Summary: In a heartbreaking opening scene, a young boy is found dead on a carousel. SVU’s detectives discover that the boy was beaten up in a sort of juvenile Fight Club, where dads force their sons to maul each other, and bet on them like a dog fight. Elliott tries to get one of the boys to talk, but the kid’s mother, herself a victim of domestic abuse, won’t let the kid give evidence against his stepfather. Then the police are called to the family’s house and find Stepdad with a bullet in his skull, pregnant Mom beaten to a bloody pulp, and the boy with a gun in his trembling hand. The heartless DA insists on bringing murder charges against the boy, because the downward angle of the gunshot suggests Stepdad was kneeling and thus not an immediate threat when he was shot. But the prosecution falls apart when Mom takes the stand and claims she killed her husband. In the end, the detectives can’t determine whether Mom or the boy fired the shot. Both walk.
Verdict: B+
What they got wrong: Does anyone else feel like they’re watching an Apple commercial instead of a police drama sometimes? Like when Elliot viewed surveillance video on his iPad? Please. In my office, I have a dusty TV/VCR combo (which I bought myself because the office VCR is a silicone-sucking shredding machine). My VCR is the right medium for most of the surveillance tapes we get. Some surveillance video comes on CD, and I watch that on my desktop computer. iPads? In my dreams. Same goes for the iPods that both detectives wield, and that floor-to-ceiling plasma screen the SVU police gather around to instantly access mug shots, DNA results, census data, and moving GPS cell-phone dots. Most police stations will get that equipment around the time they’ll get their flying cars.
Also, although there is a disturbing trend of little kids pummeling each other in lightweight versions of Fight Club, I haven’t heard of any ring where dads force their sons to fight so they can bet on the outcome.
What they got right: This was an impressively realistic portrayal of the dynamics of family violence (this dynamic plays a pivotal role in my book, Law of Attraction). The pregnant mom, snarling at Det. Stabler, refuses to testify against the man who regularly beats her (and who’s also the father of her unborn baby). She even refuses to cooperate when she knows the man is brutally beating her son. I’ve had so many cases where the mother protects her boyfriend instead of the child he’s abusing, sometimes even perjuring herself to free the man who maimed her child.
The scene where the boy shoots Stepdad also struck a personal chord with me because it was similar to a case I once handled. In my case, an 18-year-old boy had grown up watching his stepfather periodically beat his mother. Mom never pressed charges. One day, while the parents argued in their car, Stepdad punched Mom in the face. The boy, who was sitting in the backseat, pulled out a knife and stabbed Stepdad in the neck, severing the man’s spine and putting him in a permanent paraplegic and vegetative state. There was hot disagreement among the prosecutors about whether to bring charges against the boy. Tragically, the boy himself died shortly afterwards.
All views expressed on this blog are mine alone and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Department of Justice.
TokoBali says
6 January, 2011 at 7:17 pmI am a big SVU fan, but one thing ruined the whole episode for me: the spontaneous, screaming with tears in her eyes confession while testifying as a witness. It’s such an old cliche in movies and tv shows, and any writer who comes up with this, should take a few lessons in originality. Could you comment on this plot device, and often it actually happens in the real courtrooms?
Allison Leotta says
6 January, 2011 at 8:03 pmGreat point. Sobbing confessions never happen in real courtrooms. They rarely happen in real police stations. Criminals usually try to minimize their role or give a false exculpatory story. As a writer, I understand the use of confessions — who else but the killer can give you a blow-by-blow of how the murder went down? — but as a prosecutor, I have to work much harder to find out the truth. The bad guy isn’t going to spell it out for me.
Donald Simmons says
10 January, 2011 at 9:56 pmHey, it always worked for Perry Mason!
Allison Leotta says
13 January, 2011 at 5:29 pmSo true! It’s hard to live up to Perry.
SeaDrive says
7 January, 2011 at 8:46 pm“the downward angle of the gunshot suggests Stepdad was kneeling and thus not an immediate threat…” Granted this was fiction, and could be taken as a summary of a more complex set of facts, but I have heard of prosecutors making somewhat similar arguments. I find it appalling that a DA would consider sending someone away for life based on such facile reasoning. An assailant doesn’t cease being a threat just because he happens to be kneeling. Life is complicated; all sorts of things happen.
I think this topic could be the basis for novel of courtroom drama. Suppose A knows there is a contract out on his life; he was a witness to a mob hit. He takes precautions. B is a hit man and comes to kill A. Due to A’s precautions, he detects B and initially has the tactical advantage. The question of the novel is how much tactical advantage is A obligated to give up before he can use lethal force on B. Why should he have to give up any tactical advantage? But does this mean he could take out B at arbitrarily long range?
Allison Leotta says
7 January, 2011 at 9:11 pmI agree that this SVU scenario was a terrible case for the SVU DA to bring. I actually yelled at the TV set. There was a legitimate defense-of-others defense. Not to mention that they were trying this kid as an adult. Bad decisions by the SVU DA in this episode.
I like your idea for the hit man novel. 🙂
V.E. says
13 January, 2011 at 12:38 amThanks for writing these break downs of SVU episodes! I really like the show, but it helps to have some reality injected in there once in a while, you know?
Also, not sure if this is a mistake or there actually are two tenth episodes, but you’ve labeled “Lay List” and “Pop” (this post) as episode 10. Just thought I’d point that out to you so you can make sure you’re not messing up the numbers further on down the line.
Thanks for writing these posts. They’re really great!
Allison Leotta says
13 January, 2011 at 3:06 pmThanks so much, V.E.! I’m really glad you’re finding my posts fun. I like the show too, I just feel a professional duty now to try to keep it honest. And thanks for the tip about the two episode #10′s — just fixed it. Good eye!
quatisha brown says
17 January, 2025 at 4:45 amI just want the whole world to know about this spell caster I met two weeks ago,I cannot say everything he has done for me and my family I was going through online when I meant this wonderful man’s testimony online how he won a lottery through the help of dr Ose I decided to just give it a try and my life is back to me now after i lost my job due to covid he gave me a winning numbers to play lottery and i won 5000usd for my first play since then i have been working with him and he has been giving me numbers to play my lottery i can not write everything he has done for me if you need a lottery spell today contact him on oseremenspelltemple@gmail.com www.facebook.com/Dr-odion-spell-temple-110513923938220
whatsapp +2348136482342