s
p
o
i
l
e
r

s
p
a
c
e

The super-woke lectures are back and we get them from multiple
characters, including Riley and Price. And we learn about the super woke exception to the rules of discovery and whether a police officer may
leave exculpatory evidence out of a case file without committing a
felony.

There was a truly bizarre discussion of spousal privilege that I don't
recall has ever come up on this show in all these years. It didn't sound
right to me, but what do I know.

David Ajala joins the cast as Theo Walker, ex-narc now homicide
detective as Riley's partner. Is there such a thing as a low key,
sensitive narc? There's one idiotic scene in which Riley, seeking to
interview a manager/rapper at a nightclub is blocked by his armed
security guard. Riley keeps deliberately pissing the guy off, calling
him "bro" till he's just about to draw his weapon. I'm hearing Will
Smith as Hancock, Call me "asshole" just one more time... Walker goes
super sensitive and talks the guy out of brandishing his weapon but does threaten to shoot him.

The guy they wanted to interview didn't have to speak to them but it's a
public place and no one can prevent police from approaching. Isn't that literally obstructing justice? Riley might have arrested the guy but
he's effectively apologetic to his new partner.

I've seen Ajala before. He was on Supergirl but I've put that show
almost completely out of mind and do not recall him. But this show can't
bave too many English actors in the cast.

A new six-abreast walk is filmed for the opening credits.

Lt. Brady implies she knows something about Walker she needs to warn
Riley about, then holds her tongue.

Maroun (Odelya Halevi) finally gets screen time, in the bond hearing in
which she's showing a hell of a lot of her delightful cleavage, and at
the prosecution table, in which she's dressed plainly.

The police investigation is massive STOOPID. In the first interview
scene, husband and wife (guardians of the dead teenage basketball
phenomenon) are interviewed together, along with their naturl-born son
who gets no lines. If they'd been interviewed separately as real
detectives would insist on, they'd have made the arrest immediately.

The spousal privilege discussion made zero sense. Realizing that the
husband lied, they finally bring husband and wife to the police station
and, this time, interview them separately. The wife informs police that
he confessed to committing the crime to her.

Suddenly, spousal privilege is asserted and the wife is no longer a
witness for the prosecution. But the defense attorney played by Dylan
Baker, sleaze par excellence, argues that privilege belongs to the
husband.

I'm flabbergasted. In order for there to be a confidence, you actually
have to shut the fuck up and not reveal it. She made a disclosure to
police so how exactly can she be prevented from testifying?

I always thought that the spouse that knows the confidential information asserts privilege so he/she cannot be compelled to testify, but can
testify voluntarily.

During trial, there's complaint after complaint by Price that the
defense is making the victim into a Dangerous Negro, and the key
witness, also black, is having racist cliches used against him because
he's black. The defense called him a two-time felon and a panhandler.
Well, he was convicted of felonies in two separate cases and was
panhandling, so where's the racism? But it got real STOOPID when the
defense accused him of lying to protect someone from the community and
he took a payoff from the boy, who put an absurd amount of cash into his
cup. 'Cuz the boy somehow knew he was about to be killed and needed a
witness to spin a lie.

BTR1701's complaints versus the writers are heard. The affirmative
defense of self defense is asserted during the bond hearing.

The defendant asserts that he was afraid of his foster son because
they'd had a violent confrontation weeks earlier in which the son was
the aggressor.

Once again, Anthony is not there to assist the prosecutors. Walker
volunteers to get secret video evidence from the school janitor who
simply instlled surveillamce equipment on his own. I just realized that
the existence of private surveillance was not disclosed at all. The
janitor shows Walker the relevant video and, low and behold, it's
exculpatory! The son was the aggressor!

Walker lies to Price about the existence of the exculpatory evidence.

I don't recall what the charge was, 2nd or 3rd degree murder. It may not
have been a crime of intent at all and the father could have been acting
on fear from the previous confrontation. It may not have been self
defense but manslaughter might have been the appropriate charge.

Did anybody hear the charge?

Riley, not trusting Walker, spoke to the janitor separately who told him
about the tape. After the guilty verdict, both men agree that Walker
didn't commit a crime...

Uh, obstruction of justice? Lying to a prosecutor?

Riley is just upset that if he does something unethical that he discuss
it with Riley first.

This just be the woke exception to discovery, due process, and the confrontation clause found in the 14th and 1/2 Amendment if racism.

--- PyGate Linux v1.5
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

On Nov 17, 2025 at 1:20:38 AM PST, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

The super-woke lectures are back and we get them from multiple
characters, including Riley and Price.

Price and Baxter were also on SVU this week, arguing with Olivia Benson!

And we learn about the super woke
exception to the rules of discovery and whether a police officer may
leave exculpatory evidence out of a case file without committing a
felony.

That was curious, wasn't it? I must have been on a sick day in law school when they covered that.

David Ajala joins the cast as Theo Walker ex-narc now homicide
detective as Riley's partner. Is there such a thing as a low key,
sensitive narc? There's one idiotic scene in which Riley, seeking to interview a manager/rapper at a nightclub is blocked by his armed
security guard. Riley keeps deliberately pissing the guy off, calling
him "bro" till he's just about to draw his weapon. I'm hearing Will
Smith as Hancock, Call me "asshole" just one more time... Walker goes
super sensitive and talks the guy out of brandishing his weapon but does threaten to shoot him.

Having had my own encounters with uppity private security guards, I was with Riley on that one.

I've seen Ajala before. He was on Supergirl but I've put that show
almost completely out of mind and do not recall him. But this show can't
bave too many English actors in the cast.

Cleveland Booker from STAR TREK: DISCOVERY

A new six-abreast walk is filmed for the opening credits.

I was holding out hope for Yee to be promoted to Main Cop, but alas no. She probably wasn't diverse enough.

The spousal privilege discussion made zero sense. Realizing that the
husband lied, they finally bring husband and wife to the police station
and, this time, interview them separately. The wife informs police that
he confessed to committing the crime to her.

Suddenly, spousal privilege is asserted and the wife is no longer a
witness for the prosecution. But the defense attorney played by Dylan
Baker, sleaze par excellence, argues that privilege belongs to the
husband.

That's true.

I'm flabbergasted. In order for there to be a confidence, you actually
have to shut the fuck up and not reveal it. She made a disclosure to
police so how exactly can she be prevented from testifying?

Because the privilege was the husband's (as the defendant) to assert. It doesn't matter if the wife wants to disclose or even does disclose, it's inadmissible as evidence unless the husband consents.

Same is true for therapist/patient and priest/penitent privileges. If, for example, the priest breaks his vow and actually tells the cops something incriminating from the confessional, it can't be used as evidence unless the parishioner consents to it.

BTR1701's complaints versus the writers are heard. The affirmative
defense of self defense is asserted during the bond hearing.

And even so, that's not enough. It has to be officially asserted before trial in a special pleading.

This just be the woke exception to discovery, due process, and the confrontation clause found in the 14th and 1/2 Amendment if racism.

Does moviePig have a career opportunity here to teach a 14.5 Amendment module at law schools around the country?



--- PyGate Linux v1.5
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

Nov 17, 2025 at 1:20:38 AM PST, Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

. . .

David Ajala joins the cast as Theo Walker ex-narc now homicide
detective as Riley's partner. Is there such a thing as a low key,
sensitive narc? There's one idiotic scene in which Riley, seeking to >>interview a manager/rapper at a nightclub is blocked by his armed
security guard. Riley keeps deliberately pissing the guy off, calling
him "bro" till he's just about to draw his weapon. I'm hearing Will
Smith as Hancock, Call me "asshole" just one more time... Walker goes
super sensitive and talks the guy out of brandishing his weapon but does >>threaten to shoot him.

Having had my own encounters with uppity private security guards, I was with >Riley on that one.

It was a crowded night club. I was against the security guard shooting.

The spousal privilege discussion made zero sense. Realizing that the >>husband lied, they finally bring husband and wife to the police station >>and, this time, interview them separately. The wife informs police that
he confessed to committing the crime to her.

Suddenly, spousal privilege is asserted and the wife is no longer a
witness for the prosecution. But the defense attorney played by Dylan >>Baker, sleaze par excellence, argues that privilege belongs to the
husband.

That's true.

I'm flabbergasted. In order for there to be a confidence, you actually
have to shut the fuck up and not reveal it. She made a disclosure to
police so how exactly can she be prevented from testifying?

Because the privilege was the husband's (as the defendant) to assert. It >doesn't matter if the wife wants to disclose or even does disclose, it's >inadmissible as evidence unless the husband consents. . . .

Ok. I didn't understand. I guess he cannot prevent the wife from
revealing a confidence, only preventing her from testifying in court.

BTR1701's complaints versus the writers are heard. The affirmative
defense of self defense is asserted during the bond hearing.

And even so, that's not enough. It has to be officially asserted before
trial in a special pleading.

I figured it was just conflated to speed things up, not to mention
a different judge presides at the bond hearing. On tv, the arraignment
and bond hearings are typically shown together. In reality, are they
separate hearings?

. . .

--- PyGate Linux v1.5
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)