Recap: This was a realistic and subtle exploration of many real issues that come up in sexual assault trials. On a sunny afternoon, a young white woman comes home to her apartment building and politely holds the elevator door for a young black man. They chit chat, then she brings her groceries into her apartment. He follows her into her apartment, points a gun at her, and rapes her. But she doesn’t report the rape right away. Instead, she showers, takes a college exam, and goes to sleep. The next day, she reports the rape to the police. While her sex kit is being performed, Olivia and a rape-crisis advocate argue about who has the girl’s best interests at heart: Olivia thinks the girl should press charges, while the advocate thinks it will be too difficult for her.
While the girl is out at a bar the next night, she sees her rapist again. Police pick her up and drive her around until she spots the guy, who’s now walking down the street. Nick and Olivia chase the rapist, who runs into his apartment, where his mother, girlfriend, and a baby are screaming. Nick tackles the rapist, and the guy’s gun skids under the couch. Nick cuffs the guy, then grabs the gun from under the couch. While the guy is held by police officers on the sidewalk, another detective drives by with the victim. The girl identifies him as her rapist.
In court the next day, the rapist ditches his bumbling public defender when a hot-shot private defense attorney agrees to take his case pro bono. The defender argues that too many young black men are locked up and harassed by NYPD. Quaking with fear at the prospect of the high-powered defense attorney, the DA’s office puts their Unit Chief, Cutter, in charge of the prosecution. The victim tells Cutter that the last time she had sex was two weeks ago, with her professor boyfriend. But, it turns out, she actually had a one-night-stand the night before the rape. “There goes the Rape Shield,” says Cutter.
At trial, the defender confronts the girl about her one-night stand, while her mortified parents watch. The defender tries to suppress the ID procedure and Nick’s seizure of the gun. The rapist himself takes the stand and denies everything. The girl ends up looking like a liar and a slut.
The jury finds the rapist not guilty of everything, and the girl is left sobbing and disillusioned. She yells at Olivia that bringing the case wasn’t worth it. “No,” Olivia insists. “Healing begins when someone bears witness.” The parents bundle the girl off. Olivia sits despondently on the courthouse steps afterwards, and the defense attorney approaches her. They are both true believers, they agree, which somehow leads him to invite her to his daughter’s softball game.
Verdict: A-
What they got right.
Watch out when you’re going into your building. Rapes committed by strangers are rare, but when they do happen, this is often the scenario: a girl lets a stranger follow her into the building, or he “helps” her bring groceries in. Once he’s in the apartment, she’s at his mercy. Ladies, watch your back when you’re unlocking your front door.
Sex-offense detectives and rape-crisis advocates often quibble with each other. You’d think they’re on the same team, but, often, they have different agendas. Detectives and prosecutors usually argue that testifying is the most cathartic way to heal. Rape-crisis advocates often urge staying silent. As a former sex-crimes prosecutor myself, I believe that speaking up and fighting for justice is the best way to regain the power and dignity that is lost in a sexual assault.
Delayed reports are very common. Sex offense victims sometimes need time to come to terms with what happened to them. They are ashamed, afraid, or dreading the process. I’ve had countless cases where the victim delayed reporting for days, weeks, even years. If you’ve been a victim, an immediate report will be the strongest – but any report is better than none. Good cases can be made with delayed reports.
The legal issues that the defense attorney raised were ones that come up often in violent-crime trials. But, in this episode, I thought the prosecution clearly won them. The ID was perfectly good: the girl saw the rapist herself the next day (in DC, we call that a “second sighting”) and led the police right to him. That wasn’t suggestive by the police. And Nick was completely in his rights to reach under the couch when he arrested the guy on the floor next to the couch. Cops are entitled to search the “wingspan” of a person they’re arresting in order to secure the scene and the officer’s safety. The arrest in this episode was dangerous, unpredictable, and volatile, with a drug-dealer/rapist and his screaming family surrounding the detectives. Nick was well within his constitutional limits (and may have saved his and Olivia’s lives) when he secured the gun.
Finally, the issue of the Rape Shield law was spot-on. In the old days, trials might revolve around the victim’s sex life, reputation, or virtue. Not anymore. Rape Shield rules mean that this information is kept out of the trial. But once the girl lied about when she’d last had sex, she opened this door. The defense has the right to any information indicating the victim has lied, and to question her about it in open court. It’s crucial for a victim to tell the truth from the beginning. I’ve seen juries convict when the victim was a prostitute, or a drug addict, or both. But juries are very reluctant to convict when the victim is a proven liar.
What they got wrong.
This episode played into the stereotype of the bumbling public defender, like the guy in this episode who didn’t know his client’s name and kept dropping his files. But the Public Defender’s Service in D.C. provides some of the best legal defense in the country. PDS lawyers come from Ivy-league schools, they lead the national charge on cutting-edge legal issues, and theyare fierce advocates for their clients. I’d sometimes see a poor defendant and his family scrape up every last dime to hire a private attorney, on the assumption that a private lawyer must provide better representation than a public defender. Not true. In D.C., some of the best legal defense is done by PDS.
On a related note, I found it hard to believe that the DA’s office in this episode put their unit chief in charge of a case just because a big name was on the other side. Prosecutors face big cases and formidable opponents every day. There aren’t enough supervisors to go around.
Finally, the defendant almost never testifies in a sex assault case. A defense attorney worth his salt will persuade his client to stay off the stand. The defendant’s got too much to lose, is likely guilty, and might trip over his own lies. In this case, we knew the guy was guilty. It was a terrible legal strategy for this supposedly savvy defense attorney to put his client on the stand.
Still, he may have excellent taste in woman. Was he hitting on Olivia in that final scene?
Donald Simmons says
3 November, 2011 at 1:59 pmThe hot-shot defense attorney was played by Andre Braugher, who played Pembleton on “Homicide”. I got a big laugh over Munch (who is actually the same character from “Homicide”) introducing himself and Braugher going “Do we know each other?”
Allison Leotta says
3 November, 2011 at 2:31 pmAha! I was wondering about that interaction. It seemed like I was missing an inside joke. Thanks for letting us in on it!
Donald Simmons says
8 November, 2011 at 3:51 pmIf you’ve never seen “Homicide” I *highly* recommend you take a look at the first three seasons. It was one of the best police shows on TV. (After the third season a decline sets in due to the network trying to make the show more “approachable” and replacing interesting character with less interesting ones.)
TokoBali says
3 November, 2011 at 5:13 pmI think the last scene is to prepare a story line for Hargitay (temporarily) leaving the show. Benson says she’s tired out by the work, and then gets invited by the attorney. My guess is she is either going to work for him (as some kind of private detective/investigator). Or maybe they simply continue their midlife soul-searching.
Great episode (again). Except for the last episode, every episode has been great so far. The second still holds the #1 spot though. For now.
Allison Leotta says
8 November, 2011 at 1:13 amWhat a difference that would be for Olivia, eh?
Andrew MacKie-Mason says
4 November, 2011 at 5:01 amThanks for calling out the Public Defender stereotype. It bugs me to know end to see TV show after TV show play into that. It’s also why I was so upset when Raising the Bar was cancelled. *There* was an excellent legal drama.
Allison Leotta says
8 November, 2011 at 1:15 amYeah, and that stereotype always has to be dropping his files. It’s like the file-drop has become the universal symbol for legal incompetence.
NG says
7 November, 2011 at 9:02 pmWhile I agree about the bumbling public defender stereotype, this was another really strong episode, similar to the basketball coach episode from earlier in the season (which, incidentally, seems to have been preemptively ripped from the headlines — not sure how they pulled that off).
In the last several seasons, every espisode was about some ridiculous “twist” in the case. Here, when the detective was interviewing the victim’s piano teacher and he said something to the effect of “people with happy lives can’t make great music,” I thought for sure that was the clue: the girl had orchestrated her own rape the day before her piano recital hoping it would make her play better.
But they didn’t go there. It was just a “back-to-basics” look at the difficulties and ambiguities in pursuing these cases. And like real life, the good guys don’t always win and not everyone ends up happy.
I wonder if one of the issues is that, since SVU is now the only Law and Order show left, they were able to keep the “All-Star Team” of writers from the other shows, and that’s contributing to this being a much better season than those of the recent past?
Allison Leotta says
8 November, 2011 at 1:17 amI agree, NG. This season has been so much more realistic, subtle, true, and enjoyable than last. It makes for a less snarky blog, but a more enjoyable viewing experience. 🙂 I like the idea of an L&O Dream Team.
I’m curious, is NG for “Not Guilty”? In my line of work, those are the initials that are written on a case file after a not-guilty verdict, or to describe how the defendant pleads.
NG says
8 November, 2011 at 11:40 pmIt is not, but this is such a better story than the real one that I think I’ll run with it…
Los Angeles process server says
25 December, 2011 at 4:21 pmThis show is getting better and better. Can’t wait till next season.
Josh says
14 February, 2012 at 12:53 amJust got done watching this episode again not too long ago, and it’s probably my favorite episode of the season so far.
This episode was the most uncomfortable I ever felt for a victim on this show, and this is coming from someone who’s seen all the SVU episodes to date.
The thing I liked most about this episode was the fact that even though she had lied about what she had done (though I can kind of understand why she did, considering she was in a relationship and all) we still knew that she was raped because we saw it happen. It brings up the fact that even if a “victim” was lying about something, it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
Probably my only hangup with the episode is that I felt that Michael Cutter (the prosecutor) had a really poor closing arguement:
No it’s not the 1970’s anymore, but thats just stating the obvious. And as they always say, stating the obvious never helped anyone. In my opinion, what Cutter should’ve done was bring up the issue on what could Sarah possibly gain from crying rape @ her attacker during the closing arguements if it never allegedly happened? She never knew him personally, he doesn’t have much money, and she also showed to have no race bias based on the night before. If whatever happened between them wasn’t a crime, then WHY would she do something that wouldn’t keep it under wraps? Fame/attention? If that’s the case why not cry rape to the man before Wedmore, since she doesn’t know either of them. Or how big this would get.
I don’t know, after Sarah had lied I feel Cutter needed to do a better job of convincing a jury that Sarah MIGHT BE telling the truth about being raped. Jeez I feel like someone commenting on something real, like the Casey Anthony trial.
The scene that really got me was the one between Olivia and Sarah. I felt bad for Sarah for having been through all that and still not getting justice. I also felt bad for Olivia cause it seemed like her words to Sarah just fell on deaf ears. I wonder if any of the jury members might of had a change of heart after Sarah’s outburst.
Just out of curiosity Allison. Have you ever had victims that reacted the way Sarah did after a trial in which the defendant was found “Not Guilty”?