Warning: SPOILERS ahead forLaw & Orderseason 24, episode 10, “Greater Good.”
This article contains references to sex trafficking of underage victims.
Law & Orderseason 24, episode 10, entitled “Greater Good,” breaks a show tradition that has become cliché — but it weakens the episode in doing so. “Greater Good” featuresERalum Mekhi Phifer as Lyman Ross, a devoted father arrested for murder after he fatally shoots a music mogul who was trafficking his daughter under the guise of making her a star. Like many ofLaw & Order’s best episodes, “Greater Good” revolves around thorny ethical and social issues.
An undercover cop runs interference because she believes that Ross was in the right to eliminate the sex offender, and that prosecuting him was contributing to the over-incarceration of Black people. However, Price (Hugh Dancy) argues that “you don’t get to kill a man because he is vile.” The trial exposes the victim’s wrongdoings, but it often seems to be slipping away. While this entire sequence is in line with the darker tone inLaw & Orderseason 24, theending’s power is diluted because the procedural skips a pivotal scene that is usually part of the formula.
Law & Order Season 24, Episode 10 Skips The Traditional Jury Verdict Reading
It Jumps From Nolan’s Opening Statement To Outside The Courthouse
Most episodes ofLaw & Orderinclude a scene in which the jury delivers its verdict. This scene is often used for maximum suspense, dragging out the reading of the verdict for as long as possible to build anticipation. It’s understandable that the series would want to eliminate or change this from time to time, as it gets predictable if it happens in every episode. However,the way it is done in “Greater Good” is jarring.The episode jumps directly from Nolan’s closing statement to Shaw (Mehcad Brooks) walking out of the courthouse.
8 Ways Law & Order Season 24 Can Save Its Fledgling Season
There are several ways Law & Order can course correct and regain viewership despite a significant decline in its ratings compared to previous seasons.
Choosing to exclude the remainder of the trial is a bold choice that cuts both the jury verdict and the defense’s counter to Nolan’s statement. Instead of going through the entire sequence, the episode reveals the jury verdict outside the courthouse. The undercover cop, Vanessa, who interfered with the case throughout “Greater Good,” confronts Shaw and remarks sarcastically, “Congratulations on the conviction.“This choice centers the conflict between Shaw and Vanessa (Karen Chinasa Obilom), making it clear thatthis subplot is more important to the story than the jury’s verdict.
Law & Order Season 24, Episode 10’s Case Win Could Have Been More Powerful With A Jury Verdict
It Would Have Made For An Emotional Scene
The quick transition in “Greater Good” isn’t just jarring; it also robs the actors of the opportunity to react emotionally to the verdict. The case involves a controversial argument about whether it’s appropriate to charge a man for murder when the victim is committing heinous crimes against his family. Thus, it would have made sense for the lawyers and defendant to react to learning the defendant had been found guilty.This scene would also have given Mekhi Phifer and Michael Beach’s characters a reactionto what they would surely have seen as an unjust verdict.
IfLaw & Orderchose to keep Vanessa’s confrontation with Shaw, her reaction in court would have made their argument more powerful.
Furthermore,including the jury verdict would have made the final scene of “Greater Good” more powerful. If Vanessa was in the courtroom and gave Shaw a dirty look or otherwise reacted before hurrying away, it would have been an emotional ending to her subplot. Conversely, ifLaw & Orderchose to keep Vanessa’s confrontation with Shaw, her reaction in court would have made their argument more powerful. Instead, the confrontation scene had to do double duty, informing the audience of the verdict while also wrapping up Shaw and Vanessa’s conflict.
Law & Order Breaking Tradition Is Good (But Just Not In Season 24, Episode 10’s Case)
It Needs To Change Things To Remain Fresh
Although changing the formula doesn’t work well in this instance,Law & Ordershould be given credit for trying something new.After 24 years on the air, the procedural is at risk of becoming stale and predictable. The revival also has fallen into bad habits such as allowing Price to win every case — even ones he appears to be losing. Thus, it is vital thatLaw & Orderchanges its toneand breaks traditions so that it’s harder to guess what will happen in any given episode.
Law & Order Season 24, Episode 7 Case Makes Baxter A Hypocrite
Baxter’s decision in Law & Order season 24, episode 7 exposed the hypocrisy in his claim that he makes unpopular decisions in the name of justice.
That said, “Greater Good” was not the right episode to break with the jury-reading tradition. The way it’s executed inLaw & Orderis confusing, as it isn’t clear what the verdict is until Shaw and Vanessa begin speaking. Furthermore, this episode revolves around whether the defendant was justified in killing the victim, and the jury’s reaction would have helped wrap that conflict up instead of shifting the focus to the Shaw/Vanessa subplot.
