Self-defence or Murder? - Law & Order

[@spaghetti1641]

Really surprised McCoy didn't ask her why she introduced herself to the detectives who came to the house as Lisa's sister. That would have blown holes in her story. If she did nothing wrong why did she lie? How did she find out where Lisa lived to take Sophie before the cops arrived? Why did she confront Lisa at the hotel and not her home if it was just to talk? It was premeditated.

[@Debilitator47]

Yeah, watch the video on 'never talk to police'. Search it on youtube, it's a lawyer telling you why talking to police is NEVER going to help you and may in fact lead to innocent people being prosecuted. This country has a bad habit of incarcerating the innocent. And we all know this. So we lie to the police. It's not a good idea. The better idea is to shut up and call your lawyer, or a lawyer. Sadly most of us can't afford one. This system is broken by wealth and priviledge. As regards the actual story here, I wish this were a multi-part episode. Sometimes the 40-ish minute format isn't enough to really get into these stories and issues. A lot of L&O episodes are based on real crimes, with the names changed. I actually remember watching an A&E true crime episode, and then watching L&O and realizing it's literally the same story, just in a different place and different people, but the crime and investigation are enough the same. I'm not convinced it was premeditated, but I am in agreement that the woman killed her ex-partner, and not in self-defense. My read is that having failed, again, to remain a part of her daughter's life, that she in desperation killed Lisa, then lied to police, and absconded with the daughter. The deeper unstated message is that marriage and adoption equality should be for all, despite what preachercreatures would have us believe.

[@Treblaine]

Wow, that's smart and a perfect example why defendants should plead the 5th. McCoy went easy on her.

[@vickierickson4482]

@@Treblaine As the defendant she had no obligation to testify. Once she takes the stand; she must answer all questions.

[@papabumba478]

All of that is circumstantial though. She could have said she lied because she was scared. - it’s not uncommon for self defense victims to lie at first. She had looked up her address to go see her, when she got there she found out she was at a hotel at that time, so went to the hotel instead. - Seems reasonable to assume she’d have found her address before coming to New York because the last she heard the mother lived there, New York is a big place.

[@Treblaine]

​@@papabumba478 "She could have said she lied because she was scared." That doesn't exonerate her as that fits with the prosecution's theory, as a murderer would be afraid of the police. She claims to have acted in self-defense yet her refusing to call for help to save her when she could be dying (she had no way to know she was already dead) is proof of the mens rea that her goal was to kill, not simply to avoid being attacked and do the minimal harm to protect herself. "She had looked up her address to go see her, when she got there she found out she was at a hotel at that time, so went to the hotel instead." This doesn't actually matter to the case as they aren't trying to prove premeditated murder (first degree), it was clearly opportunistic as who could plan such circumstance. And taking the opportunity of her death to take her child shows a motive for the killing. It was certainly unjust that she was effectively the girl's parent yet the law had no means of recognising that, the solution is to change the law.

[@gideonjones8088]

"How could I abduct my own child? If anybody's guilty of kidnapping, it was Lisa." Uh... no? By your own logic she couldn't kidnap her own child if you couldn't. Not to mention she was the only one with legal custody, loophole or otherwise.

[@Deborahtunes]

Exactly...

[@Harry-bn5mp]

The dead partner did abduct their child. It was meant to be a formality. Sure she had the papers, but she had a moral obligation to share custody of their daughter.

[@Zaiaku666]

@@Harry-bn5mp Maybe, but a lot of times, moral obligation and legal obligation don't overlap.

[@t-rexcellentreviews1663]

@@Zaiaku666 people also have a habit of viewing themselves and the world around them in the manner which they wish to perceive themselves in, as far as the adoptive mother is concerned, she signed the papers as a single mother, so she is that little girls sole parent, her ex doesn’t have any rights to see her daughter and that’s that, it’s not true or fair, but that is how some people’s minds work.

[@jakdhalegutierrez3129]

@@Harry-bn5mp That depends on state law, sure now it has changed but back in those times when it came to same-gender parents if a child is involved. If a parent received the rights to be the child's sole parent and have sole custody then she/he has the right to deny the other partner's visitation because according to some of the states felt it was for the best. I forgot what episode and season but there was an episode on SVU that touched this topic a little bit.

[@yesterdayitrained]

She killed the little girl’s mother. How is that in her daughter’s “best interest”? The only “best interest” she is looking out for is her own.

[@RLucas3000]

She was also the little girl’s mother. She definitely killed her, but was it in self defense or not. Both sides agreed the woman was stinking drunk, so I’m more likely to think she was defending herself, considering how MOST are when drunk, than if she had been sober. If you are too drunk to legally drive, maybe you shouldn’t be picking a fight on an open air hi-rise balcony?

[@laurachavez8724]

@@RLucas3000I haven’t watched the whole episode, but from what I’ve seen of far, I think it’s more likely that she pushed her. Not all people are violent when they are drunk. I she confronted, they argued, Lisa might have said some hurtful things and then Renee pushed her. A person who is drunk is not very well coordinated, they don’t have good balance, and it would’ve been easy to grab her and push her in that state. Her actions after the incident speak volumes too.

[@MMuraseofSandvich]

"You took your child and ran! Yes or no!" The judge should have stopped her answer. McCoy was well within his rights to restrict her to yes or no answers.

[@RLucas3000]

It’s legal, but an awful strategy. When either does it, it comes across as the attorney trying to hide something from the jury, and no jury likes that.

[@aaronburgin1442]

I felt bad for her for losing her daughter, but that self defense story was a joke.

[@t-rexcellentreviews1663]

It was, I feel like more couples before having children need to consider the unpleasant possibility of what will happen should they break up or get divorced, speaking as a child of divorced parents myself, it always has an impact on the kids, always.

[@user-ig3oq7ty7m]

Her self defense fell off when she didn't call 911

[@t-rexcellentreviews1663]

@@user-ig3oq7ty7m yeah, it did.

[@josephbalan8384]

The woman was drunk and attacked! You can’t prove it wasn’t

[@t-rexcellentreviews1663]

@@josephbalan8384 fair point, but even if she didn’t push her ex partner, she still didn’t call 911

[@Panwere36]

The simple truth is that she committed murder in order to not have to deal with the reality she was not going to get custody.

[@Arjay404]

This defense is so preposterous. On the day of Lisa's death were you and her married? No For the time period of 2 years before the incident had you and Lisa spoken to each other? No On the day if Lisa's death, did she invite you to her apartment? No Did she invite you in when you showed up at her door? No When you noticed that Lisa was drunk, did you leave? No When she started arguing with you, did you leave? No When she started pushing you, did you attempt to leave? No When you as you describe it, accidentally caused her to fall of the balcony, did you call 911? No When you saw her laying there in the tree, did you go down to see if she was alive? No When the police came to Lisa's apartment, to which you were not invited, but in which you were now staying, did you tell them what happened? No When the police after having found her corpse stuck in a tree asked you if you were her sister, did you correct them and tell them you were her ex-wife? No When the police asked if Sophie's father was around did you tell them that you were Lisa's ex-wife? No When you told the police that the child was adopted did you tell the police that you were Lisa's ex-wife? No When the police were in Lisa's apartment to which you were not invite and Sophie called you mommy, did you tell the police that you were Lisa's ex-girlfriend/partner? When the police left did you at any time contact Lisa's parents to tell them that she was dead? No When the police left, did you stay at Lisa's apartment? No Did you take Sophie to Lisa's parents? No Have you at anytime had legal custody of Sophie? No Is it true that you and Lisa were divorced for 2 years on the day that Lisa died? Yes Is it true that on the day of Lisa's death you showed up at her door unannounced? Yes Is it true that you were not drunk or in any way under influence of mind altering chemicals? Yes Is it true that you got into an argument with Lisa who according to your own testimony was drunk? Yes Is it true that you didn't tell the police that you were Lisa's ex-wife when they asked you if you we're her sister? Yes Is it true that after the police had left that you took Sophie out of her home? Yes Is it true that when the police found you after you took Sophie out of her house that you were at a highway rest shop? Yes Is it true that Lisa had sole custody of Sophie? Yes Your honor, I rest my case. Even if the defense objects to some of my questions in the second section on grounds that the question was already asked and answered it doesn't matter, because even though the jury is supposed to disregard those questions and answers, they won't and I will have drilled those facts of the case into their head.

[@NeoFreshair]

Do you realise it's fictional crime drama and not real!!

[@maxcardun]

@@NeoFreshair Naw he's just waiting for 12 people with a reply of "GUILTY" but they're still in deliberation.

[@TheLegend1800]

"I guess I must have just pushed her back, cause then she just lost her balance and fell." What, did this balcony not have any barrier around it? I don't care how drunk you are, there's no way you can accidentally fall off a balcony from losing your balance. You need a hefty shove to get pushed over a balcony barrier. Never mind the whole "there's no way a person would've just fallen from the balcony into the tree she had to have been pushed" thing kind of throws another wrench in that, unless physics decided to just stop working at that moment.

[@t-rexcellentreviews1663]

I feel like this story shows us what happens when two partners get a child without first considering the long term possibility that they might break up or get divorced somewhere down the line.

[@bellerain381]

Exactly!! So many couples get involved and make so many long term plans in the short months they’re together and things begin to crumble because the couple don’t realize they will go through tough times!

[@t-rexcellentreviews1663]

@@bellerain381 It really does seem like nowadays that people go straight to divorce the moment a relationship becomes stale or begins to fall apart

[@camishavilme7402]

T-Rexcellent Reviews well the marriage rate was higher when women weren’t able to escape abusive marriages and had to rely on men for money. The concept of marriage usually has never been for love (either arranged or women needed a man for support) and is pretty flawed in general. People getting divorced isn’t the problem really but it is the lack of planning that is super problematic

[@t-rexcellentreviews1663]

@@camishavilme7402 excellent points my friend and your correct, though I wish marriage was treated with a bit more sanctity nowadays than it is, I’m more than happy to give that idea if it means women can escape an abusive relationship.

[@BW022]

Few partners do. Most importantly, there is nothing they can legally do. No court can every uphold any contract regarding a child as children aren't property. Men face this all the time. If you have children and there is a divorce, 90% of the time she'll end up with primary custody and most of the time you'll be limited to weekends or every other weekend, have no say over the men your ex brings into the home, and she could easily decide to move the child thousands of miles away. This doesn't even include the fact women can lie about abuse. In the rare 10% of cases where men do get custody, its typically women who walk away, clear abuse, or serious substance abuse issues.

[@rabbitsfoot8]

Drunk or not how do you accidentally push someone off a building

[@shioriryukaze]

She sneezed?

[@t-rexcellentreviews1663]

You don’t, this is just one of the many reasons why I don’t drink alcohol.

[@andrewyoung2796]

She died of natural causes. Gravity is natural. Today we just say covid

[@t-rexcellentreviews1663]

@@andrewyoung2796 or she was drunk and being unreasonably cruel to someone she use to love, I’m not defending the other lady in this scene, she knew going up that hotel room was a bad idea and did it anyway, but this is what happens sometimes when people just can’t put down the liquor bottle.

[@andrewyoung2796]

@@t-rexcellentreviews1663 I suppose emotions were very high

[@blank_stare_productions]

I wonder if Renee Bishop knows her lawyer is really an Alien named Reggie and that he has a squid baby =)

[@tia4057]

And a beautiful squid baby it was 🐙

[@marycanary]

You're referring to the movie"Men in Black" am I right?

[@javierpatag3609]

If you find that casting funny, it’s worse during the early seasons. ;-) L&O was notorious for casting the same actors in different roles, even permanent ones.

[@nfwarrior3000]

@@marycanary figure that out all by yourself?

[@marycanary]

Of course I did, I've seen a couple of those movies. .

[@terrynasonisasupervillain9017]

I love law and order

[@kartikprasad4359]

The defense attorney played an alien on Galaxy Quest.

[@nicholasmaude6906]

IMO this is one of the trial scenes that ADA Stone would've handled better.

[@creatip123]

- redirect, mr. mccoy? - nothing your honor. the people rest entire courtroom: oh thank god!! we could use a rest.....

[@alofritzmaul3818]

Bro I turned on the tv today and watched a law and order episode with snoop dog in it. This show is fuckin nails y0

[@robertlevine2827]

Well hell, Ice T's a cast member.

[@KaymalaHarris]

Isn’t the defense attorney the same “drunk” guy from the SVU episode of “41 witnesses”? If not they look eerily alike.

[@Cursed_Mark]

He was in Galaxy Quest, too.

[@Davvvee]

He was alsopresent as an attorney in the episode about the guy who covered uo his wife murder with 9/11.

[@sonrouge]

Yep. They often switch the actors around in their roles.

[@imansmith817]

That sounds good which episode is that?

[@KaymalaHarris]

@@imansmith817 Forty-One Witnesses Law & Order: Special Victims Unit: Season 17, Episode 13.

[@OnlyGetty]

When a defendant says delusional stuff like that, there's no harm in moving for a psyche evaluation.

[@Harry-bn5mp]

It wasn't a delusion. It was either a lie or the truth.

[@alyssagriffin9180]

What happened to Sophie after the court scene? 😥 I know its a fictional crime show but when a plotline of a certain episode involves a child, the audience's natural response is to worry.

[@KozuKage4007]

The grandmother got custody of her

[@alexdurain3753]

@@KozuKage4007oh thank god.

[@KozuKage4007]

@@alexdurain3753 thankfully for Sophie

[@dietotaku]

@@KozuKage4007 which grandmother? i find it hard to believe renee's mother had any grounds for guardianship. if lisa had sole custody, then her death should have transferred custody to her nearest living relative, her parents.

[@bonheura]

@@dietotaku True but you could see in the beginning of the show that Liza's parents were homophobic and didn't consider Sophie as their granddaughter (especially the father), unlike Renee's mother who really was supportive to her daughter and begged Jack McCoy to do something to be granted Sophie's custody, at least to the trial.

[@uberxchuck944]

By Grabthar's hammer, I object!

[@michaelnoble2432]

"Her child"? Not in any sense of the meaning of that phrase. The jury was right in finding her guilty of murder and kidnapping.

[@seanwebb605]

There is no legal limit of blood alcohol. It's not illegal to be drunk. Was the defense attempting to suggest she was cloud surfing under the influence? Is her license to be on a tall building being suspended?

[@dietotaku]

he was referring to the legal limit to be considered intoxicated. you can say that biologically intoxication depends on a variety of factors like weight & tolerance, but legally .08 is intoxicated, full stop.

[@seanwebb605]

@@dietotaku Not full stop. There is no legal standard of intoxication as measure of blood volume. There is a clinical determination of intoxication. Since the victim is not accused of anything at all legal standards for intoxication are entirely irrelevant. She was not driving a motorized vehicle, performing surgery or acting as an air traffic controller. She was not legally intoxicated. There is not legal limit for being intoxicated. No legal standard.

[@TheBatugan77]

Also, the guy says "1.2." He must've meant 0.12.

[@seanwebb605]

@@TheBatugan77 I think 1.2 would be a crazy amount

[@diamondlee1884]

Hes a lawyer here as well as in Grace and Frankie!!

[@Iuxinterior]

i’m glad this isn’t an issue in america anymore at least but if you have no legal guardianship that entitles you to a kid then you have no defense that means any bum who claims to be a parent can show up and make a case otherwise

[@kristinaj9159]

Interesting how the lawyer was later a drunk witness on SVU

[@robpaton2981]

that defence lawyer was a young kid who was cast as a baseball superstar in witness protection in 21 jump street

[@jandoel]

"Any thing is possible"- the worst expert witness of all time

[@geniosityfilms]

Quellek as a defense attorney makes me want to hear him out, despite my love of Jack McKoy

[@curtisberard7831]

Her BA was 1.2?! Isn't .40 or higher usually result in death?

[@Nepomniachtchi_Austin]

1:03 what the hell is the stutter on the makeup Left upper cheek of the defendant(?) I haven't found a single comment talking about this. Then it's just gone any time she's on the stand like it didn't happen. I would really like to know why/how this happened.

[@alexandriasaunders5243]

You’re right!

[@nyarden301]

Lisa....winslow? We're just going to ignore that?

[@samanthasmith8301]

POINT IS: she had no business being there by herself. I don't believe a word of her.

[@mikekling5880]

Stupid question it's always murder.

[@cromano6830]

Nope

[@melissar4612]

Sorry, how does someone have a blood alcohol content of 1.2?

[@nickbrundidge9089]

0:51 1:55 2:36

[@drehogue3423]

Blood Alcohol was 1.2? Don’t they mean 0.12

[@Loverboy0694]

Kind of hard to take the person serious as an expert when he can’t even tell the blood alcohol content correctly

[@michaelmorton5698]

Pretty sure a BAC of 1.2 means the person is dead from fatal alcohol poisoning. Some expert witness.

[@rhuephus]

wow 1.2 BAC would be dead already

[@rodx5571]

0:36 really? a BAC of 1.2 is enough to kill 3 people. He should have said .12, which is drunk, but not dead. At 1.2 if not dead, certainly catatonic or covulsive.

[@juliettemora4156]

Does anyone know how this ends?

[@joewhitehead3]

She’s found guilty

[@jennief7114]

Does anyone know how this case ended, meaning the verdict?

[@ChristinDaoud]

Guilty

[@cooky75015]

@@ChristinDaoud thank you

[@shirleyanngilbreath4353]

Why bother to show less than half of the episodes 🤔

[@aznsbd]

She initiated a confrontation with a woman who ended up dead. MURDER.

[@marcamusprime9513]

Not a very emotive actress, but her performance felt strangely grounded.

[@Bull1908]

Episode and season

[@o-O426]

Someone tell me how I read this titles as “Self Defence or Musical”

[@Aussie.Lassie]

Lmao. You were either drunk or pushed ;)

[@rhuephus]

that is the way Canadians and the UK spells "defense"

[@rizqeenurhani3683]

No objection hearsay mccoy?

[@theresaderse-nosacek5236]

Plenty of parents kidnap their child, if fact 90% of kidnappers are the child's parent/s. You just said that most kidnappings do not count.

[@mirandavinci4146]

What was the verdict in the end?

[@jackape1]

guilty

[@MsNetouu]

Falling down drunk 🥴

[@cousinjake7986]

How her BAC is 1.2?

[@oldmanjimh3165]

DEFENSE!!!!!!

[@Rage867]

Dr said the wrong blood alcohol. Should have been .12, but he said 1.2. That would mean your blood would be 120% alcohol

[@citytrees1752]

The verdict?

[@joewhitehead3]

Guilty of kidnapping & murder

[@cartermorrison7917]

Good at least the jury is not that stupid. Truthfully I do feel bad that Renee lost her ability to see her Sophie but that means no excuse for her to kill her ex-wife Lisa and kidnapping the adoptive daughter. Now Renee must pay the price by taking her punishment. It's what she deserves.

[@traviskarnes6825]

She was also offered a handsome plea deal.

[@spdr07_20]

supreme court sus.

[@Zackarytheattackary]

Anyone know the verdict?

[@emilyholasek63]

Guilty on all counts.

[@stephwiller9089]

So I can't remember who ends up with custody of the kid. Is it Renee's parents or Lisa's homophobe parents.

[@joewhitehead3]

Either Lisa’s parents or child services

[@jaimeduncan6167]

So she is sentenced ? If Lisa was a man, René will be out and will be called brave and survivor.

[@dietotaku]

@@jaimeduncan6167 no, if lisa was a man it would have been all the more stupid of renee to stalk him across the country and confront him while he was drunk.

[@spencerwyche2552]

I thought it was spelled defense

[@osvaldwulf9960]

One of the biggest foreheads that'll ever exist!!!

[@danielserrano591]

legal

[@xxkittycatsxx4606]

I've never been this early.

[@ashyknees352]

Me either lol.

[@MandA1900]

Same

[@TactileTherapy]

That's what he said.

[@SuperPal-tr3go]

Congratz!

[@i.I.j]

What do u want a medal 🏅🏅🏅🏅🏅🏅🏅🏅🏅🏅

[@anaasma989]

So stupid lawyer of defence, trying to show the juries how fragile she is

[@danielserrano591]

judged law court

[@joewhitehead3]

None of this woulda happened if it weren’t for people’s backwards attitude on homosexuality. That much is for certain. But what I don’t understand is Lisa just taking Sophie away from Renee, cutting her off completely & moving to another state. Like, what’s that about?

[@jaynehogue2459]

This has nothing to do with homosexuality this is an adoption case pure and simple. The lady who was killed had legal adoptive custody and the lady who killed her was her partner but did not have legal adoptive custody. So get over yourself

[@vianjelos]

She likely showed violent or controlling tendancies earlier on..thus spurring the alienation. People dont stalk and murder their ex lovers out of no where..there are signs of that kind of behavior prior.

[@eunhastolemyheart6098]

@@jaynehogue2459 Actually. It was because of homophobic underlying reasons. If the Florida law in the 90s had allowed gays to adopted, the two could've shared custody of their child when they split up and this conflict could've been easily avoided.

[@gretchenjaenisch1826]

This was premeditated .

[@dr.vegapunk5853]

yep it was obvious

[@robertphillips6296]

What screwy logic!

[@danielserrano591]

school fees date 1977 P.R.

[@personperson8331]

Sound effect.

[@grba875]

Number 10

[@idontno0]

Dun dun dun

[@terryleeschiller8515]

Of these were full eposdes I would agree, but little scraps.. Forget it

[@vi9763]

They're streaming on Netflix

[@markwilson4724]

@@vi9763 not in the UK

[@terryleeschiller8515]

@@vi9763 Thanks!!

[@amanimar679]

I’m number 7

[@josephbalan8384]

The Florida goverment is why they was divided! Also it was good reasonable for self defense! She was wrongfully convicted and the jury ignored that she was drunk

[@dragonstouch1042]

If she had called 911, she could have argued self defense. Not calling 911 always causes problems when you try to argue it. The kidnapping also did not help (in the eyes of the law, she kidnapped the child).

[@dr.vegapunk5853]

@@dragonstouch1042 yeah but this type of people refuse to see that i for example to poke hole in her story i would had ask her this: why she introduced herself to the detectives who came to the house as Lisa's sister?, How did she find out where Lisa lived to take Sophie before the cops arrived?, Why did she confront Lisa at the hotel and not her home if it was just to talk?

[@katherynemero4118]

Actually, it was self-defense. This woman lost everything to her ex because her ex was a stronger applicant with more money and power behind her. She had no recourse. The law didn't recognize her as having rights. That is self-defense. I assume she loses, but her defense is the correct choice. She was defending her right to exist with her daughter in a world where she had no rights. That is self-defense.

[@Cloak1972]

No. There’s not a state in the union where not having custody or parental rights is grounds for self defense.

[@roanshadowraven4426]

this was murder but interesting

[@katherynemero4118]

@@roanshadowraven4426 defense of self is self defense. It was closer to a hate crime than murder.

[@billlarussa5908]

Tell us you haven't even remotely studied law without telling us.

[@Cloak1972]

@@katherynemero4118 Again, no. This was straight up murder. She wasn’t defending herself. She was killing someone who had something she wanted.

[@tm502010]

This episode doesn’t age well. A Gay parent is still a parent .

[@CharizardMaster69]

that’s not the point

[@alcoholandfun243]

She had zero legal custody. So, no. She isn't a parent.

[@papabumba478]

@@alcoholandfun243 Legally she wasn’t a parent, but in life she was more of a parent than a lot of legal parents. Granted it won’t hold up in courts, but there is something off about adopting a child together and then after years, abandoning your partner and stopping the kid from seeing her just because you didn’t like her. One of those cases where you can fully understand the motive, but can’t condone it.

[@alcoholandfun243]

@@papabumba478 I understand your point, and yes, I see her problem and have sympathy for her. But, they didn't adopt together in the eyes of the law. Unfortunately for her. Secondly, this happens hundreds of times a day with fathers in family court and most don't bat an eye 🤷‍♂️

[@papabumba478]

@@alcoholandfun243 my point was moral vs legal. I think it’s wrong whenever a parent tries to keep the child away from another parent that has a bond with a child. Not saying she has a point legally, but not even allowing the other mum to see her is wrong. The kid clearly loves both.

[@andrewyoung2796]

Where are the rainbows and unicorns now

[@NACHALCHAIM]

The state should not allow sick people to adopt.

[@danielserrano591]

corridor law court tampafl. date 2003 december yul