markthurman-44228 Reviews

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Guardian (2018) Season 19, Episode 21

A Straight-A Student?? Really???

[4/10 · 8 October 2022]

I felt like this should be submitted as a "Goof". But, I'll submit it as a short review instead.

Tiana has spent the past two years hooking, using hard drugs, and drinking hard liquor - from the age of 14 to 16. She was so concerned about finances that she couldn't sleep at night unless she was using drugs.

I find it implausible that any teenager living this lifestyle could also be a straight-A student. Are we to believe that she would wake up on school mornings and attend school and turn in homework assignments and make A's on tests after nights of drinking, drugging, and selling herself for money? That makes no sense.

I'm a big fan of the series and this episode has some good elements. But, the straight-A student characterization is outlandish.

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Unholiest Alliance (2016) Season 17, Episode 18

I Love Benson, But . . .

[7/10 · 31 August 2022]

This and the previous episode make an interesting two-part drama. But, there are aspects of Lieutenant Benson's character that don't set right with me in this and recent episodes.

First, I agree with another reviewer who says that Benson's intimate relationship with Internal Affairs Bureau (IAB) Captain Ed Tucker doesn't feel right given the extensive abrasive history between Tucker and basically every past and present member of SVU. I'm still trying to decide what this tells us about Benson. But so far this "relationship" doesn't seem to me like anything closely resembling a natural fit.

Second, my biggest problem with this and the previous episode is Benson's adamant insistence that Tucker is innocent of the allegations against him. Only three episodes earlier ("Collateral Damages") we saw Assistant District Attorney Pippa Cox have to come to terms with her husband's (NYPD Deputy Commissioner Hank Abraham) involvement in child pornography. Pippa and Hank had been together for twelve years and had two children together, yet Pippa was completely blindsided by the evil actions of her husband. Benson witnessed Pippa's world come apart from very close range. Benson had far less history with Tucker than Pippa had with Hank. Yet, Benson never considered for a second that the allegations against Tucker may have been true. Benson did not utilize any skepticism and wait to see what the investigation revealed. As it turned out Tucker had, in fact, been set up and was not guilty of being a dirty cop. For this, I suppose we are to surmise that Benson could not have been wrong about Tucker. If so, what makes her instincts about Tucker so superior to Pippa's instincts about her husband Hank? The idea that Benson learned nothing from Pippa's experience only three episodes earlier seems to me to be very bizarre.

Finally, we saw Benson go off on Rollins near the end of the episode "Star-Struck Victims" two episodes prior to this one. Benson made the false accusation that Rollins leaked a video to the press. Then, Benson claimed that Rollins was lying when she (Rollins) denied the accusation. Moments later Benson found out from Sergeant Mike Dodds that he had been the person who leaked the video. Benson looked stunned by Dodds' admission, but we never saw her apologize to Rollins. For anyone with Benson's background it should be fully-ingrained to investigate the possibilities before jumping to a forgone conclusion that Rollins was guilty of the leak. Then after Benson discovered that she had been wrong about Rollins, Benson should have been profusely apologetic to Rollins. But, no apology ever occurred. Why?

I've loved this show and the Benson character since I started watching the series from the beginning a couple of years ago. But, I hope the writers resolve some of these problems with Benson's character. Human weaknesses are one thing, but these character inconsistencies serve no useful purpose.

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Surrendering Noah (2015) Season 16, Episode 23

A Different Take On Benson's Unfavorable Comments About Stabler

[8/10 · 23 August 2022]

I just read the reviews here for this episode and see that some reviewers do not like the comments made near the end of the episode by Benson in regards to Stabler. She said that she grew more during her four years with Amaro than she did during her twelve years with Stabler. My opinion is that there is a key point that can never be set aside whenever Stabler crosses Benson's mind, and that point is that Stabler did not grant any form of closure for Benson when he suddenly left SVU. He left without a single word to Benson. He ghosted her. That is a very traumatic way for an important relationship to end. Unfortunately, I know that from experience. As fans of the show, we always had much affection for the relationship between Benson and Stabler. But, if you were on the receiving end of a relationship that ended in that manner, you cannot forget the pain that person caused by leaving without a single word. I can understand how Benson appreciates and respects Amaro in a way that Stabler willingly forfeited.

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Turmoil (2009) Season 11, Episode 8

The worst-written episode of the series up to this point

[4/10 · 8 April 2022]

This is the worst-written episode of the series up to this point in my opinion.

First problem: I like that Stabler has to sometimes balance his job with his home-life. But, I think the writers quite often go too far to show Stabler's short fuse. He is a seasoned detective who often appears to never learn from his mistakes when it comes to both his temper and his quickness to assume someone's guilt. We see these shortcomings on steroids in this episode. Yes, his son is involved. Even so, a veteran detective shouldn't have acted so much like an out-of-control rookie in this situation.

Second problem: A. D. A. Cabot and the prosecution are accused of suppressing a recanted statement by the alleged rape victim. And yet no one involved in the case provides any evidence regarding the mysterious recant statement. It makes no sense that the A. D. A. And SVU would be held responsible for withholding such information whenever no evidence is presented in court that the recant even occurred.

Third problem: With two cases occurring simultaneously, and with SVU having to continually allocate few resources to both cases, it makes no sense that Detective Benson would make time to formally request a new A. D. A. Be assigned to their department. That request is also inconsistent with how SVU typically handles internal problems.

The one aspect of this episode that I liked was seeing SVU have to deal with more than one serious case at a time. I enjoy this series very much. But, I've often thought that in real life there would often be more than one serious case under investigation at any given point in time. We see that in this episode and it's a rarity.

There was probably a good story here - a story that could have been much more consistent with what we saw from SVU until the past couple of seasons, which became much more inconsistent.

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Savant (2007) Season 9, Episode 4

10/10 On The Strength Of Guest Star Paulina Gerzon

[10/10 · 12 March 2022]

I had seen perhaps 25% of the SVU series (a variety of episodes from throughout the series) prior to subscribing to Peacock a few months ago. Since subscribing to Peacock I have been watching (re-watching in some cases) every SVU episode in order beginning with Season 1, Episode 1. I watch each episode and then read the complete IMDb entry for the episode I have just watched.

I love this episode, thanks to Paulina Gerzon's portrayal of Katie. SVU consistently has amazing guest stars, many of whom play characters outside their normal typecast, which is always a revelation. I was not familiar with Paulina Gerzon, but she knocked it out of the park as Katie in this episode. I love how on multiple occasions she recounts the events of her mother's being attacked and finishes her accounts with the words, "The End".

I am also a big fan of Stephanie March who played A. D. A. Alexandra Cabot in earlier seasons of SVU (with more still to come). But, this is an extremely rare example in my experience that a major character in a great TV series is replaced and the replacement character/actor matches her/his predecessor. Of course, I'm referring to Diane Neal who plays A. D. A. Casey Novak. Casey has been a very important character in several recent episodes and Diane plays her brilliantly. Often times in acting it's the little things that breathe life into a script; for instance, when Casey is questioning Katie on the witness stand, Katie gives an amazing account of what she heard when her mother was attacked. When Katie finished her account by saying, "The End" (which in itself is adorable), Casey couldn't help but smile. After Katie's incredible performance on the witness stand, Casey's smile was priceless.

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Brotherhood (2004) Season 5, Episode 12

Spoilers - Should this have been a mistrial?

[7/10 · 27 January 2022]

Spoiler Alert - I am not an attorney, although my daughter has a J. D. from a prominent law school. So, I would like to think that I have at least a layman's appreciation and understanding of basic law principles. It seems to me that the judge in this case should have ended the trial immediately when the defense attorney - whom everyone involved recognized as having a potentially strong conflict of interest - made a "mistake" while questioning his client on the witness stand which allowed the prosecution to reintroduce an article of damning evidence. This piece of reintroduced evidence directly led to the defendant being forced to admit on the witness stand that he was guilty as charged. If there was no potential conflict of interest, an attorney's mistake is simply that - a mistake. But, the mistake coupled with the defense attorney's potential conflict of interest puts an entirely different legal spin on the attorney's "mistake". Stabler understood that the defense attorney's "mistake" was intentional. I understood as it was happening that it was intentional. How did the judge not instantly recognize that the defense attorney was acting in his own interest, rather than the interest of his client, the defendant? This plot point made for an interesting twist in a tv show, but I think it would have led to a mistrial in a real-life courtroom. I think that the courtroom scenes on SVU are generally much more realistic than this one.

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Juvenile (2002) Season 4, Episode 9

Thoughts about the decision to try as an adult and the verdicts

[9/10 · 22 December 2021]

If I am reading a couple of other reviews correctly, I think there may be some confusion about why Bureau Chief Elizabeth Donnelly (played by Judith Light) chose to question the 14-year-old defendant Jeremy Brice (played exceptionally well by Shane Lyons) so aggressively in court. It appeared to me that the decision to try Jeremy as an adult came from Donnelly's boss, the unseen District Attorney, and that Donnelly was merely (albeit aggressively because that is any attorney's responsibility) following the D. A.'s order.

As for the highly-charged final scene, it seems to me that Jeremy's mother was entirely to blame for refusing to take the deal that was offered to her son's defense. The mother failed to recognize: (1) the high degree of likelihood that her son would be convicted; and (2) the consequences in terms of sentencing that would accompany guilty verdicts in her son's case. Since he was a willing participant in the robbery, and since the other crimes (rape and murder) occurred during the commission of the robbery, and since he was tried as an adult (whether rightly or wrongly), the sentencing was necessarily going to be very severe if he were found guilty on multiple charges, which he was. Both Assistant D. A. Alexandra Cabot (played to perfection as always by Stephanie March) and the boy's defense attorney (played by Illeana Douglas) recommended that the mother take the deal to ensure a much lighter sentence for her son. Some other reviewers seem to think that the court system was the culprit in this boy's life being completely ruined by the sentence. Perhaps the mother's decision to not accept the deal was simply the writers' device for making the episode's ending so tough for the viewer to accept. I don't think it was realistic for the mother to think her son would be found not guilty given his level of involvement in the horrendous crimes against the helpless victim, especially given that he was being tried as an adult.

Despite what I perceive to be a flaw in the story in order to maximize the emotional energy of the ending, I still consider this to be an exceptional episode and give it nine stars. I wanted to add these comments as an alternative to some of the other thoughts I have read here.

Gunsmoke: Brides and Grooms (1975) Season 20, Episode 19

634th (out of 635) best episode of Gunsmoke

[2/10 · 15 November 2021]

The other reviews here pretty much give you a sense of the worthiness (or lack thereof) of this episode. I'm ranking it the 2nd worst episode in the long, legendary history of the series, just ahead of its pitiful prequel, "The Wiving" (season 20, episode 6).

The only reason why I'm ranking this episode slightly ahead of its prequel is because this episode (if taken as a stand-alone episode) does not condone Stockholm Syndrome as an acceptable premise for the making of a happy ending.

All of us longtime Gunsmoke fans know that Marshall Dillon made, at the very least, a cameo appearance in each of the 635 episodes of the series. I DVR Gunsmoke each day on MeTV. I watch each episode and eventually delete all but a few favorites. MeTV, like most of these oldies networks, tend to delete a scene or two from each episode in order to make time for more commercials. In the case of this episode, MeTV deleted the one requisite scene that had Marshall Dillon (and apparently Festus as well). Therefore, this episode, as it aired today on MeTV, had zero appearances from any of the stars shown in the opening credits (Doc, Festus, Newly, and Matt).

Gunsmoke: The Wiving (1974) Season 20, Episode 6

635th Best Episode Of The Series

[1/10 · 30 October 2021]

The Gunsmoke TV series had 635 episodes.

One of those episodes had to be the 635th best.

This is it.

Trust me.

I gave this episode one star because zero stars was not an option.

And to the reviewer who thinks that Karen Grassle is not beautiful, please get an eye exam.

Gunsmoke: Matt Dillon Must Die (1974) Season 20, Episode 1

Correction of one of the trivia items

[10/10 · 25 October 2021]

This is the second time I have written a Gunsmoke review for the sole purpose of addressing a mistake in a trivia entry. There is no mechanism for commenting on a trivia entry, so I will address it here in the review section.

One trivia entry for this episode states that James Arness once described a situation in which his stunt double, Ben Bates, was hospitalized for two days following the filming of scenes in which the stunt double collapsed after multiple takes of running through snow. The writer of the trivia entry stated that James Arness "did not specifically identify this episode, but it's the only one that would fit the description".

That's not true. There were also scenes of Marshall Dillon literally running through snow over a long distance on a moonlit night in the season 16 two-part episode called "Snow Train". Perhaps there were other such episodes as well, although I don't recall any at this time. If the stunt double collapsed from running through snow, I strongly suspect it would have occurred during the filming of "Snow Train", rather than "Matt Dillon Must Die".

As a matter of review, I would highly recommend this episode. The great Morgan Woodward was as outstanding as ever.

Gunsmoke: Alias Festus Haggen (1972) Season 17, Episode 23

Correction of what some reviewer called a "Goof"

[9/10 · 2 September 2021]

Some reviewer on this site called attention to a "Goof" that is, in fact, no goof. According to the reviewer, Frank Eaton's left holster should have been empty late in the episode because he was holding his pistol in his right hand. What that reviewer missed was that Eaton told his wife to take Festus's pistol. Eaton had his own gun drawn on Festus at this time. Susie took Festus's gun and handed it to Eaton who then placed it in his left holster. At this point Eaton is holding his own gun in his right hand and is carrying Festus's gun in his left holster. This was not a goof. Since one cannot respond with a comment in the "Goofs" section, I am commenting with the correction here.

Excellent episode.

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Gone (2006) Season 7, Episode 16

This episode belongs to Diane Neal.

[9/10 · 27 April 2021]

Which actress do I like better in the Assistant D. A. role, Stephanie March or Diane Neal? Both were outstanding, but I probably give the nod to Stephanie March by the absolute slimmest of margins.

And then I watch this episode and Diane Neal is exceptional.

Okay, it's a tie.

Also, I enjoyed Judith Light's limited but highly effective performance as the judge. This is a very strong courtroom episode.

There is one aspect of this episode that strikes me as rather unusual (the only reason why I deducted one star). A young woman is raped and murdered, although her body is never found. We the viewers are shown no visual evidence of the rape/murder, such as the body at the murder scene or at the medical examiner's office. Then, two of the young male defendants kidnap and murder the third young male defendant. There are no scenes of the kidnapping or the murder of the young man. We do see his body which is found in the next-to-last scene. That is the only scene in the entire episode in which we the viewers are shown any visual evidence that any criminal acts ever occurred during this episode. We only see the three young defendants presented in three different ways: either (1) on various surveillance camera footage the night the young lady from Toronto was last seen; or (2) being interrogated by the detectives with the boys' lawyers present; or (3) dressed up and sitting in court (or in the restaurant in the final scene) looking like choir boys. We never see them committing the criminal acts. We hear about the violent acts of these young men, but we never see either the criminal actions or the results (other than Jason's body being found near the end of the episode). When the two young men are arrested in the final scene, the whole thing seemed so sanitized to me that it didn't quite feel real.

Otherwise, the story and the courtroom drama were terrific!

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Taboo (2006) Season 7, Episode 14

Clarification of a previous reviewer's false claim of an inconsistency

[8/10 · 26 April 2021]

A previous reviewer said that Ella's step-mother told Detectives Munch and Finn that Ella's parents divorced when Ella was eight. That is inaccurate. Ella's step-mother told the two detectives that Ella's parents divorced when Ella was a baby. Eight - baby - they sort of rhyme, so I suppose the mistake is sort of understandable, even though I had no trouble understanding it myself. I was watching a DVR recording of this episode and rewound this scene and verified that the step-mother clearly (to my ears) said "baby", not "eight". The difference is significant. If Ella's parents had divorced when she was eight, she would have been old enough to have memories of her father. Since she was a baby at the time of the divorce, she would have no such memories since the divorced mother forbade contact between the father and Ella. Both Ella and her slimeball father claimed they did not know each other when they "met" after her 18th birthday. If the divorce had taken place when Ella was eight, they would have known each other to some extent and the plot line that they didn't know each other would have been false. I thought the reviewer's mistake should be noted so that her claim of an inconsistency is debunked.

Gunsmoke: The Wreckers (1967) Season 13, Episode 1

WHY did Kitty switch the identities of the two men??

[8/10 · 10 April 2021]

I'm giving away a bit of info about the first few minutes of the episode, but nothing else. Therefore, I'm not indicating a spoiler alert.

Did you see that stagecoach wreck?? End over end several times. No seatbelts (of course). Was that a survivable wreck? I'm not so sure. Those onboard the stagecoach should have been thrown around like rag dolls, probably breaking every bone in their bodies. Yet, all three occupants of the stagecoach survive, at least initially. I think it's very unusual that the one woman onboard is alert immediately after the wreck, while both big, strong men are unconscious. Not only is Kitty not either dead or, like the others, unconscious, she is alert enough to switch the identities of Matt and his prisoner. But, WHY did she do that? She could not have known that the accident was planned. And even though she could hear men approaching, she could not have known who they were or their intentions. Even if she thought the arriving party was there to rescue Matt's prisoner, why would she think that those in the party would not recognize the prisoner, which would foil her attempt to switch their identities? I don't think there is any plausible explanation for why Kitty switched their identities, other than it was necessary for the sake of the plot.

Otherwise, this was a terrific episode that features the great actor Warren Oates, who happens to be from my neck of the woods in Muhlenberg County, Kentucky.

Gunsmoke: The Prodigal (1967) Season 13, Episode 3

The boys should have been told early on

[7/10 · 10 April 2021]

Much is positive about this episode, including a suspenseful story and terrific acting. But, I have to disagree with the general premise of the plot. In my mind the two grandsons were entitled to know who killed their dad. I can understand them not being told at the time their dad was killed since they were so young. But, they should have been told the truth by the time they were adults. In my opinion Marshall Dillon should have known that trouble would occur as the result of their not knowing the truth. There was trouble, however, and it was very much avoidable. Of course, if the young men had been told the truth when they first arrived in Dodge at the beginning of the episode (as they should have been), there would have been no story that would make for an interesting episode. So, we got an interesting story, but one that is very flawed.

Gunsmoke: Malachi (1965) Season 11, Episode 9

Primary plot is similar to a previous episode

[8/10 · 3 February 2021]

Malachi Harper hasn't seen his brother, Ethan, in 35 years. Malachi drinks away all the money he makes from selling buffalo hides, whereas Ethan is a non-drinking businessman from Baltimore. The two brothers occasionally write letters to one another. Rather than tell his brother the truth regarding his chosen profession, Malachi has written to Ethan that he (Malachi) is the U.S. Marshall in Dodge City. Then, Malachi receives a letter from Ethan in which Ethan states that he will be stopping in Dodge for a few hours while traveling to San Francisco on a business trip. With Marshall Dillon out of town for a few days, Malachi's good friend, Festus, decides it would be a good idea for Malachi to pretend to be the marshall during Ethan's brief visit. Of course, we know this won't go well.

This plot is similar to that of Season 4 - Episode 18 entitled "Marshall Proudfoot". In that episode Chester has written to a relative that he (Chester) is the marshall of Dodge. Then, when that relative comes to town, Chester - like Malachi - pretends to be the marshall while Matt goes along with the charade. And yes, that episode also has unforeseen consequences.

Gunsmoke: Run, Sheep, Run (1965) Season 10, Episode 16

Ending Doesn't Make Sense

[31 December 2020]

This was a decent episode until the end. My wife and I watched it and were both confused by the surprise twist at the end. The surprise twist was that Tom Stocker, according to Marshall Dillon, killed a man that Tom and Mary encountered approximately two-thirds of the way through the episode. The reason why my wife and I were both confused is because it did not appear to us that Tom shot the man. We recorded this episode on DVR and rewatched that scene. The man whom Tom allegedly killed was chasing Tom with a bucket. Tom got on his horse to ride away. As Tom begins to ride away, the man appears to trip and fall while running toward Tom with the bucket. Tom turns around on the horse and fires a warning shot or two at the man, but the shot(s) do not appear to hit the man. The man is seen lying on the ground looking up at Tom as the shots are fired and the man does not appear to be hit. Therefore, it was a complete surprise to us when we learned at the end of the episode that Tom had killed the man.

The ending was obviously intended to be irony - that Tom did not murder Braeden early in the episode (the reason why Tom spends the rest of the episode on the run), but must now stand trial for another murder that occurred later while he was on the run. The ending would have worked if the murder victim would have appeared to have been shot.

Gunsmoke: Mayblossom (1964) Season 9, Episode 20

Excellent episode despite MAJOR flaws

[7/10 · 24 November 2020]

**Spoiler Alert**

I like these early Festus episodes. Nine seasons into this legendary TV series, I find it very interesting to see this new major character taking shape.

Laurie Peters is excellent as Mayblossom, Festus's "cousin once removed". She would have been a nice recurring character, but that did not happen.

Mayblossom was raped by Lon during the second half of the episode. The word "rape" would not have been uttered on scripted network television when this episode initially aired in 1964. I agree with at least one other reviewer of this episode who said that both Doc and Matt treated this event much lighter than was warranted. I don't think 1964 network television had a clue as to how to treat this topic in an appropriate manner.

What came next in the storyline was perhaps even worse. Festus went after Lon and killed him in cold blood. Shot him twice. Marshall Dillon happened to be riding nearby, heard the shots, and saw Festus leaving the scene of the shooting. Matt asked Festus if he had killed Lon. Festus said that he did. We then see Lon lying dead with his gun still in its holster. The shooting was most obviously not self-defense.

If anyone other than a series regular had committed this cold-blooded murder, Matt would have arrested the person on the spot. But, in the very next scene we see Festus going about life as a free man with the marshall nowhere in sight. It appeared to me that the whole incident was simply being dropped.

Then, just before the episode ends we learn that the marshall allowed Festus to go free temporarily so as not to upset Mayblossom. In the final scene we see Mayblossom leaving town with her newly-betrothed. As soon as those two are on their way, Matt tells Festus that he (Festus) will have to be arrested for Lon's murder. Very surprisingly, both Doc and Matt tell Festus that they don't think there is any way that, given the circumstances, a jury in Dodge would convict Festus of murder. The episode ends with Festus entering the jail cell. We don't have to see what happens in the trial to know that Festus is not convicted.

Both the rape and the cold-blooded revenge killing are treated with about as much seriousness as if someone had stolen a couple of dollars worth of candy from the general store. I found this very disappointing.

Both of these events occur rather late in the episode. By that time I was already drawn in, and I actually found this episode to be very entertaining. Had the rape and murder been handled in a more appropriate manner, I would have rated this episode with nine stars. I am deducting two additional stars due to the careless writing during the final 15 to 20 minutes of the episode.

Gunsmoke: Friend (1964) Season 9, Episode 17

A mistake in the story

[8/10 · 20 November 2020]

After watching this episode I realized that, unless I missed something, there was a flaw in the story. The boy, Runt, claimed that he saw Frank Gore carrying Judd's lifeless body immediately after the two fought. Given that it was Frank who was buried in Judd's grave, isn't it much more likely that Runt would have seen Judd carrying Frank's body? Since Runt and Judd were close friends, I find it highly unlikely that Runt would have been mistaken about who was carrying whom. I also find it highly unlikely that Runt saw the event clearly, but that Judd later recovered and was immediately able to kill and bury Frank.

Otherwise, I enjoyed this episode very much.

Gunsmoke: Ash (1963) Season 8, Episode 23

Good story; terrific character-acting!

[9/10 · 13 October 2020]

One of the great things about watching Gunsmoke is seeing the outstanding character actors/actresses who make guest appearances on the show. This episode has an all-star lineup of guest stars: John Dehner, Anthony Caruso, Dee Hartford, and Adam West (whose screen time on this episode was far less than I would have liked). Other reviewers of this episode talk about the storyline. I simply want to say that Anthony Caruso's and John Dehner's performances are first-rate (as if that's a surprise). I would probably give this episode a rating of 8 stars based on the script, but I'm raising my rating to 9 stars because of the performances of Mr. Dehner and Mr. Caruso, two of the greats of their era.

Gunsmoke: I Thee Wed (1960) Season 5, Episode 31

The rest of the story??

[10/10 · 16 July 2020]

****Spoiler Alert****

This is not so much a review as it is a guess as to what happened after the onscreen story ended.

We saw Hester shoot and kill her abusive husband, Sam. Then, we saw Marshall Dillon escort her back to his office. Even though it is not spoken, the implication seems to be that Hester will be arrested for murder.

I'm not so sure that's what happened. No one was present to hear the final conversation between Hester and Sam that led to the killing. In fact, it could be believed by the law that Hester bailed Sam out of jail for the purpose of killing him herself. But, we the tv audience saw what happened. Despite Hester's attempt to be kind to Sam, he made serious threats against her all the way to the end. He also took (basically stole) her money pouch near the end. When she took the gun, he made a move toward her. It is very clear to me that she shot him in self-defense. Can she prove it was self-defense, rather than a planned killing? I think so. Hester's money pouch was still on Sam's body as he lay dead on the sidewalk. Sam's main interest at the time he died was in whatever money still remained from the sale of the broach and the bail payment. Given his despicable behavior all the way up until the time he was released from jail as well as his possession of the money pouch (which demonstrates how little gratitude he had for Hester's sacrifice), there should be enough evidence - even if some of it is circumstantial - to provide reasonable doubt in a court of law that Hester planned this to be a murder.

My guess is that after Marshall Dillon takes Hester back to his office and listens to her story, she would be released. I thought this was an excellent episode, and especially hard-hitting (no pun intended) at the time of its original airing.

Gunsmoke: The Coward (1959) Season 4, Episode 26

Huge flaw in the writing of this episode imho

[3/10 · 20 June 2020]

Spoiler Alert!!!!!!!!!!

I am a big fan of Gunsmoke. I enjoyed certain elements of this episode, such as Marshall Dillon's confrontation with Ed Seby (played by Barry Atwater) near the end of the episode. I also think the acting in this episode was top-notch by everyone. But, I have one rather huge problem with this episode. Yes, it was Seby's talk around town that set into motion others attempting to kill the marshall. But, it was not Seby's bullet that killed Jack Massey (played by James Beck) barely five minutes into the episode. When all is said and done, a murder was committed in Marshall Dillon's office - of all places - and the murderer is never identified, much less brought to justice. This is, in my opinion, a huge flaw in the writing of this episode.

Gunsmoke: Letter of the Law (1958) Season 4, Episode 5

Effective Law Enforcement in the Old West

[8/10 · 8 June 2020]

This episode is all about the letter of the law versus the original intent of the laws on the books, and subsequently how the law should be enforced.

Teek (a former gunman who no longer carries a gun due to a promise he made to his wife when they got married) and his pregnant wife, Sarah, have built a home and a farm on a piece of land near Dodge. Their labor has been hard and is far from done, but they appear to be up to the task of making it work. Matt receives a court order from Judge Rambeau of Wichita to evict the Teeks from the property because Teek failed to register the deed within 90 days. Matt knows that enforcing this eviction may result in Teek carrying his gun again and using it in revenge. Since Teek has established himself as a reformed gunman, and since Teek and Sarah are honest, hard-working folks whose only transgression is a clerical error, and since Sarah is pregnant, Matt chooses to not immediately enforce the eviction. Clifton James, an excellent character actor, seems a not-so-wise casting choice to play a former gunman. I'm deducting one star for this casting choice.

Matt goes to Wichita and has a conversation with Judge Rambeau and Lee Sprague (a citizen of Dodge City who stands to gain the land after the Teeks are evicted). Judge Rambeau states that the law leaves no room for emotion, while Matt explains that some flexibility is in order in the West where the law is still rather new.

Judge Rambeau sends his flunky Deputy Haley to Dodge to carry out the eviction notice. This is where we see the rubber meet the road in terms of the principle characters' differing approaches to law enforcement. First, Haley is now outside his jurisdiction. Since Haley was sent by Judge Rambeau, the judge has failed to follow the letter of the law by sending Haley to execute this court order. During the confrontation between Haley and Teek, Haley roughly shoves the pregnant Sarah to the ground. Matt, who arrives with Chester just as this confrontation begins, backhands Haley to the ground and ends the confrontation. Matt sends Chester back to Dodge to bring Doc to provide medical attention for Sarah. Doc eventually informs everyone that Sarah will be okay after she recovers, but the unborn child has not survived.

Teek is very relieved to learn that Sarah will be okay. But, he then becomes angry that Haley's brutality with Sarah has resulted in the death of their unborn child. In a CLASSIC Marshall Dillon move, the marshall intentionally turns his back as Teek deals with Haley. Teek didn't kill Haley and, no doubt, Matt wouldn't have allowed that to happen. But, this scene was an outstanding example of Marshall Dillon exercising some law enforcement flexibility and allowing for a little frontier justice. Cudos to director Richard Whorf for the composition of this scene in which Matt's back was in the center of view as Teek deals with Haley.

Teek and Sarah are ultimately allowed to keep their land. As other reviewers have stated, the ending scene was less than satisfying. So, I'm deducting a second star for that. Otherwise, this was an excellent episode.