User Reviews

This episode dips a toe into the murkiest of waters - the margin (note - I do not call it a dividing line) between the law and the public interest (i.e. the general good). It has to be said that the scriptwriters give themselves plenty of let-outs to help them come through unscathed. Is it in the public interest that two US hostages be executed? Obviously, no, on the face of it. But what other aspects of "public interest" can be seen in this scenario? The PR benefits of a successful rescue, with the brave hostages returned to a well-publicised celebration? If the mission fails, these same PR professionals will be able to inflame public opinion against the vicious terrorists who cut the heads off innocent Americans. So "public interest" may win whatever happens: it is arguable that the PR outcomes are desirable in any event - all very unclear. As to the law, is it wrong to kill someone? Again, obviously, yes. But here is where it gets murky again, and the writers trigger their get-out-of-jail-free cards. The traitor was stabbed in self-defence (defence 1). He did not die of the stab wound (defence 2, which makes defence 1 irrelevant and throws us onto defence 3). He died as a result of unexpected reaction to his restraint (defence in mitigation 3, but dubious under the "thin skull" rule). He was restrained in order to prevent him endangering an active operation (defence 4 - not sure about that one under military law). Although there are parallels here to the plot line in "A Few Good Men", where a victim was subjected to an attack involving a gag, which resulted in lactic acidosis and his death, there are clear distinctions. In "A Few Good Men", the victim was restrained with the deliberate intention of the activities resulting. Here, there was no such intention. The only intention was to preserve the mission. I have to say that I come down on Sam's side. The teams he represents are not "off you go to war" soldiers. They are *at war* full time (as are, really, our team in NCIS OSP LA). The battlefield is here and now. They did what was needed to accomplish their mission. Callen, as Sam's SAC, recognised the team unity existing within the SEAL group and let him run with it.

So just because your a SEAL means you can get away with murder, and get to go on a mission.

Sam is one of the worst characters in NCIS history and nothing but a pathetic hypocrite.

That SEAL team should have been benched until a thorough investigation was conducted and concluded, then once they were deemed involved in the crime, they should have been charged and stripped of SEAL status, and sent to prison.

Sam should never have been involved in the investigation once he showed his obvious bias in favour of the SEALs.

Called, as lead agent needs to stand up and be in charge, but he lets Sam dictate a lot.