An angry veteran whose son died in Iraq claims extreme emotional disturbance after he is charged with killing a young Iraq War protester he thought was provoking him.An angry veteran whose son died in Iraq claims extreme emotional disturbance after he is charged with killing a young Iraq War protester he thought was provoking him.An angry veteran whose son died in Iraq claims extreme emotional disturbance after he is charged with killing a young Iraq War protester he thought was provoking him.
Photos
- DA Arthur Branch
- (as Fred Dalton Thompson)
- Judge Lisa Pongracic
- (as Charlotte Ortiz Colavin)
- Chuck
- (as Trent Armand Kendall)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaAllen v. United States (1896) was a United States Supreme Court case that first approved of a judge giving an instruction to a deadlocked jury for them to reconsider their votes in order to prevent a hung jury. It specifically is used when an overwhelming majority of the jury is in agreement and there are only one or two dissenters. While it isn't requiring the dissenting jurors to change their vote, it is encouraging them to be sure that their vote is based on the facts of the case and the law and not instead on their own personal feelings or beliefs. It also encourages them to consider that if their arguments are not convincing to the majority of their fellow jurors that they be absolutely sure that they truly are convinced, beyond a reasonable doubt, of their vote.
After that case such an instruction became known as an Allen charge and was used to prevent a hung jury due to a small minority disagreeing with the majority. Because it is used to dislodge jurors from entrenched positions, the Allen charge is sometimes referred to as the "dynamite charge" or the "hammer charge." Since the ruling was made in the federal Supreme Court, state courts are not required to abide by the ruling. In fact 23 states in the US have laws that prohibit the use of a Allen charge.
- GoofsAs Arthur points out when that type of choke hold is done properly it is rarely fatal, the only time it is fatal is when the person either is improperly trained or the person being subdued has some type of health problem (like cardiac or vascular disease). So it would be difficult for McCoy to prove to a jury, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant had the prerequisite intent to kill when he used a non-lethal method designed to subdue. Therefore it would be a mistake to not allow the jury to consider the charge of manslaughter in the second degree, which would be what the defendant would be guilty of if he indeed did not have the intent to kill.
So the jury should actually be considering convicting on one of three charges, 1: Murder in the second degree if the prosecution is able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had the intent to kill while suffering from no emotional disturbance. 2: Manslaughter in the first degree if the prosecution is able to prove an intent to kill but the defense is able to prove extreme emotional disturbance. 3: Manslaughter in the second degree if the prosecution fails to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had the intent to kill.
- Quotes
[last lines]
Arthur Branch: No surprise the jury hung.
Jack McCoy: I'll try him again.
Arthur Branch: Your problem was too many blue collar jurors. They identified with Kenneth Silva.
Serena Southerlyn: How do you know who the holdouts were?
Arthur Branch: The people who escape jury duty, same people who escape active duty.
"Veteran's Day" is a very good episode, if falling a little short of being great despite having a lot of great things individually. Like a lot of episodes in 'Law and Order's' late seasons and actually 'Law and Order' in general, it is a case of one half being superior to the other. But not because one half is bad, just that there is one half that executes the storytelling especially even better. Though perhaps it could have done a little bit more with the subject covered, which is a challenging role and a brave one to tackle.
Beginning with the good, it is a slickly made episode, the editing especially having come on quite a bit from when the show first started (never was it a problem but it got more fluid with each episode up to this stage). The music is sparingly used and never seemed melodramatic, the theme tune easy to remember as usual. The direction is sympathetic enough without being too low key on the whole.
The script is generally taut, with little fat, and intelligent. The story does intrigue and is tense and moving, the policing scenes are solidly done and the legalities are accessible and intriguing. It doesn't come over as preachy and it isn't too much of one side. Most of the acting is very, very good, Sam Waterston dominating. Do love Briscoe and Green's chemistry.
On the other hand, Elisabeth Rohm looks bored and drained of life and never connects with the character or with Waterston. Once things become more complex and not what they seemed initially, the episode becomes a little over-complicated and could have done with a slowing down.
Did find the ending on the hasty side from trying to include too much in a short period of time.
Concluding, very good. 8/10.
- TheLittleSongbird
- Jul 6, 2022