Thursday, May 5, 2022

Law & Order “Severance” Recap, Review, Discussion



Law & Order “Severance” meant a loss for Nolan Price and a blow to his ego.  Price has been overconfident as of late,  possibly fueled by a few wins made on weak cases.   Samantha Maroun concludes early on that the defendant’s problem would garner sympathy from the jury, and again she was correct.

Bernard and Cosgrove seem to be on better footing this episode, although Cosgrove risks alienating Bernard AND Dixon at the same time when the discussion turns to working with people you don’t like. 

I didn’t connect with this episode much.  The first half, with the detectives  working to find the suspect, was fairly cut and dry.  The second half felt a bit routine as well, with Price doing the usual forging ahead,  despite concerns from Maroun AND the issues Jack mentioned involving the CIA.  Price says the science is in their favor, but frankly there is probably a lot about Havana Syndrome that they don't know.  It’s almost like Jack doesn’t  care  if Price loses one. Maybe Jack knew this case was lost already and wanted Price to learn a lesson?  Regardless, I’m not convinced that Price knows how to pick his battles, and I wonder if Samantha Maroun isn’t the better person for the job. 

Jack told Price his old boss said "Lawyers who need to be right, lose more cases than those that don’t."  I'm not sure who said it - assuming it was either Schiff or Branch - as I can't track that quote back to either one of them in any previous episode that I can find. 

It was nice to see Francie Swift, another Law & Order “repeat offender”, in yet another role!




Here is the recap: 

Alexis Morphew, on a video conference call, tells the others they should be done for the night and they should go to bed. She explains there will be difficult conversations tomorrow. Someone buzzes at her door, she looks through  the peephole, opens the door, and asks the person what are they are doing there. 

The next morning, Bernard and Cosgrove are at that townhouse with police; Alexis has been found dead inside her home, strangled.  No sexual assault, but there was a struggle.  There is blood on her fingernails and doesn’t appear to be a burglary.  The alarm was deactivated, turned off to let someone in, so she knew the killer. A colleague called when she didn’t show p for a meeting as usual. 

The detectives speak with that colleague, they were in many virtual meetings. Alexis was distracted yesterday. She logged off at 7:30, saying that was early.  They were working together on a project, she is the CFO of Questarc, an electric car company, also rockets and robots. 

Back at the 2-7, there was no DNA match on the blood and her phone records show texts and phone calls at all hours, including CEO Ethan Merritt, who she texted saying there was a problem, they need to talk.  He did not reply. They wonder if he replied in person. 

At the Questarc offices on Thursday, April 7,  they speak with Ethan. They discuss the text; he didn’t see it until this morning. He explains Alexis was having problems with a former employee. Ethan promoted her to CFO 6 months ago and her predecessor didn’t take well to it.  He sent her a few distasteful emails. 

At the 2-7, Bernard,  Cosgrove and Dixon discuss the threatening emails they found from Terry Bellatoni. He has a temper also, based on a restraining order they found from an ex-girlfriend.  A video of him near the townhouse was found, arguing with Alexis. 

The detectives speak with Bellatoni about the altercation with Alexis. He blames her for him being replaced.  He got severance but he was employee #6 at the company and he ruined two marriages to get it off the ground, but now he’s out because Twitter  says being a white man is a moral equivalent of being a serial killer.  He was in Palo Alto at the time of the murder.   Lots of people didn’t like her, suggesting they talk to Kayla, he assistant. 

They speak with Kayla who thinks everyone loved her, but mentions she might have been seeing someone. She heard her on a call telling someone they can’t been seen together – she used a second, secret phone. 

Later, they speak with Robert Fletcher and he says he doesn’t know who Alexis is.  They explain finding the burner phone call, then he says no comment.  They explain she was murdered and he says he is gay and he is a journalist. She was a source, talking about the toxic environment at Questarc and the bad behavior of the CEO, Ethan Merritt.  She was trying to take Merritt down, and they were close to doing it. 

Back at the 2-7, Cosgrove explains to Dixon that Alexis was a whistleblower about the toxic workplace.  Dixon says he was supposed to be the new breed of CEO, and Bernard says “Spoiler alert: It’s a lot like the old breed.”  They thought she was hoping the article would get Merritt booted. Cosgrove agrees Merritt is a jackass but he’s the boss and shouldn’t he be allowed to get pissed off once in a while. He adds if it is sexual or physical in nature he gets it – obviously – but should a guy get booted from his own company just  because he’s a dick?  Dixon thinks it is more nuanced than that. Cosgrove adds you don’t have to like the people you work with.  Bernard asks if he is sending them a message, and Dixon says probably, but luckily she doesn’t care.  Cosgrove chuckles. She tells them to dig deeper and see if he really is early to bed, early to rise kind of guy. 

With Merritt in interrogation, they explain they saw him sneak out of his place so he lied about his whereabouts and said he has to worry about appearances.  He says he is dating an employee and was with her that night and it was consensual.  He consents to a DNA swab.  

Later, Dixon says Merritt’s DNA was a match and the girlfriend confirms his alibi.  But they went over the video footage and facial rec found Gus Imelski at a nearby bodega, his is founder of a solar company that Questarc was about to acquire. Merritt told them Alexis abruptly called off the deal the day she was murdered.  Imelski was looking at a $300  million  pay date. 

At Raystrux Engineering Lab on Friday, April 8,  they speak with Gus and he said he was at Alexis’ house and he wanted to fix things. She never answered the door. It was around 10:15 and he rang the bell and then left.  He denies killing her. He tells them to ask Colin Baker, the consultant Questarc hired. He bumped into him about a  block away from her house and he said he blew him off and kept walking. 

The detectives speak with Colin Baker who seems very  nervous and agitated.   He says Alexis messed up the numbers with the Raystrux deal. He says he never went to  her  house and starts yelling at them.  He says he has been awake for two days straight and has a migraine.  They see marks on his arm and when they ask him to roll up his sleeves, they see scratches.  He says he’s rather not say how he got them.  Bernard says then they will have to continue the conversation at the precinct. 

Later, Colin is being arraigned for the murder, there with his lawyer Diana Marcus. He pleads not guilty,  Maroun argues for remand and Marcus argues for him, saying he suffers from debilitating migraines and should be cared for at home by his wife who is a physician. The judge remands him anyway. Colin doubles over in pain more than once but is taken away. 

Back at the DA’s office, Maroun and  Price discuss the migraines and Price thinks he is setting up a defense.  Maroun gets a message that the DNA collection is being challenged,  bit Colin signed a consent form and it is on video. 

In the judge’s chambers, Price and Marcus discuss the DNA collection and Marcus argues it was a severe migraine and that he had mentioned he hadn’t slept in over 36 hours.  He was also on a heavy dose of sumatriptan which can cause dizziness. The judge throws out the DNA. 

In Supreme Court Part 19 on Monday, May 2,  Price makes his opening argument. Alexis was a problem which could have ended his career as he had made a mistake overvaluing the company and she could have exposed his secret.  He cites this as his motive for murder. 

Gus testifies about seeing Colin near Alexis’ home that night and Colin was distracted.  This was unlike him.   Under cross, he explains the termination of the deal and Marcus implies that would be a motive for murder for Gus.  But Price counters that Gus voluntarily offered his DNA.  It was not a match.  As Gus steps down, Colin starts to yell at Gus and starts to walk toward Gus. Colin screams he didn’t kill anybody. Officers have to remove Colin.  Everyone is stunned, and Maroun asks Price what the hell was that?

Later, in the judge’s chambers with Price, Marcus explains they are filing an affirmative defense: not guilty due to mental disease or defect. She had a medical expert examine Colin who shed  new light on a pre-existing condition: Havana Syndrome. 

At the DA’s office in a conference room, a doctor explains to Maroun about Havana Syndrome, first spotted 5 years ago at the embassy in Cuba.  Colin was stationed there in 2017. The doctor explains Colin’s symptoms and this MRI showing trauma to his brain. They don’t  know who caused it or who is behind it.  They discuss Colin’s increase in symptoms. 

Later, Maroun explains to Price that Colin sought help in 2017 which makes his claim credible.  They discuss whether it is a valid reason for murder. Maroun thinks because he was working for the country at the time he may  be sympathetic.  But there isn't anyone else who had it who  murdered anyone.  She thinks the defense is viable but Price thinks it is violence and intent.  Maroun gets a message saying the defense just subpoenaed the deputy director of the CIA. 

Later, the deputy director of the CIA meets with Jack McCoy. They are preparing a motion to quash but  asks Jack to consider  pleading out Colin.  Jack understands but makes no promises. 

Later, Jack discussed this with Price and that the defense is trying to shift the blame to the government and Price could lose. Price disagrees and says the facts and the science are in their favor. But Jack counters it is easier to hate the feds than a handsome government worker with a wife and two kids who was unknowingly attacked  by a foreign agent.   Price mentions Jack’s “friend” at the CIA. Jack says Price is missing the point, and  asserts this is not politics, it’s about playing the hand you have,  not the hand you wish you had.  Price gets it, but is comfortable with his cards. Jack gives him the go ahead. 

At Supreme Court Part 19 on Thursday, May 5,  Doctor Grady  testifies for Colin and discusses his symptoms and that they are like CTE, like what football players get.  He discusses the trauma to his brain and the possibility of violent outbursts.  He  states Colin would not understand the nature and consequence of his actions.  Under cross,  Price brings out that one can’t accurately diagnose CTE in a living person.  The doctor must admit it is only identified post-mortem.  He also states no one else he knows has done what Colin has done. 

Colin’s wife testifies about what happened to Colin in Havana and his symptoms.  They took the job in New York and the symptoms later got worse. She says Colin was always kind and gentle  but the anger built over the year and the smallest thing would set him off. He was like a different person and she even considered leaving him.   She did not consider the Havana syndrome.  Under cross, she explains she is a pediatrician and admits they talked about treatment for these other symptoms but he was worried about work and didn’t want to take time off.  Price implies it was because Colin wanted to make partner. She also admits since they have been in New York he never sought treatment for these new symptoms.  He brings up she still lived in the home with their two children and suggests the symptoms weren’t that severe at all, and maybe he was under a lot of pressure.  He presses that Colin wanted to make partner . 

Colin is on the stand in his own defense. He admits he did not plan to kill her, he was trying to salvage the deal.  She invited him in and they got into an argument, he doesn’t remember.  He sort of blacked out and then remembers talking to her, then sitting on the stairs. He saw scratches on his arm and Alexis on the floor. He panicked and ran home, he did not intend to hurt her, she was his friend.  

Under cross, Price presses Colin that he did not call the police or an ambulance. He wasn’t thinking clearly. Price says Colin went there to confront her to prevent her from being fired.  He blames the syndrome, and Price brings up no one else had those symptoms.  He cries, saying the government screwed him and lied to him.  Price says Colin killed an innocent woman to protect his career. Colin says Price is right, he goes on saying he doesn’t know why and is sorry he can’t take it back.  He cries and continues to apologize, breaking down.  The jury looks on sympathetically. 

Later, the verdict is in – not guilty by reason of mental disease.  Colin and his wife are relieved.  Price looks confused and disappointed. 

Back at the DA’s office, Price sees Jack walking out and walks after him, saying he still thinks Colin was lying. Jack turns and says, “My old boss, he used to say, ‘Lawyers who need to be right, lose more cases than those that don’t.’ ”  Price takes a deep breath and Jack shrugs, turns, and walks to the exit. As Price stands there alone, watching, we fade to black. 



10 comments:

Valens Hawke said...

Wow... this was a real clunker to me.

Pros
1. They finally lost a case they had no business winning anyway (there were some VERY questionable "guilty" verdicts this season).
2. Jack's last line.

Cons...

Where to begin?

Havana Syndrome? Really? You're ripping THAT from the headlines? Especially weird as more information has come out about who was really "patient zero" (CIA officer, not a US diplomat).

This is a criticism of the writers and how they're writing Price. In the premiere, they go to lengths to show Price brings a different perspective as former defense attorney. After that, I feel like they do a poor job with him preparing for a case, his line of questioning, and his general strategy. In episode one, he goes further in explaining just how using a confession would actually hurt because they defense will use it in a certain way. After that, he seems to simply rely... well nothing... not even case law much. So when the Defense tries to get the DNA evidence out, he never tries to attack the problem by their point of view and poking holes in it and having a solid counterargument for the judge. He just relied on, "He seemed cogent, didn't state he was suffering from a migraine." And then he tries the, "You're the only one!"? accusation as a question on cross. All it takes is one. Like, I get it, the defense is absurd cause no one else suffering from Havana Syndrome committed murder or other acts of violence. But here, you have a gave that can make a compelling argument he was screwed by the government, has a wife and two kids and the wife played her part perfectly, and you can't anticipate the strategy and come up with a better line of questioning for cross?

And again on the writing, doesn't the prosecution have a the right to have their own psychiatric or psychological expert examine him if the defendant is using a mental defect defense?

This episode, outside of the scenes with Jack, was just terrible all around.

brit said...

Jack was the only bright spot in the whole episode. I was not a fan of making Havana syndrome a crime of the week next they will be saying covid quarantine is a reason to murder a person.

dttruman said...

I didn't really understand this episode because it left too many things dangling or unanswered.The Havana Syndrome was used as an excuse for the killing, but they hardly went into any details and what they did go into was kind of flimsy. All we saw was Price cross examining the defense's medical expert. Where was the prosecution's expert witness. Key evidence (DNA) was conveniently left out and as far as we knew there have been no other types of this kind of killing. Just why was the deputy director of the CIA called in to testify, they never delved into that one. How the jury can say the defendant was "not guilty", and not even consider a lesser charge like manslaughter was too arbitrary.

Laurie F said...

This episode was lacking in a solid prosecution. Price and/or Maroun never went any lengths to determine if Colin had just been a massive jerk all along or to find anything that showed that he was reacting to the stress of the job and wanting a higher position is the thing that made him go off the deep end. Price made an assumption and had no proof to back it up. Maroun was right about the medical issue being a viable defense or making Colin seem credible. I agree, maybe Jack thought it was okay for Price to loose for two reasons - it would teach him a lesson AND it would get the CIA off the hook for their role with the syndrome, as far as the defense using that to make their case. Price seems like an amateur sometimes!

Heather In Kansas said...

Don't give them any ideas, lol! Although I feel certain that L&O has already written a script where quarantine will be a defense to murder.🤦‍♀️

Heather In Kansas said...

I agree with Chris and the other replies here. It DOES only take one. The jury looked so sympathetic, I questioned why Nolan didn't go for a plea deal after the wife's testimony. "The need to be right" sounded like something Schiff would say.

Also, L&O seems to have regressed. Maybe it's the prevalence of IRL televised court cases, but the problems the DA'S office runs into seem VERY unrealistic. We're back to changing pleas mid-trial without giving the DA time to examine the witness? Is this 1992, lol?

Valens Hawke said...

"I wonder if Samantha Maroun isn’t the better person for the job."

More than once this season (more like half the episodes), I've said aloud, "Price, why is your second chair smarter than you?" The writers are atrocious when it comes to developing price.

Also, when he said "the science is on our side," I think back to one of the early Cutter-episode (it might have been "Called Home") where Jack says to Connie, "Your case is all [something, brain maybe?] and no heart." It would have been nice if that had been said or even referenced.

As for Jack's old boss. Yeah, the writers were deliberately vague on the "old boss" and I could't find the quote as well... But I have a feeling this might have been one of those lessons young Jack learned from Adam as he was moving up in the office. But it's vague enough that Lewin or Branch could have said it but I think would have been too old by that point to need that lesson.

red said...

Jack said a he so not lewin

Chris Zimmer said...

Oops - yes, he did say he so you're right it was not Lewin. I fixed it! Thanks.

A said...

Some pretty poor writing here. Yes the fact that they lost (though he's remanded to a mental institution, so that might be where he belongs instead of prison), but also the lead up to it. Why bother throwing out the DNA evidence if it's not going to matter and he's just going to admit to the murder anyway? If the audience is supposed to feel that he is genuinely suffering from the condition and it isn't an act (which, given the verdict, strongly appears to be the case), why not have one of the main characters voice this possibility? Something like the Treat Williams SVU episode did this idea right.