"Law & Order" Release (TV Episode 2006) Poster

(TV Series)

(2006)

User Reviews

Review this title
6 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Sexual Consent forms
bkoganbing13 July 2012
This episode has Kim Shaw committing murder on the set of one of the entourage of Tim Peper who is one of the slimiest characters that was ever prosecuted on Law And Order. Since Shaw did the deed how is it that Peper is on trial?

This guy Peper is some piece of work. He's a male version of Paris Hilton who travels to various locations to get young woman to show their assets with a little recreational help. Of course he beds them and while in a vulnerable state has them sign sexual consent forms. Probably he figures that protects him as he cites Kobe Bryant's situation as his rationale.

But through a little bit of legal legerdemain Sam Waterston come up with a theory of law that Peper set up the situation that made Shaw shoot his friend and he's legally responsible. On that basis Peper is arrested.

The hubris on this guy is incredible and he's got a lawyer who is cut from the same cloth. Peper is convinced that his consent forms absolve him of all responsibility.

You have to see the way Waterston brings this piece of work down.
15 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
That's why you started using consent forms? Kobe Bryant?
Mrpalli7725 January 2018
A man was recording a video during a private party involving paid girls called "Babies being bad". The cameraman and the boss got into the coach with two female party goers and they saw a member of the crew dead on the ground, hit by a champagne bottle. He changed girls like socks, anyway his last fiancèe (Alexandra Daddario), his brother who disapproved the business and his partner were soon ruled out. CCTV footage placed a blond girl inside the coach; the bartender identified her as a girl called Nicole, a junior in college with strictly catholic parents blackmailed by the victim for a tape. She confessed, but detectives wanted to know more about her personal life: she was described as a good person by family and friends. Then McCoy wanted so hard to convict the party planner for rape, a previous case could help him.

A nice episode, the defendent doesn't understand why McCoy hates him so much. We can also see Cassady didn't realize about how things go in some circles, probably due to her upbringing. To be frank, I'm not so agree to the verdict.
11 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Boring investigation followed by predictable courtroom antics
IMDB-User-48013 March 2011
Warning: Spoilers
This episode is strange for reading like a Law & Order: SVU episode. Evidently the Mothership writers wanted to try their hand at a sex crime plot. As is common in with most SVU episodes, they gussy up a banal sex-crime plot with brief glimpses at footage of nude or scantily clad women, in the increasingly perverse pursuit of pushing further the line that divides 4 p.m. TNT broadcasts and 2 a.m. Cinemax programming.

A young man is found murdered in a film trailer for what is essentially a lawsuit-friendly version of Girls Gone Wild, and a single bloody fingerprint found at the scene matches none of the records. Everyone denies having seen anything, and security footage proves that they are lying. From a shaky ID obtained from a bartender, they determine that the killer was a probably young blonde woman. One suspect stands out as unusually academically focused in comparison to the other blondes whom the detectives interview. She declines their request for a fingerprint sample, but she is then tricked by Det. Cassady who feigns mistakenly handing her two business cards. I can excuse the suspect, Nicole, for not watching enough Law & Order to recognize this rather common ploy, but the writers ham-headedly assume that the viewers don't watch Law & Order, either: under the assumption that the viewer is a moron, Det. Cassady blurts out Det. Green that now it's only a matter of getting the business card to the lab for fingerprint analysis. Okay, except anyone who's ever filed a police report would know that police use matte cards, because they often need to write the case number down on the card for your reference. Matte cards are better for writing on, but glossies would be a lot better for retaining a print.

They arrest Nicole, and she confesses to the murder. She said that the show's producer blackmailed her into having sex with him in order to withhold nude footage of her that she'd consented to when she was drunk, on vacation. After having sex with her, he told her that he was changing the deal, and that now she had to have sex with his friend. He left to get his friend. When the friend came in, she panicked, bludgeoned him to death, and escaped through the window. Nicole pleas to manslaughter with the agreement to testify against the producer, whom they decide to charge with felony-murder. This was actually an unexpected turn, because had this been an SVU episode, I am sure that charges against Nicole would have been dropped, as it sounded as though she was defending herself against gang rape. Part of the logic for charging her seemed to rest on the fact that she had an opportunity to leave the trailer voluntarily in-between her encounters with the two men. However there was not very much time in-between encounters. She would have needed to first put her clothes back on, she was clearly traumatized, and her encounter with the second man could easily be construed as rape.

During Nicole's testimony, in one of the most preposterous court-room displays on this side of SVU, the producer's attorney shows to the jury the original Girls Gone Wild video of Nicole drunkenly consenting to being taped and then fully disrobing. Just because the plot is SVU doesn't mean you need to follow SVU's lead in abandoning all notion of reality -- and taste. Although this damaged Nicole's credibility as a prosecution witness, the mother of another young woman comes forward, who was apparently subjected by the film's producer to an ordeal exactly like Nicole's.

Several times during this episode, they explained the logic behind what is admittedly a legal peculiarity, felony-murder. I suppose that this was for the viewer's benefit, but right before the jury's decision the producer, for about the fourteenth time this episode, was like, "How can I be convicted of murder if I didn't commit the murder?" That has already twice been explained -- and then they explained it again. I guess they ran out of questionably pornographic material so they needed some good ol' filler. He declines a plea offer for rape minus the murder, and the jury comes back with a murder conviction. The end.

The series was on an obvious decline during this period, and it's surprising that they bounced back later with two strong closing seasons. While Law & Order had traditionally featured the occasional allusion to real-life headlines, during this period they formed the story of virtually every single episode around a rather obvious link to headlines. I guess that they thought viewers were too stupid to follow a story not crafted around some headline.
14 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Hubris
TheLittleSongbird6 September 2022
Am slowly working my way through writing reviews for all the episodes of 'Law and Order, 'Special Victims Unit' and 'Criminal Intent' with a long way to go, and anybody who has read any of my reviews for previous episodes of all three shows will know already how much admiration there is from me for anything that tackles difficult and controversial themes and issues. Have made no secret of this. "Release" is no exception by all means.

There were many great episodes in the latter seasons of 'Law and Order', although the show was not the same post-Briscoe, but "Release" to me was not one of those great episodes. It's definitely not a bad episode and some of the episode was actually very good. It's the legal scenes where it went off the boil drastically, meaning that "Release" went from a high middle tier episode to one of the lesser Season 17 episodes, which is a shame because the concept had a good deal of promise.

"Release" oes have enough good things. The photography and such as usual are fully professional, the slickness still remaining. The music is used sparingly and is haunting and non-overwrought when it is used, and it's mainly used when a crucial revelation or plot development is revealed. The direction has some nice tension while keeping things steady, without going too far the other way. The writing in the first half entertains, intrigues and engages.

On the most part, the acting is very good, in both lead and support.

Unfortunately, too much of "Release" doesn't work enough for it to be a good episode. Cassady has lost none of her blandness and Milena Govich doesn't have enough personality or enough chemistry with Jesse L. Martin, who is actually great. Cassady is also very unprofessional in this episode to sackable offense level. In the legal scenes (which are often a lot better than the policing ones), the dialogue also becomes less focused and is instead more over-heated and the pace loses tautness.

Furthermore, the legal scenes (which usually are what makes 'Law and Order' as good as it is at its best) are very over-heated and also far-fetched (the latter is mostly not the case with the show). And not just by a little, but by pretty improbability. Nicole's testimony for example was enough to insult the intelligence in how implausible and melodramatic it was. It was just not realistic that a case so flimsy, so full of holes and so easily dismissable went further ahead than it should have done (not beyond thrown out of court). The verdict was also just not realistic.

Concluding, watchable but there have been far better episodes of the season and of the show. 5/10.
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
flawed
runnerjogger525 April 2018
Anyone who watches this episode will see its mountain of flaws and mistakes. And though the character "Chris Drake" might have been arrogant he certainly wasn't a criminal and he should have never been tried or convicted on both charges.
9 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Predjudiced trash....
amarshall-167566 October 2017
This episode is not only a testament to poor sensationalism but also to the failure of the justice system. The details of how plot changing testimony is entered in this show is lazily vague and incoherent. The fact that a signed consent form doesn't protect one from retribution is a testament that despite the cries of feminism... Women have so much power. Religion and base ideas of morality cloud sound mind and judgment. More importantly the case law used to prosecute the man. The whole basis of the drama of the entire show is poorly explained. The prosecutor stretches the use of the clause (or case law) which allows one felony "rape" the ability to charge the perpetrator with resulting more serious crimes "indirect murder committed by a woman for which the accused was not even present" We don't even know if the woman was charged with murder. It could have not even been a murder but self defense still the "slimy man" was charged with murder. Poor episode construction because the jurisprudence was a reach which would have been slightly less repulsive if it was very articulated. Not only is this a slippery slope. The fact that the man tried his best to protect himself and got consent is completely ignored he is characterized and people's retarded base judgment is not only sickening it is hypocritical and repulsive. Everyone has sexual fantasy. Everyone is so quick to come to judgment on the part of others when the story of a bad man is titillating and satiates a base desire to pass judgment. The fact that the prosecutors unconstitutionally stretched previous case law in a judgmental self righteous crusade is bad enough. The fact that the previous ruling ruling was glanced over and not explained while the "bad morals " of the guy is the focal point is a testament to our judgmental prejudiced off with his head emotii]onal justice system. Furthermore, they don't even address the core issue that the girl could be deranged and lying. The fact that this didn't even cross anyone's mind is absolutely insane. It wasn't even addressed this makes me lose hope in society. If the girl was black... Think about it... Her perfect Irish Catholic girl, story would never hold. At the very least it would be much more difficult to believe based on prejudice. The fact that she lied is not addressed the fact that she said she would have sex with him is not addressed honestly i wish i could burn every copy of this episode . The fact that the good privileged white girl couldn't possibly be deranged when she committed the murder..... Its... Sickening...
6 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed