The thing that concerns me most about this episode is that the theme seemed to more closely resemble "guilty until proven innocent". Putting aside the fact that Kent was convicted, when it was brought to light the shaky way he was found guilty, and the shady lawyer that didn't properly serve his client, the reopening of the case should have meant "clean slate - innocent until proven guilty". THAT is the whole point of a new and FAIR trial. Regardless of the outcome, that should have been Catherine's focus and intention. Instead her focus was "Crap, now I have to prove that I was right". Grissom would have focused on the truth being more important. One can look back at a "similar" episode wherein a person sent to prison for a crime was exonerated because Grissom looked at the episode with fresh and unprejudiced eyes, and found it to have been a wrongful conviction. Regardless of the difference in outcomes, that is what Catherine should have done. Catherine (and much of her team) were more inclined to "prove her correct", and that is why I despise Catherine's character, and why she should have been fired.
"If I Had A Hammer…" Discussion *SPOILERS*
- Thread starter Destiny
- Start date
In any case, it would not have been reason enough for her to be fired. These things have happened before and it does not result in the person being fired.
Also you cannot blame Catherine, it was the way they wrote the episode. They wanted us to think he was not guilty and she had put away a man who was not, but she went with her gut that said he was guilty in some aspect, which he was.
Let's face it, in today's real world, innocent until proven guilty is not really the case. The media always makes them look guilty and it is their innocence they have to prove.
Also you cannot blame Catherine, it was the way they wrote the episode. They wanted us to think he was not guilty and she had put away a man who was not, but she went with her gut that said he was guilty in some aspect, which he was.
Let's face it, in today's real world, innocent until proven guilty is not really the case. The media always makes them look guilty and it is their innocence they have to prove.
Desertwind
Head of the Day Shift
We just got home from Saturday errands, and watched this again, and we found NO fault with this, I didn't watch this fabulous episode to nit-pik, and find everyone or everything wrong, although I do when it's garbage, to me.. it was intense, and Cath did a marvelous job, as did the rest oF the team.. Mistakes are always made in any crime scene investigation. She was young and it was her first 'solo' as she stated, so that kinda of explains the whole thing, and a few errors in judgement. This was an extrodinary CSI, [some this season have been below par], and congratulatios to all who put this together Cath.."The 1st thing Grissom taught me, people never look up":thumbsup:
Last edited:
Catherine herself said that back in the day, the partial print on the rock was enough for a conviction. Catherine gathered the evidence the way she had been trained to do. Lab techs processed what she had and it was interpreted according to what fit with the other evidence that night: the 911 phone call and eyewitness testimony (as reliable as it was). If anyone is at fault it's the lawyer and the jury. Yes, Kent got screwed as far as his attorney goes. He was guilty, though. Grissom always said that nothing happens by coincidence and Catherine believed the same.
LastToKnow710
Witness
What they said! :thumbsup:
Technology is always advancing. What it took to get a conviction 18 years ago is what she found. She did her job the way she was supposed to. Petty insults are a bit uncalled for. Marg didn't write the episode or the character. She's an actor who shows up and delivers her A-game every time. Period.
Catherine has always been great at her job. Her and Grissom worked hand-in-hand towards making the graveyard shift so good. Heart and soul. Yin and yang, etc. Where his shortcomings fell, she made up for it, and vice versa. She's a strong, sassy, intelligent woman who's good at her job.
kaylyne
Coroner
Actually, the "never doubt" line was from the season 1 finale, strip strangler, where she told that to Grissom at the diner.
Regardless, it was nice for TPTB to have that great scene with Cath & Jim, with Jim giving her a pep talk. It made me remember that even though Catherine is now the supervisor and 'woman in charge', she still needs someone to give her advice, and someone to keep her grounded at work. I'm glad it was Brass here. It seems that Brass, Doc & Ecklie are the only ones now who can be looked at as Catherine's equals - having been there the longest. Maybe that's why I like Conrad Ecklie even more these days, he seems more of an equal to them rather than annoying colleague as he had been previously.
vegaslights
Brute
Actually, the "never doubt" line was from the season 1 finale, strip strangler, where she told that to Grissom at the diner.
That's right. I knew it was from Season One, but I just couldn't recall if it was from the very start of the season or the very end. :lol:
Thanks, Kay.
Firstly, as for the evidence, that was ALL that was needed BACK THEN. That is not the fault of the crime scene investigator who found said evidence. She found what she found. She was new back then. She can't help it that she didn't think to look up. Grissom even said no one ever does think to do that... so it's not just her. It's easy to make mistakes on your first solo case. This show may make the job look easy, but it's not as easy as it looks.
Secondly, it is NOT Catherine's job to investigate why the man got a sucky lawyer who gave horrible advice nor is it her responsibility. Her responsibility was the evidence and presenting her findings to the best of her ability with the resources available to her at the time.
That case you're referring to with Grissom, that was NOT his case originally. That was Conrad's team's (the dayshift) case. The nightshift CSIs were always mentioning how non-thorough the dayshift was, particularly Ecklie... who didn't look thoroughly at the evidence or deeply. He just found the first thing basically and got the conviction based on that. Plus, it hadn't been a long ago as Cath's case and there were more things available as far as testing and whatnot than there was in Catherine's case 18 years earlier. IMHO, comparing these two cases is like comparing apples and oranges. They're both fruits and roundish in shape, but that's where the similiarities stop. :lol:
As for the team being only interested in "proving her right", that is one interpretation of the scene. That doesn't make it true or false. It only makes it one view. In my view she was NOT trying to prove she was right. She was trying to find the truth. She did start to doubt her gut instinct and it was Brass who told her their gut instincts were right and the convict was trying to get her to doubt herself.
Catherine and the team were trying to find the truth, nothing more, nothing less. They believed the truth was that the guy actually did it. They had other reasons to believe that. There were no other prints found at the scene other than on that rock to even suggest someone was else was there (until they found the girl's print on the hammer). He was the only suspect they had at first. There was nothing more they could think at that point... until the weapon was recovered and the other print found.
Even if Catherine had doubted her gut instinct at some points, the way the convict talked to her pretty much proved his guilt. I mean I'm sorry, but an innocent man is not going to nastily mention someone's child in a sleazy manner as he did, nor would they bring up the Eddie thing. That was just low on his part. An innocent person would be worried that if they didn't play nicer, the person might just falsify evidence to keep them in jail.
It would be completely and utterly ridiculous for Catherine to be fired for doing her job.... which is proving her case. She focused this time on trying to find the murder weapon. Whether or not the outcome proved that the convict was guilty or innocent. Her concern was getting the to the truth, no matter what that may be. Did she hope she hadn't gotten an innocent man convicted? Sure. I would hope that too, for I would feel very badly about getting an innocent man convicted for something he didn't do. I would think that pretty much anyone would feel that way. I personally could tell that the fact that she might have gotten an innocent man convicted was eating away at Catherine and weighing her down with guilt, which is why she started to doubt herself and her gut instincts.
Like Cath said, her supervisor (who might have been Brass at the time, or someone else because Gil didn't become supervisor until after Brass went back to homicide) read her reports and signed off on them. So, technically it would have been that supervisor's responsibility to make sure his employees were thorough. Besides, if people were fired for being wrong and making assumptions or trying to prove themselves right instead of examining every available piece of evidence thoroughly, Conrad Ecklie would have been fired a long dang time ago. :lol:
This was the type of scenario where no one would want to be wrong regardless of the situation at hand. Her team might have wanted her to be right, but that doesn't mean that none of them (including Catherine) would have accepted her being wrong. The point of the matter is, they didn't want to be wrong or want her to be wrong because they knew that it would weigh on her mind and that she'd probably beat herself up about it. They were hoping that they'd get the outcome they did. I would have too, but none of them were overlooking any evidence at that point. They re-examined the old evidence, found and processed the newly discovered evidence and came up with the conclusion that the man was in fact guilty and did in fact deserve the sentence he got. IMO, he should have gotten the death penalty because of how brutal the murder was. The old guy was half blind, half deaf or whatever. he couldn't have identified a suspect with 100% or even 80% accuracy. There was no reason to kill him.
However, under the law, the man does deserve another trial on account of the lawyer issue. For that instance, he didn't get a fair trial. However, his lack of a fair trial had NOTHING to do with the evidence and everything to do with bad legal representation (the latter of which Catherine has absolutely no control over).
---
On another note: It's hard to believe Lindsey is now 18. :lol: Wow does time fly. :lol:
Last edited:
Zipster
Witness
Let me just say wow. I loved this episode. I love the team work, the science and the cast interaction. Could go into a lot more detail about it, but meh - it was just the best episode of the season so far for me.
Catherine has never been my favourite character in CSI, but after nearly 9 years, she's still surprising me. :bolian:
Catherine has never been my favourite character in CSI, but after nearly 9 years, she's still surprising me. :bolian:
Gremine
Rookie
Better than last week i think. I almost believed the guy was innocent. Cath's first case 18 years ago? It is the easy way to blame the others for a mistake you did. The prison guy did it but Cath didn't , the scene with Brass is ... The team prooved Cath was right. So the evidence never lies. Even the nature helped Cath, the tree gave the hammer. The tree was the most important witness in the case. I like the original ideas like that.
I especially like it when they do that in a personal episode like that. They didn't use the rest of the team as a decor.
She is missing him, it is a nice reference.:thumbsup:
Here is the Gregory the Great ! It was time to see Greg not only in Archie's lab. :guffaw: Also the yearbook scene with Riley was cute.I like to see Riley with ponytail. I guess she is not a romantic person, btw .Go Riley, i am not either.
Cath's first case 18 years ago? It is the easy way to blame the others for a mistake you did. The prison guy did it but Cath didn't , the scene with Brass is ... The team prooved Cath was right. So the evidence never lies. Even the nature helped Cath, the tree gave the hammer. The tree was the most important witness in the case. I like the original ideas like that.I especially like it when they do that in a personal episode like that. They didn't use the rest of the team as a decor.
She is missing him, it is a nice reference.:thumbsup:
Here is the Gregory the Great ! It was time to see Greg not only in Archie's lab. :guffaw: Also the yearbook scene with Riley was cute.I like to see Riley with ponytail. I guess she is not a romantic person, btw .Go Riley, i am not either.
Just watched the episode and I really liked it
I love the way they all helped Catherine. Nick's smile at the end of the scene where he told about that pinkie-print on that hammer was so sweet :adore:
He was so happy that he could help Cath out there.
I'm sure Cath would have been happy if Grissom would have been there... she really needed someone to talk to..., not just a friend but someone with much life experience. It was the first time I really thought that she misses Grissom... I felt so sorry for her as she walked past Grissom's old office... thatnk god that Brass was there to catch her I really loved the scene between the two of them... Brass the great uncle for all our CSI's
I love the way they all helped Catherine. Nick's smile at the end of the scene where he told about that pinkie-print on that hammer was so sweet :adore:
He was so happy that he could help Cath out there.
I'm sure Cath would have been happy if Grissom would have been there... she really needed someone to talk to..., not just a friend but someone with much life experience. It was the first time I really thought that she misses Grissom... I felt so sorry for her as she walked past Grissom's old office... thatnk god that Brass was there to catch her
I really loved the scene between the two of them... Brass the great uncle for all our CSI's 
LastToKnow710
Witness
This would've actually made a better 200th episode than that sorry excuse of a CSI episode they actually aired did.
I was thinking that very same thing.