonder if it has to do with the actors playing the parts: do they dislike each other in real life? Because on screen, it's colder than the South Pole.

But the real problem is Hugh Dancy. Sorry folks, but he's all wrong for the part. By wrong, I mean the character is empty and the actor simply sucks. I don't believe him for a minute. I was disappointed that they didn't bring back Linus Roache, who's a far better actor and was great in the role of Cutter. But Dancy? Terrible, terrible casting and completely off in the role. When the first part of the show is over, I just watch the episode go down the tubes...

Chris Zimmer said...

@M.Forest and @Valens Hawke - the jury is still out with me on Price. I can't tell if the problem is Dancy or that the character just isn't being written well. Either way, I fell like something is off here but I can't quite pin it on one thing.

@ChiTownGal - my guess is they read him his rights inside the townhouse. Wyatt starting talking to them as they left the townhouse and then he finally asked for his lawyer after they started pressing him. But yes, most times we see them read the rights

Valens Hawke said...

@Chris Zimmer: I truly believe it's the writers. Dancy is a hell of an actor, to me at least. I just think the writers REALLY do not know what they want to do with him. Episode 1, I really thought they were aiming for a Benjamin Stone-esque, more soft spoken and strictly ethical lawyer as a contrast to McCoy and Cutter (which, I mean, Cutter had that attack dog mentality that Jack did but was his own character since we was highly unorthodox at times and didn't seem to be as... bombastic as Jack was). And that... lasted a whole episode? Since then, we've gotten some very inconsistent writing for Price. Last week, he really went full-on seasons-5-10-Jack McCoy during his cross of the defendant and I'm sitting here going, "You're a former defense attorney? You should know better? This is making him look sympathetic!"

Also, wasn't the revival be picked up pretty late in the production cycle for the 2021-2022 season? Since, as I understand it, they were supposed to produce Law & Order: For the Defense until NBC decided (wisely) to bring back the Mothership. There's a theory on Reddit that most of these scripts are repurposed from that production cycle, which might explain some of issues the "order" half is having. I'm not sure I'm buying it since that means the "Law" half had to almost be completely original and that has shown actual progress over the season and Cosgrove has developed nicely. The usual suspect of writers probably weren't available, nor was one of the past showrunners (Balcer or Chernuchin). Now that we're going to have an actual off-season production, next season will be better?

It'll be interesting to see if we're going to see the tradition of at least one-cast changeover that we saw from 2-7 and 9-18.

Unknown said...

Good lord. This is probably the worst episode of probably the worst season of law and order. The second half of this episode was all over the place and had almost nothing to do with the beginning of the episode.

Laurie F said...

I like Law & Order and like a lot of things about this new season. If they had any weak spots, it's : 1. the fact they are winning too many cases on so little evidence that it's not credible and 2. The issue with Nolan Price/Hugh Dancy. I don't the issue is Dancy as much as it is how they are writing Price. Like he's all smoke and mirrors and no solid evidence. Hard for me to describe what's wrong here. Bernard/Cosgrove are coming along well.

M. Forrest said...

@ Chris Zimmer. I agree. Maybe I am too hard on Dancy, but he just strikes me as the wrong casting. But the writers do have a very hard time defining Price. When I saw him going for blood in this episode, I immediately thought: OK, a family member/friend/loved one overdosed in his past. That one was scripted all the way.

The other thing that has bugged me since the first episode is that there many times when I was expecting a not guilty verdict, based on what we used to see in the first 20 seasons of the show. As Laurie F wrote, the prosecution often has little evidence, yet they win. In the "old days", they would have got a hung jury or an acquittal. One of the things that I loved about L&O was how much the verdict often depended on case law, legal tactics, etc. Very little now.

A said...

The pretender here wasn't really that great, they figured her out pretty quickly.