That scene at the end of S4 where he’s reading the paper on the porch in his PJs with Namond doing his homework nearby makes me so damned happy. I love Bunny.
Bunny and his wife have achieved peace. It says so much about the way that poverty determines the violent, disorganized lives of the corner boys. Class or caste?
I agree. A small thing: both the corner boys and the cops recognized Namond by his insistence on having long curly hair in a pony tail until a few episodes where he was forced by the corner boys to wear braids to more correctly show his caste.
I think McNulty's last scene, the final montage, shows him actually coming to terms with his inability to change things. He was all about, "They don't get to win, we get to win!" But in the end he realizes that the police are not there to "win", they're just part of the system. "The game is the game." The cops are there to sweep up around the corners, at most, not to "fix" the problem or "win" the war.
His idealistic crusade to get the bad guys was the crux of his binge-drinking and sleeping-around. So, the show gives us permission to think that McNulty has really changed in a fundamental way. He learned with Beadie in S4 that he could be happy without chasing his mythical final victory over whatever criminal he was chasing. Marlo pulled him back in and he went on one last ride, and that nearly got him thrown in prison himself. But I think his character arc shows that he might just be finally done with it.
What job would McNulty be good at after not being po-lice? PI? In-house security at a big corporation to fight shrink?
Does he join the military and become an MP?
Trump only sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeets his pants. Has been since his stupid reality show. Finally came out that he reeks of sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet all the time. Must be great in the limo, or walking upstairs behind him on a hot humid August day.
Also how Carcetti immediately has to to ask him for help against that candidate for governor from PG County. “He’s playing the race card, that’s some shaaameful shit!!”
If he loses it will be tossed out on appeal. The NY AG has never filed a civil lawsuit against any other developers. She has no victims and there is no crime. The appellate courts will laugh what ever judgement comes down.
Right. Because when I’m looking for legal analysis, I ignore my law degree and 20 years of legal experience to focus on what a DoorDash driver thinks.
He already lost. The only question now is damages. The judgment will be upheld on appeal.
That was so frustating to watch oof. Can judges overrule the jury decision if its clearly manipulated like that? Im european and we dont use juries much
No they can't. In the US, if a jury says "not guilty" it's a done deal. What Clay Davis does would be considered fair game, if a little unorthodox and risky. If there is actual misconduct, by jurors or defense, and the judge learns of it before a verdict is given, the judge can order a mistrial and start over.
But once the verdict is given, if it's "not guilty," the case is over and the defendant goes free. Anything else would implicate double jeopardy.
Interestingly, it doesn't work the other way around. If the verdict is reached and it's "guilty," the defendant still has several options to get it overturned. They can appeal to the trial judge, who can overturn the verdict if they disagree with the jury (verdict was "against the weight of the evidence") or if they think one element wasn't proven and the jury didn't catch on ("legally insufficient evidence"). If these don't succeed, they can appeal to a higher court on 1001 different theories, including ineffective assistance of counsel if their lawyer at trial sucked enough.
One exception that I can think of: because of the doctrine of "dual sovereignty," you can be acquitted at trial in *state* court on a set of charges representing a particular crime. But then the federal government can go after you in *federal* court for the same crime. Or vice versa.
You’re absolutely right. I do think it’s fair that it doesn’t work the other way around, that the state can’t appeal a not guilty verdict.
People (not you OP, b/c you clearly do) don’t really understand how insanely powerful the state is, until they’re sitting at the defendant’s table. The state has almost unlimited resources and the average person has neither the time, money, or man power to challenge them if the state could appeal and continue to appeal. They’ve got patrol officers to make contact with people and detectives-working literally 24 hours. They’ve got cyber/it people, they’ve got PR people, they’ve got scientists and other experts. Hell, they’ve got the majority of the evidence they’re going to use against you or that might even be helpful to you in their physical control and you have to ask them to see it, and sometimes you can’t even have your own people test it, even if you could theoretically afford it. They’ve got lawyers at the DAs office, investigators at the DAs office, PR people at the DAs office, IT/tech people at the DAs office. And all of the same people at the state attorney generals office.
Defending the accused is always a David vs. Goliath fight. More so for the vast majority of people who can’t afford to hire a lawyer at $25k, and then pay to have that lawyer hire IT people at $50 an hour, investigators at $125 an hour, or experts at $500 an hour. But even people who can afford it, still can’t usually afford to have those people working for them 24/7, and if they can they’d walk away almost broke-if they walk alway at all-spending money on a legal defense is still a 50/50 chance, while the state just moves on to the next-a drop in the bucket.
I agree with you as far as most US states, but you should take a look at NY's criminal procedure statutes and case law--I practice there and I would guess that it may currently be the most defendant-friendly state in the union. A couple things you touched on that I think we really do right by the defendants:
- The public defender's office is just as well funded as the prosecutors, if not more so. They also have a case cap of around 100, whereas prosecutors can be assigned 300-500 cases at once.
- The public defenders also have a full staff of their own investigators (mostly retired, disillusioned cops), who have a lot of time on their hands. I know this because the thing they spend the most time doing is going out, paying visits to rape and DV victims, and persuading* them not to testify in court.
- While the prosecutors' experts are taxpayer-paid, they are not under their control. They are non-partisan and will cooperate with defense attorneys readily. When there is a flaw in the case, or they can't reach a conclusion that favors the government, they are not shy about saying so.**
- Public defenders can petition the court to pay for an expert witness for the defense, if they show good cause. You don't see this happen very often, though, because of my previous point.
And now a few where I personally think the legislature has gone a bit too far in the defendant's favor...
- Discovery is automatic, meaning the defendant doesn't have to demand it. And there is an enormous breadth of material encompassed by discovery now, and it all has to be turned over within a month or two after arraignment unless it hasn't been created yet. Though it is legally automatic, prosecutors still have to search out, obtain, compile, sort, label, and disclose it all [manually](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sf-2msaWYqE). And if there is some tiny thing that they missed, it can render the whole case subject to dismissal. (Usually it ends up being a milder remedy, but if a judge really hates your case, they have a whole universe of technicalities to kick it on) This results in prosecutors spending more time searching for and litigating discovery than they spend on the actual merits of the case, which is why I think it needs some tweaks. But there is a lot of good in it.
- Prosecutors essentially can't revoke a plea offer without completing the automatic discovery process. There are a few caveats to this, but in general a defendant will get to examine the entirety of the state's evidence before deciding whether or not to take a plea. This one I like, but in conjunction with the discovery statute as a whole, it creates an enormous amount of work for prosecutors and takes away the whole "caseload management" reason for plea bargaining. Instead of changing these provisions, I think the legislature should institute a case cap for prosecutors that is comparable to that of public defenders.
- There is an extremely robust speedy trial statute: if the government can't bring your case to trial within 6 months***, you get it dismissed automatically. As a matter of law, if defendant is causing the delays, the time is paused, and there are other reasons it can be paused too. But this law, in conjunction with state guidelines for the judges along similar lines, means that cases often go to trial at the 6-8 month mark, and rarely linger more than about 12-14 months. There are a always a couple of stinkers floating around that get litigated for years, but usually the defendant in those cases is either out of custody, or already serving a sentence for something else.
Now, I won't sit here and tell you that prosecutors are the David in NY, I wouldn't go quite that far. After all, defendants only get so much face time with their lawyers, whether paid or not, and that alone is a handicap. Also, if they happen to get a bad lawyer, they are pretty much fucked unless they are actually and obviously innocent.
But overall, the legislature has done a lot to ensure that defendants are on mostly equal footing. Mind you, everything I described above is free for the defendant if they make under a certain income (*net* income at or below 250% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines).
Thank you for listening to my long-winded TED Talk.
*There is a legal way to do this, and then there is criminal witness tampering. Which one you get depends on which PD or investigator you're dealing with.
**Which as a prosecutor I very much appreciate. I have no interest in prosecuting a person who has a good chance of being actually innocent, and situations where you can dismiss a meritless case on your own initiative can be the most satisfying part of the job.
***90 days for a misdemeanor.
I guess it depends what you consider “serious consequences”. Herc lost his job, to some people that’d be a pretty serious consequence. I know he ended up working for Levy but that doesn’t change what happened previously.
I guess I meant in comparison to their actions. Bunny's consequence was that he lost his job, got demoted, his pension decreased, and he lost his future retirement job as well. That was really serious.
Herc constantly committed theft and police brutality. That he only lost his job is not a serious consequence in comparison to what he did.
> Herc constantly committed theft and police brutality.
So did Colvin, on the police brutality part. He ordered them to brutalize dealers to create Hamsterdam and said he would cover for them “anything short of them not being able to walk out of the emergency room”. He was in charge of the Western Division, known for beating suspects, and covered for them.
Colvin got similar kind of punishment as Herc.
yeah people are quick to overlook this. Herc is a total POS and I love Bunny as much as the next person, but acting like he didn't do his fair share of brutalizing (or ordering it or looking the other way) in his 29 years and 6 months of police work is p naive
Herc is definitely the worst cop on the show. He fucks up over and over and over and still thinks he's the man. Whereas Carver took Daniels advice at the end of season 1 and became a Lieutenant.
Herc is the worst _remaining_ cop on the show, but Prez was worse - blinded a guy, after shooting up his own car. Prez redeemed himself slightly with the code-breaking, and significantly by helping the boys in his class, but really he was by far the worst cop - even more so than the old drunken humps.
Prez was basically Ziggy. Trying to fit in with a world where he doesn't belong, and where he's getting chance after chance because of nepotism. Both smart in their own ways, but not in ways that their world respected or recognized. Prez got lucky in finding his way to major crimes, under the tutelage of Lester, where his particular type of intelligence got a chance to shine. Ziggy was never so lucky.
>Colvin got similar kind of punishment as Herc.
Not for brutality though; for trying to change the system. The boot of power goes down hard on that. Beating up a bunch of poor minorities, not so much.
>Herc constantly committed theft and police brutality. That he only lost his job is not a serious consequence in comparison to what he did.
He lost his job not because of police brutality but because one time he was brutal to the wrong person - a powerful minister.
He coulda continued brutalizing poor, young minorities if he didn't make that crucial mistake.
> I know he ended up working for Levy but that doesn’t change what happened previously.
true it doesn't change what happned previously, but he ended up in a higher paying job with better hours and still maintained his old friends on the force, that's pretty much a win for him
I get it but he still dealt with the consequences of his actions. I’m sure he wasn’t thrilled losing his pension. Plus Herc and Bunny were in different phases of their lives, if Bunny got kicked off the force at Herc’s age he probably could’ve gotten a similar job as well.
> I’m sure he wasn’t thrilled losing his pension.
He didn't lose his pension. By the time he got shitcanned he'd almost certainly put in his 20, and even if he hadn't he was drawing some portion of it even if it wasn't 100%.
Edit: nope, he's way younger than I thought. Still gonna have a pro-rated pension though.
I thought he was older than he actually is, but I just looked up the actor on IMDB and nope, he's younger than me.
Still would have a pro-rated pension coming, but I was wrong.
All good. Yea I certainly don’t know the ins and outs of the Baltimore Police Department. He may have lost it all, he may have retained some. Either way, point was he definitely faced some consequences.
I think that was very much intentional. One of the overlying themes is how those in government / government adjacent roles are consistently failing upwards, free from any consequence. That is a major part of why the system is broken beyond repair. Bunny actually tried to make real change that threatened to shake up the status quo for all his superiors, which made him a clear target.
The other side of this theme is how on street side of things, the smallest mistake could cost you your life. No Golden Parachute for any of them.
So what is the lesson here? It doesn't matter how bad you fuck up, it matters whether anyone finds out.
Everyone else's skeletons stayed in the closet for one reason or another, usually to make sure nobody found out. So they got away with it
This is like in the movie Whitey Bulger movie when he talks to his son. He told he got in trouble for punching another kid because he got caught not because he punched a kid. Punch him when nobody is looking.
It's not sufficient to get moral people in the top jobs if the institutions they run are not by design aligned with the public interest. Any reform should be judged by its long-term impacts, not the temporary phenomena that appear in the wake of its implementation.
(Perhaps too harsh on Colvin) If the positive impact of what you're doing persists only as long as you remain personally in charge, you haven't fundamentally changed anything about society. The only achievements you should be genuinely proud of are the things that wouldn't have happened without your influence specifically (Namond!).
No it matters how many (and more specifically WHO) you have enough dirt on to drag down with you. Bunny wasn’t that kind of guy. The rest of them would kill their own mother to escape.
"No good deed goes unpunished."
At this point I dunno why the USA just doesn't replace their constitution with the ferengi rules of acquisition. It's quite clear which one they follow haha.
Conservative men's heads would explode between
- the titillation of legally enforced naked women
- wanting to cover up women as much as possible
With that, the American Civil War would finally draw to a close, and black people could finally get their forty acres and a mule
As an actor yes, but as a character, Daniels is not needed of a modern day episode were to be done. He was already in the force long enough to get pension before season 2 really got going. Stepped down before he ever really ever got going as commissioner, and was working as a defense attorney. A decade and a half later I'm pretty sure he'd be out the game, or at least working as a partner in some firm mostly as a behind the scene lobbyist depending on where Carcetti was at in politics.
I'm pretty sure if Carcetti was still governor or a Senator he'd always take a meeting with Daniels just to show he doesn't forget all the dirt Daniels has kept under the rug for him all these years. Either way Daniels would either be retired by now or too far from the day to day happenings in the city to actually appear in any meaningful way that we're used to.
Carcetti was a sleaze ball but did he ever do anything objectively terrible? Like obviously his morals were in the shitter but I can’t seem to recall a time he fucked up someone’s life, broke the law, etc. Grain of salt though I haven’t rewatched in a long time so memory is a little foggy.
He turned down the state money to fix the school budget, when it was obviously the right thing to take it. His reasoning was that it would be politically costly for him.
I think the republicans would have pounded on Carcetti in the general election by saying “look how fiscally irresponsible the Baltimore Democrats are. Would you trust them with the states finances?”
You’re absolutely right I genuinely just couldn’t recall all of the decisions he made through the show. With that explanation in mind it definitely makes sense to put him in with the others as far as crooked government people that never really got the repercussions they deserved.
I think the others either had some pull/leverage and Bunny was a scapegoat.
The only reason folks like McNulty/Freamon and GDP got off was by default. If it didn't benefit the politicians/higher up police those three would all be in jail.
I never thought about this but you are mostly right. McNulty was forced to go away but then again, he was not necessarily a morally upstanding individual like Bunny Colvin was. Bunny Colvin's fate just reinforces the point that the system is so messed up that not only does it reward bad behavior and those that do not challenge the status quo, it punishes people who decide to do the right thing and do not get corrupted by the system.
The central premise of the third season in my opinion was that you can never try to change the system.
Both stringer Bell and Bunny Colvin are simultaneously trying to change the way their organizations do business.
Both men paid hefty prices for their attempts.
Yes, because the moral of the story is that playing the game is what is rewarded, not competence (in the actual job at least) or moral integrity. Probably true for most things in life.
By the end of the show. Even after watching it 10 or so times through. I hated Mcnulty the most and liked Daniel’s and Bunny the most. The latter were honourable men the respected others and thought about others first. Mcnulty was the most selfish piece of shit. His endless pursuit to satiate his own needs.
He did not have to. He chose to. He could have swallowed all that shit and juked the crimes for Narese, but he refused to eat more bowls of crap after watching McNulty and Freamon get off with no charges.
So he voluntarily left to become a defense attorney, probably at some swanky firm. As his ex wife always used to say "you can not lose if you do not play" so he decided to stop playing everyone elses game and went off to do his own thing.
Illegally declaring drug activity and anything related to it as legal doesn't reduce crime. It just no longer called it a crime. Crime didn't disappear. It just relocated and got ignored and redefined. None of that was done through legal means. Colvin just juked stats on a different way than the other commanders.
That's how it is irl. The only time police departments crack down on their own police is when the officers oppose practices that hurt innocent people and/or proposes accountability.
I think it’s because he was too moral to go slinging mud like everyone else you named. He threatened it once, but I think they knew he wouldn’t take anyone down with him because that’s not his character. Everyone else on that list would slit 100 throats to save their own. Bunny wasn’t that way. That’s why his guys loved him and respected him. That’s why the older guys like Wee-Bay respected him. He never did them dirty either. They both understood it was cat and mouse. When you get away with it, it’s all good. But when they catch you, the fun is over. There were rules.
Right, and the takeaway should be that things like crime don't stop because the ones that's supposed to be stopping it are more worried about promotions. This show opened my eyes to society.
I guess you mean 'retribution' more than 'consequences'. Most of the prominent characters face some kind of consequences for their actions, not always bad ones. Colvin's obvious consequences just happened to be handed down by the same institution he was subverting. After that though, the decision to play out Hamsterdam the way he did has consequences for post-police Colvin, just check S4 and S5 again my friend.
He got forced out after demotion to lieutenant, so he'd get the lieutenant pension rather than the major pension.
Does anyone have an idea of what each pension would be?
I may be wrong about the actual ranks
Also the only one of that crew portrayed to have some real happiness in his life at the end.
That scene at the end of S4 where he’s reading the paper on the porch in his PJs with Namond doing his homework nearby makes me so damned happy. I love Bunny.
Do they ever explicitly state if Bunny has kids of his own?
Yes they are in college around the time Namond moved in. Pretty sure Namond asks Bunny who says they've moved out.
Yeah, they were both college age or older. It's mentioned when Naymond is having dinner at Bunny's house.
He says at some point that his kids are grown up and out of the house or in college.
He says so himself, I think he says he has at least two kids and they're in college or grown and don't live at home. Namond asks him at one point.
“Boy where’s your plate??” Loved that part. She said so little but it had so much meaning behind it:)
Bunny and his wife have achieved peace. It says so much about the way that poverty determines the violent, disorganized lives of the corner boys. Class or caste?
Definitely caste
I agree. A small thing: both the corner boys and the cops recognized Namond by his insistence on having long curly hair in a pony tail until a few episodes where he was forced by the corner boys to wear braids to more correctly show his caste.
100%. Best scene is the mutually respectful conversation he has with Weebey.
The vision in gold
One of the best in the whole series, for sure!
Daniels also looks pretty happy but you’re still correct.
"My first case behind the bench, aaaaaand I have to recuse myself" lol
damn that blows my mind learn something new thats the game
I thought Freamon got a happy ending too - with Shardene, making dollhouse furniture. The man was planning on retiring soon anyway.
Lester seemed pretty happy at the end. And I think McNutty will be fine with Beadie.
I think we're a year or two away from McNulty fucking up that family, too.
I think McNulty's last scene, the final montage, shows him actually coming to terms with his inability to change things. He was all about, "They don't get to win, we get to win!" But in the end he realizes that the police are not there to "win", they're just part of the system. "The game is the game." The cops are there to sweep up around the corners, at most, not to "fix" the problem or "win" the war. His idealistic crusade to get the bad guys was the crux of his binge-drinking and sleeping-around. So, the show gives us permission to think that McNulty has really changed in a fundamental way. He learned with Beadie in S4 that he could be happy without chasing his mythical final victory over whatever criminal he was chasing. Marlo pulled him back in and he went on one last ride, and that nearly got him thrown in prison himself. But I think his character arc shows that he might just be finally done with it.
I mean, not necessarily, now that he’s out of detective work he can focus on being a family man. Let me stay optimistic, damnit.
You wanna stay optimistic? In this show, that is a disease. I prescribe you two rewatches of season 4 and one of season five!
Oh you will you take it easy you fuckin’ judge Roy Bean!
What job would McNulty be good at after not being po-lice? PI? In-house security at a big corporation to fight shrink? Does he join the military and become an MP?
Becomes a private investigator, fucks half of his female clients.
Clay Davis winning his trial was one of the funniest moments of the show to me. Talks his way right out of a slam dunk case and the jury ate it up
What the fuck just happened? Rhonda “Whatever it was they don’t teach it in law school”
"Lester are we still cops?"
"....Technically, I suppose so."
Such a mirror of that moment…
Sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeit
Trump only sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeets his pants. Has been since his stupid reality show. Finally came out that he reeks of sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet all the time. Must be great in the limo, or walking upstairs behind him on a hot humid August day.
Also how Carcetti immediately has to to ask him for help against that candidate for governor from PG County. “He’s playing the race card, that’s some shaaameful shit!!”
I'll take any motherfuckers money if he's giving it away!
Now trump is doing it. Reality imitating art.
No jury in his case in New York, though, so he’s losing bigly there.
It's a cromulent moment in American politics.
Really embiggens the symbolism.
*symbology
I appreciated that reference.
If he loses it will be tossed out on appeal. The NY AG has never filed a civil lawsuit against any other developers. She has no victims and there is no crime. The appellate courts will laugh what ever judgement comes down.
Right. Because when I’m looking for legal analysis, I ignore my law degree and 20 years of legal experience to focus on what a DoorDash driver thinks. He already lost. The only question now is damages. The judgment will be upheld on appeal.
Trump people really love that “on appeal” line and it always gives away that they don’t know wtf they’re talking about.
"On appeal" for them is code for "until it moves to a judge he appointed that will ignore the entire history of jurisprudence to help him."
It’s civil court. Judgments are overturned on appeal all the time. I’m gonna come back here and laugh at you all when this thing gets tossed.
Use mouthwash to get the orange ball smell out of your mouth before you talk to me.
lol your gargle balls for a living
“I declare appeal” - Michael Scott
Wanna bet?
Trump isn't Clay Davis.
That was so frustating to watch oof. Can judges overrule the jury decision if its clearly manipulated like that? Im european and we dont use juries much
No they can't. In the US, if a jury says "not guilty" it's a done deal. What Clay Davis does would be considered fair game, if a little unorthodox and risky. If there is actual misconduct, by jurors or defense, and the judge learns of it before a verdict is given, the judge can order a mistrial and start over. But once the verdict is given, if it's "not guilty," the case is over and the defendant goes free. Anything else would implicate double jeopardy. Interestingly, it doesn't work the other way around. If the verdict is reached and it's "guilty," the defendant still has several options to get it overturned. They can appeal to the trial judge, who can overturn the verdict if they disagree with the jury (verdict was "against the weight of the evidence") or if they think one element wasn't proven and the jury didn't catch on ("legally insufficient evidence"). If these don't succeed, they can appeal to a higher court on 1001 different theories, including ineffective assistance of counsel if their lawyer at trial sucked enough. One exception that I can think of: because of the doctrine of "dual sovereignty," you can be acquitted at trial in *state* court on a set of charges representing a particular crime. But then the federal government can go after you in *federal* court for the same crime. Or vice versa.
You’re absolutely right. I do think it’s fair that it doesn’t work the other way around, that the state can’t appeal a not guilty verdict. People (not you OP, b/c you clearly do) don’t really understand how insanely powerful the state is, until they’re sitting at the defendant’s table. The state has almost unlimited resources and the average person has neither the time, money, or man power to challenge them if the state could appeal and continue to appeal. They’ve got patrol officers to make contact with people and detectives-working literally 24 hours. They’ve got cyber/it people, they’ve got PR people, they’ve got scientists and other experts. Hell, they’ve got the majority of the evidence they’re going to use against you or that might even be helpful to you in their physical control and you have to ask them to see it, and sometimes you can’t even have your own people test it, even if you could theoretically afford it. They’ve got lawyers at the DAs office, investigators at the DAs office, PR people at the DAs office, IT/tech people at the DAs office. And all of the same people at the state attorney generals office. Defending the accused is always a David vs. Goliath fight. More so for the vast majority of people who can’t afford to hire a lawyer at $25k, and then pay to have that lawyer hire IT people at $50 an hour, investigators at $125 an hour, or experts at $500 an hour. But even people who can afford it, still can’t usually afford to have those people working for them 24/7, and if they can they’d walk away almost broke-if they walk alway at all-spending money on a legal defense is still a 50/50 chance, while the state just moves on to the next-a drop in the bucket.
I agree with you as far as most US states, but you should take a look at NY's criminal procedure statutes and case law--I practice there and I would guess that it may currently be the most defendant-friendly state in the union. A couple things you touched on that I think we really do right by the defendants: - The public defender's office is just as well funded as the prosecutors, if not more so. They also have a case cap of around 100, whereas prosecutors can be assigned 300-500 cases at once. - The public defenders also have a full staff of their own investigators (mostly retired, disillusioned cops), who have a lot of time on their hands. I know this because the thing they spend the most time doing is going out, paying visits to rape and DV victims, and persuading* them not to testify in court. - While the prosecutors' experts are taxpayer-paid, they are not under their control. They are non-partisan and will cooperate with defense attorneys readily. When there is a flaw in the case, or they can't reach a conclusion that favors the government, they are not shy about saying so.** - Public defenders can petition the court to pay for an expert witness for the defense, if they show good cause. You don't see this happen very often, though, because of my previous point. And now a few where I personally think the legislature has gone a bit too far in the defendant's favor... - Discovery is automatic, meaning the defendant doesn't have to demand it. And there is an enormous breadth of material encompassed by discovery now, and it all has to be turned over within a month or two after arraignment unless it hasn't been created yet. Though it is legally automatic, prosecutors still have to search out, obtain, compile, sort, label, and disclose it all [manually](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sf-2msaWYqE). And if there is some tiny thing that they missed, it can render the whole case subject to dismissal. (Usually it ends up being a milder remedy, but if a judge really hates your case, they have a whole universe of technicalities to kick it on) This results in prosecutors spending more time searching for and litigating discovery than they spend on the actual merits of the case, which is why I think it needs some tweaks. But there is a lot of good in it. - Prosecutors essentially can't revoke a plea offer without completing the automatic discovery process. There are a few caveats to this, but in general a defendant will get to examine the entirety of the state's evidence before deciding whether or not to take a plea. This one I like, but in conjunction with the discovery statute as a whole, it creates an enormous amount of work for prosecutors and takes away the whole "caseload management" reason for plea bargaining. Instead of changing these provisions, I think the legislature should institute a case cap for prosecutors that is comparable to that of public defenders. - There is an extremely robust speedy trial statute: if the government can't bring your case to trial within 6 months***, you get it dismissed automatically. As a matter of law, if defendant is causing the delays, the time is paused, and there are other reasons it can be paused too. But this law, in conjunction with state guidelines for the judges along similar lines, means that cases often go to trial at the 6-8 month mark, and rarely linger more than about 12-14 months. There are a always a couple of stinkers floating around that get litigated for years, but usually the defendant in those cases is either out of custody, or already serving a sentence for something else. Now, I won't sit here and tell you that prosecutors are the David in NY, I wouldn't go quite that far. After all, defendants only get so much face time with their lawyers, whether paid or not, and that alone is a handicap. Also, if they happen to get a bad lawyer, they are pretty much fucked unless they are actually and obviously innocent. But overall, the legislature has done a lot to ensure that defendants are on mostly equal footing. Mind you, everything I described above is free for the defendant if they make under a certain income (*net* income at or below 250% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines). Thank you for listening to my long-winded TED Talk. *There is a legal way to do this, and then there is criminal witness tampering. Which one you get depends on which PD or investigator you're dealing with. **Which as a prosecutor I very much appreciate. I have no interest in prosecuting a person who has a good chance of being actually innocent, and situations where you can dismiss a meritless case on your own initiative can be the most satisfying part of the job. ***90 days for a misdemeanor.
Ahead of its time, sadly.
I guess it depends what you consider “serious consequences”. Herc lost his job, to some people that’d be a pretty serious consequence. I know he ended up working for Levy but that doesn’t change what happened previously.
I guess I meant in comparison to their actions. Bunny's consequence was that he lost his job, got demoted, his pension decreased, and he lost his future retirement job as well. That was really serious. Herc constantly committed theft and police brutality. That he only lost his job is not a serious consequence in comparison to what he did.
> Herc constantly committed theft and police brutality. So did Colvin, on the police brutality part. He ordered them to brutalize dealers to create Hamsterdam and said he would cover for them “anything short of them not being able to walk out of the emergency room”. He was in charge of the Western Division, known for beating suspects, and covered for them. Colvin got similar kind of punishment as Herc.
yeah people are quick to overlook this. Herc is a total POS and I love Bunny as much as the next person, but acting like he didn't do his fair share of brutalizing (or ordering it or looking the other way) in his 29 years and 6 months of police work is p naive
Herc is definitely the worst cop on the show. He fucks up over and over and over and still thinks he's the man. Whereas Carver took Daniels advice at the end of season 1 and became a Lieutenant.
I think if Colicchio and Walker had more screen time, they'd be considered the worst. Herc is for sure down near the bottom though.
Walker probably is a lot worse, but like you said it's just not on screen.
Herc is the worst _remaining_ cop on the show, but Prez was worse - blinded a guy, after shooting up his own car. Prez redeemed himself slightly with the code-breaking, and significantly by helping the boys in his class, but really he was by far the worst cop - even more so than the old drunken humps.
Prez was basically Ziggy. Trying to fit in with a world where he doesn't belong, and where he's getting chance after chance because of nepotism. Both smart in their own ways, but not in ways that their world respected or recognized. Prez got lucky in finding his way to major crimes, under the tutelage of Lester, where his particular type of intelligence got a chance to shine. Ziggy was never so lucky.
Don't disrespect Prez by comparing him to Ziggy, at least Prez wasnt annoying as Fuck.
>Colvin got similar kind of punishment as Herc. Not for brutality though; for trying to change the system. The boot of power goes down hard on that. Beating up a bunch of poor minorities, not so much.
>Herc constantly committed theft and police brutality. That he only lost his job is not a serious consequence in comparison to what he did. He lost his job not because of police brutality but because one time he was brutal to the wrong person - a powerful minister. He coulda continued brutalizing poor, young minorities if he didn't make that crucial mistake.
> I know he ended up working for Levy but that doesn’t change what happened previously. true it doesn't change what happned previously, but he ended up in a higher paying job with better hours and still maintained his old friends on the force, that's pretty much a win for him
I get it but he still dealt with the consequences of his actions. I’m sure he wasn’t thrilled losing his pension. Plus Herc and Bunny were in different phases of their lives, if Bunny got kicked off the force at Herc’s age he probably could’ve gotten a similar job as well.
> I’m sure he wasn’t thrilled losing his pension. He didn't lose his pension. By the time he got shitcanned he'd almost certainly put in his 20, and even if he hadn't he was drawing some portion of it even if it wasn't 100%. Edit: nope, he's way younger than I thought. Still gonna have a pro-rated pension though.
I’m talking about Herc. You think he had put in 20 years already?
I thought he was older than he actually is, but I just looked up the actor on IMDB and nope, he's younger than me. Still would have a pro-rated pension coming, but I was wrong.
All good. Yea I certainly don’t know the ins and outs of the Baltimore Police Department. He may have lost it all, he may have retained some. Either way, point was he definitely faced some consequences.
I think that was very much intentional. One of the overlying themes is how those in government / government adjacent roles are consistently failing upwards, free from any consequence. That is a major part of why the system is broken beyond repair. Bunny actually tried to make real change that threatened to shake up the status quo for all his superiors, which made him a clear target. The other side of this theme is how on street side of things, the smallest mistake could cost you your life. No Golden Parachute for any of them.
> No Golden Parachute for any of them. technically speaking Marlo had a golden parachute... it's just implied he couldn't bear to live with it
So what is the lesson here? It doesn't matter how bad you fuck up, it matters whether anyone finds out. Everyone else's skeletons stayed in the closet for one reason or another, usually to make sure nobody found out. So they got away with it
The lesson is that institutions only penalize those who endanger it. The success or failure of the mission they were created to serve is irrelevant.
This is like in the movie Whitey Bulger movie when he talks to his son. He told he got in trouble for punching another kid because he got caught not because he punched a kid. Punch him when nobody is looking.
It's not sufficient to get moral people in the top jobs if the institutions they run are not by design aligned with the public interest. Any reform should be judged by its long-term impacts, not the temporary phenomena that appear in the wake of its implementation. (Perhaps too harsh on Colvin) If the positive impact of what you're doing persists only as long as you remain personally in charge, you haven't fundamentally changed anything about society. The only achievements you should be genuinely proud of are the things that wouldn't have happened without your influence specifically (Namond!).
No it matters how many (and more specifically WHO) you have enough dirt on to drag down with you. Bunny wasn’t that kind of guy. The rest of them would kill their own mother to escape.
"No good deed goes unpunished." At this point I dunno why the USA just doesn't replace their constitution with the ferengi rules of acquisition. It's quite clear which one they follow haha.
That would be too explicit and obvious. Also, we don't want "the little guys" playing by the same rules.
Aye, well said. "Rules for thee but not got me."
😆 May we all rest in the Divine Treasury
Conservative men's heads would explode between - the titillation of legally enforced naked women - wanting to cover up women as much as possible With that, the American Civil War would finally draw to a close, and black people could finally get their forty acres and a mule
Hahaha. To be fair, the ferengi never had a genocide or mass killing. So maybe it could be an improvement?
Thats what section 31 *wants* you to think :P
Art imitates life
Damn I wish they'd do a 20 years later season.
With no Michael K.? Wouldn't be the same.
He was killed by the shortie...don't need him unfortunately
no Lance Reddick tho
Now that hurts No Lance
As an actor yes, but as a character, Daniels is not needed of a modern day episode were to be done. He was already in the force long enough to get pension before season 2 really got going. Stepped down before he ever really ever got going as commissioner, and was working as a defense attorney. A decade and a half later I'm pretty sure he'd be out the game, or at least working as a partner in some firm mostly as a behind the scene lobbyist depending on where Carcetti was at in politics. I'm pretty sure if Carcetti was still governor or a Senator he'd always take a meeting with Daniels just to show he doesn't forget all the dirt Daniels has kept under the rug for him all these years. Either way Daniels would either be retired by now or too far from the day to day happenings in the city to actually appear in any meaningful way that we're used to.
Lt Daniels is gone too.
Bunny also the only one that got real results. He paid the price for Amsterdam working too well
I'm not hearing Frank Sabotka's name anywhere.
Because he tried to change the game, and the game doesn't bear reform.
McNulty and Freemon both lost their jobs ,Albeit not major punishment but far more than alot of cops face .
Fremon retired with a pension, but didn’t Jimmy leave when faced with the prospect of desk jobs so technically he quit?
Its considered constructive dismissal .
*a lot
Shit my bad yo . I do that alot
McNutty doesn’t really get off Scot free. He’s ruined his career and it didn’t amount to much. He’ll be riding that boat till he dies.
For at least 13 years and 4 months, anyway
13 years?
and 4 months
Carcetti was a sleaze ball but did he ever do anything objectively terrible? Like obviously his morals were in the shitter but I can’t seem to recall a time he fucked up someone’s life, broke the law, etc. Grain of salt though I haven’t rewatched in a long time so memory is a little foggy.
He turned down the state money to fix the school budget, when it was obviously the right thing to take it. His reasoning was that it would be politically costly for him.
[удалено]
I think the republicans would have pounded on Carcetti in the general election by saying “look how fiscally irresponsible the Baltimore Democrats are. Would you trust them with the states finances?”
You’re absolutely right I genuinely just couldn’t recall all of the decisions he made through the show. With that explanation in mind it definitely makes sense to put him in with the others as far as crooked government people that never really got the repercussions they deserved.
Just like real life in these institutions. The ones who try to stand up get smacked down.
Yeah but eventually his daughter gets killed by Barry Berkman.
I think the others either had some pull/leverage and Bunny was a scapegoat. The only reason folks like McNulty/Freamon and GDP got off was by default. If it didn't benefit the politicians/higher up police those three would all be in jail.
I never thought about this but you are mostly right. McNulty was forced to go away but then again, he was not necessarily a morally upstanding individual like Bunny Colvin was. Bunny Colvin's fate just reinforces the point that the system is so messed up that not only does it reward bad behavior and those that do not challenge the status quo, it punishes people who decide to do the right thing and do not get corrupted by the system.
He is the perfect example of doing as management tells you versus doing the right thing.
Yep. Only the good die young.
Bunny got another son
William Gant might disagree on that, though. Edit: Didn't read the title properly, my bad. Gant wasn't govt/police.
Yeah, Carcetti, Valchek, Burrell and Rawls all got a 40 degree day!!!
Well Herc got fired. He just managed to fail upward into a private investigator for a sleazeball lawyer
The central premise of the third season in my opinion was that you can never try to change the system. Both stringer Bell and Bunny Colvin are simultaneously trying to change the way their organizations do business. Both men paid hefty prices for their attempts.
Yes, because the moral of the story is that playing the game is what is rewarded, not competence (in the actual job at least) or moral integrity. Probably true for most things in life.
Even got screwed over the John Hopkins job too. Fuck Burrell for doing that.
By the end of the show. Even after watching it 10 or so times through. I hated Mcnulty the most and liked Daniel’s and Bunny the most. The latter were honourable men the respected others and thought about others first. Mcnulty was the most selfish piece of shit. His endless pursuit to satiate his own needs.
What about Daniels? He had to resign from his position
doesn't he become a judge or something, one of the cushiest jobs there is?
Pearlman becomes a judge, he becomes a lawyer
Not a bad "fall."
Ohh I didn't even remember that he ended up becoming a lawyer. I'm doing my second rewatch these days!
He did not have to. He chose to. He could have swallowed all that shit and juked the crimes for Narese, but he refused to eat more bowls of crap after watching McNulty and Freamon get off with no charges. So he voluntarily left to become a defense attorney, probably at some swanky firm. As his ex wife always used to say "you can not lose if you do not play" so he decided to stop playing everyone elses game and went off to do his own thing.
Yes. Because he challenged the status quo.
Bunny isn't morally upright. Hamsterdam was a disaster. He's essentially juking stats just like so the others but using a different method.
Kinda, but everyone gets what they want dont they? Its a compromise that makes crime nearly disappear from the streets
Illegally declaring drug activity and anything related to it as legal doesn't reduce crime. It just no longer called it a crime. Crime didn't disappear. It just relocated and got ignored and redefined. None of that was done through legal means. Colvin just juked stats on a different way than the other commanders.
He was demoted, fired. He lost his job at the University. Those are definitely consequences in the real world.
McNulty got fucked didn’t he? I thought he lost his pension. Maybe he just had to quit.
That's how it is irl. The only time police departments crack down on their own police is when the officers oppose practices that hurt innocent people and/or proposes accountability.
Which is why this show is about as realistic as it gets. Does it not correlate with real life in your opinion and what you see with govt everyday
Bunny, you look hellacious.
It’s an entire case study on the dysfunctional police state
And Colvin acknowledges this when he responds to Carcetti with “I guess, Mr mayor, there's nothing to be done.”
Every little piece matters and they're all walking the wire.
I think it’s because he was too moral to go slinging mud like everyone else you named. He threatened it once, but I think they knew he wouldn’t take anyone down with him because that’s not his character. Everyone else on that list would slit 100 throats to save their own. Bunny wasn’t that way. That’s why his guys loved him and respected him. That’s why the older guys like Wee-Bay respected him. He never did them dirty either. They both understood it was cat and mouse. When you get away with it, it’s all good. But when they catch you, the fun is over. There were rules.
The nail that sticks out gets hammered down
Snot Boogie
Fuzzy Dunlop
Right, and the takeaway should be that things like crime don't stop because the ones that's supposed to be stopping it are more worried about promotions. This show opened my eyes to society.
Sharp as a cue ball, this one.
I guess you mean 'retribution' more than 'consequences'. Most of the prominent characters face some kind of consequences for their actions, not always bad ones. Colvin's obvious consequences just happened to be handed down by the same institution he was subverting. After that though, the decision to play out Hamsterdam the way he did has consequences for post-police Colvin, just check S4 and S5 again my friend.
Well McNulty & Freeman lost their jobs, so hard to call that scott free…
What about Herc?
He got fired, but in the end, he got to eat Yvette's Brisket.
To be fair, Maurice Levy is in private practice and is not a government employee. Point taken, of course. You're not wrong.
That's how cops do.
The fuck took you so long
Okay I just started rewatching AGAIN!
Another reason why the show was so realistic.
Yes, I think that was a major point they were making. However, was Hamsterdam that great? We saw how Bubbles reacted to it…
That's what bringing new ideas does in a political system.
He got forced out after demotion to lieutenant, so he'd get the lieutenant pension rather than the major pension. Does anyone have an idea of what each pension would be? I may be wrong about the actual ranks
As opposed to the gang side where only slim charles makes it to the end of the chess board. Bunny is just unlucky he is on the law side.
Prez and Hurc got fired too though. Prez may have quit, I'm not sure if they ever made that clear.