FindLaw | Legal News & Information

The legal issues addressed in Law and Order's season finale were so complex that many of them flew far above the head of this law school graduate reviewer. The heady subjects taken on -- jurisdiction, the Monroe doctrine, foreign policy, and separation of powers -- seemed more appropriate for a seminar at Yale Law School than for NBC's 10:00 p.m. time slot on Wednesday night. My initial feeling that the subject matters addressed were not suited for the intended audience was confirmed when, at 10:58 p.m., my best friend, an extremely bright non-lawyer, called and asked, "What are you going to do with that?"

The episode starts off with the death of Samuel Whitman, a retired professor found dead on the stairs of an apartment building. The detectives trace Whitman down to his last known address and learn from his landlord that Whitman was always "bitching and moaning" that the CIA killed his son. Because the autopsy reveals no medications, the detectives remarkably conclude that the "rantings were not delusional." That Whitman was serious about his allegations is further confirmed for the detectives when they find a directory of government phone numbers in Whitman's bag.

The detectives gain access to Whitman's post office box by assuring a young postal employee that it is not a federal offense to open the mailbox for them, since they promise not to open the mail itself. The detectives find a returned letter from Ed Albrecht, United States Navy. They obtain a new address for Whitman, at a seedy hotel, where they find articles describing the 1973 death of an American college student, Jason Whitman, in Chile. If the Albrecht character had any involvement in killing that kid, the detectives assert, he'd better run. The detectives soon learn, however, that Albrecht died six weeks earlier.

The detectives review the phone records of all residents of the building where Whitman was killed and learn that a Kevin Morse placed a call to Santiago, Chile, two weeks earlier. Morse initially denies placing the call, but quickly confesses when the detectives learn that Morse is Albrecht's son. According to Morse, Whitman showed up at his door asking to speak to Albrecht. Morse told Whitman that Albrecht was dead. Whitman was upset. Morse fought to protect himself. Whitman slipped and fell down the stairs.

Morse then reveals that he is ashamed of his father and describes for the detectives the night when Albrecht started bragging about how Naval Intelligence helped the Chileans kill an American. Morse didn't want to believe it, he states, but he knew it was true. Morse waives his Miranda rights, signs a confession, and pleads guilty to manslaughter 2 with a one to three year sentence.

Now the real story begins as the detectives, along with Carmichael and McCoy, decide to track down Jason Whitman's killer. With Albrecht dead, the detectives go after General Emilio Pantoya, the Director of Intelligence for Chile, who just happens to be receiving treatment in a New York City hospital.

The Feds instruct McCoy not to investigate Jason Whitman's murder, urging McCoy to understand that this is not an American problem. McCoy ignores their request and decides to learn more about Jason Whitman.

The lawyers visit the woman Jason traveled to Chile with in 1973 and learn that Jason went to Chile to work at a leftist radio station. They learn that Albrecht put Jason in touch with a Chilean family, the Caldarones, where Albrecht assured Jason he would be safe. The lawyers visit Mrs. Caldarone, who describes in detail the night Jason and her husband were taken by the Chilean soldiers.

The lawyers then learn from subpoenaed Navy files that, on the night Jason was murdered, Albrecht was staying at a hotel in New York City. They visit another naval officer who was also in New York on that night and learn that Albrecht had asked this officer to send General Pantoya a telex containing an address. The lawyers are now able to establish a nexus with New York City, so they file criminal charges against Pantoya.

Hmmmm. The woman Jason traveled with to Chile in 1973 still lives in New York. The Chilean wife relocated to New York. Albrecht was at a seminar in New York on the day of Jason's death. The witness who actually sent Pantoya the telex with the Caldarones' address is living in New York. And Pantoya happens to be receiving medical care at a New York hospital. Not likely.

Anyway, with the New York City nexus established, the detectives arrest Pantoya, who asserts "blanket immunity." Pantoya's counsel argues that the case must be dismissed because all elements of the crime occurred in Chile. McCoy argues that jurisdiction is appropriate because Pantoya is charged with conspiracy, and the crime of conspiracy occurs where any element takes place. The judge agrees with McCoy.

Pantoya then argues that the case should be dismissed on humanitarian grounds, arguing that Pantoya's health is failing and that prosecuting him for a murder that took place 27 years ago would serve no useful purpose. The judge disagrees and a trial ensues.

After Jason's mother and a political prisoner testify about the terrible conditions in Chile in the early 70s, Pantoya takes the stand and explains to the jury that there was "war and anarchy" in his country and that he acted "with the support of the American government." When cross-examined by McCoy, Pantoya refuses to answer questions, asserting his immunity. Because Pantoya won't answer McCoy's questions, the judge orders all of Pantoya's testimony stricken. The jury returns a guilty verdict.

Presumably due to the important foreign interests, the Supreme Court grants Pantoya an emergency expedited hearing. Carmichael urges McCoy to agree to probation in lieu of the appeal, but McCoy says that he might as well spit in the jury's eye. I note that this is not the first time McCoy has used the jury as an excuse to further his own agenda.

It is unclear what the precise issue is on appeal. Pantoya's counsel argues generally about the insufficiency of the jurisdictional nexus and the importance of upholding foreign policies. Seemingly arguing that killing is never justified, McCoy starts and ends by asserting that "man has only the rights he can defend." The episode ends as the clerk walks up with the decision. The viewer is left with Carmichael's assertion, "Win or lose, you fought the good fight."

It's too bad that I couldn't figure out what the good fight was. From start to finish, this was a case that made no sense. It made no sense that the lawyer and detectives took such a keen interest in a 27-year-old murder that they weren't even assigned to investigate. It made no sense that all principal actors had some connection to New York City. And it made no sense that the District Attorney's office would allow its attorneys to fight such a battle in the face of pressure from the federal government not to. If Carmichael and McCoy want to "fight the good fight," then they should pick a battle that people might care about -- not one involving events that occurred decades ago in a now friendly country.

Past Reviews

Message Boards

Disclaimer