Law & Order: Special Victims Unit

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit (1999)

2 corrected entries in season 5

(6 votes)

Head - S5-E25

Corrected entry: Stabler slams a female suspect into the barred window which leads to her having a potentially life ending seizure. If he's had problems like this before, it's been mentioned, then this should've gotten him suspended or fired.

Rob245

Correction: Plenty of cops have done worse and kept their jobs.

LorgSkyegon

Head - S5-E25

Corrected entry: At the end of the episode the female child molester reveals that she has just learned that she's pregnant with her victim's child. However, earlier in the episode (several weeks prior in the episode's time span), she underwent surgery. A Pregnancy test is part of a standard pre-op workup for all women of child-bearing age. She would have learned about her pregnancy then. Obviously, this was altered for the "end of the episode" dramatic effect.

Correction: Not necessarily, I underwent surgery and as long as I signed a paper saying I was sure I wasn't pregnant, they went ahead with the surgery.

shortdanzr

Wrath - S3-E2

Continuity mistake: Benson visits Stabler at his home to confronts him about the FBI detail he has ordered to protect her. They talk outside and then Benson is seen walking away. The next shot shows a side shot of Benson approaching him again in silence but mouthing words to him. (00:49:00)

More mistakes in Law & Order: Special Victims Unit

Uncle - S8-E4

Elliot Stabler: Just so you know, everybody loses it their first kid case.
Dani Beck: I'll get used to it.
Elliot Stabler: Well... When that happens, transfer out.

Cubs Fan

More quotes from Law & Order: Special Victims Unit
More trivia for Law & Order: Special Victims Unit

Spousal Privilege - S16-E8

Question: Why was A.J. only charged with reckless endangerment? The video showed him punching Paula in the back when she's climbing the stairwell, getting punched in the face by A.J. and then being dragged away unconscious. Shouldn't he have been charged with either aggravated assault or assault and battery instead considering how violent he was?

Answer: I didn't see the show so I don't know the details. A general answer would be because a reckless endangerment charge is easier to prove "beyond a Reasonable Doubt" in court and get a conviction. This charge would not require the prosecutor to prove intent, which would be required for proving aggravated or simple assault. Also, if there were no visible injuries, it is difficult to show bodily injury. Just because the reckless endangerment charge was specifically mentioned, it does not necessarily mean there were not other charges filed. Police often make multiple charges, like lesser-included offenses, so that the defendant's act will fall under one of them if the legal requirements are not met for the others, if they are not sure of the best charge to make (the district attorney knows and can decide), or to have something to plea bargain with.

KeyZOid

More questions & answers from Law & Order: Special Victims Unit