User Reviews

Frank Cosgrove is an odd cop because it seems like they shift his political views too much and it also seemed like he should have been able to handle the crypto loser in the factory. Getting outplayed and then shot did not seem like a probable result considering how unthreatening the guy was.

This was a solid episode though. Not a lot of courtroom scenes, but we do not always need the 50/50 split. Nolan also seems to flip flop on who he offers deals to and who not. I think he would have supported the idea of the money being recovered and the guy still serving 20 or so years in a federal prison.

As an artist goes missing and that it shows over in the CCTV that is Closed Captured TV that some people were in the getting over on crates to be taken from the place that the artist was showcasing art or worked at that place.

Both Cosgrove and Shaw try to find the missing artist but the search and rescue goes into a rescue and recovery. Sure enough the crates are found and the artist is found murdered.

Which was thought to be an art dealer who owned the place the artist was showcasing art but the dealer is in fact hiding and in the fearing that the killer is out to get her. As the police and DA must find her to testify and give her safety.

Usually a family member or an employee that are persons of interest as the cops arrest the ex and how that it is up to the DA's office to make a case for murder. And to find out the motive over in why the ex murdered the artist. The ex also is wealthy and could possibly use the unlimited resources to flee the country asap.

Was it out of an affair or that jealousy to money?! So many possibilities but needs to find motive and jury decide guilt or innocence.

No, this isn't the worst Law and Order episode ever, (there are 487 of them besides this). It's one of many that leave you wondering "What about this?"

So this hedge fund genius, (as a Mets fan I'm glad it wasn't Steve Cohen), has stolen pension money from public employees, including the people investigating him. He's killed someone who was going to testify in his trail for doing that, (much is made of the question: Did he know she was going to testify? Of course he did. His lawyer has to be informed of any potential witnesses), and wounded a bystander. But when the bystander is on the stand he makes his fingers into a pretend gun and points it at her, causing her to panic and flee. He offers through his lawyer in the murder case, to accept a manslaughter plea and do 20 years if he also returns all the pension money - not to the pension fund but to each individual contributor. The prosecution doesn't accept this and gets a favorable verdict on 2nd degree murder. (We are told that could result in life imprisonment. I checked the internet and it says 15-40 years.) Yeah! The good guys won even through their one eyewitness bolted.

Not mentioned in the trial is the fact that the genius showed up in the warehouse where the witness had been hiding in fear of him and attempted to kill her but was stopped by a policeman that he shot in the chest. Doesn't that seem kind of relevant? And wouldn't it result in a third charge for shooting the police officer? Oh, and wouldn't the state investigation of the pension money theft have resulted in restitution anyway? It's not like he's got the money in bags stashed somewhere in this electronic age.