"In a Dark, Dark House" Discussion *SPOILERS*

[Ipstenu]

Sara, Doc Robbins, Greg and Catherine (who processed and signed off on the cuffs part) can be legally cleared pretty easily.

There's no way to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that RAY put the cuffs on. There are two days where Haskell was 'missing' (between LA and Vegas) and anything could have happened. So them signing off saying 'Well, we saw the wrists but it wasn't a cause of death, and we didn't find evidence of them anywhere, so logically it occurred somewhere else.' is accurate.

The problem is they all KNOW it's a damn lie. Catherine can prove it, too, but chose not to. Sara and Greg (and Dr. Robbins) have suspicions and no proof.

 

[GregNickRyanFan]

Yeah, I don't see anything haunting. I guess it was kind of freaky to see Ray actually stabbing Haskell multiple times and all of that... but really it wasn't much different than Hotch beating the ever living crap out of Foyet on Criminal Minds after Foyett had stabbed him repeatedly months earlier and then killed his ex wife and threatened his son.

He wasn't stabbing him, unless I totally missed something. He was punching him. Haskell died from a broken neck suffered in the fall, according to Doc.

I thought he had a knife in his hand, but maybe that was earlier when he cut the cuffs lol. I guess it all blurred together for me or something lol.

Not only did Ray murder him,but several of his co-workers betrayed their badges to let him get away with it.

Sorry, but this is not completely correct. Brass is the only one who betrayed his badge. The rest of them did their jobs. Sure they wanted to find a way to prove Ray innocent of murder, nothing wrong with that... but they did NOT tamper with evidence at any point the way Brass did. Catherine only suspected that Brass took evidence, she could not prove it... therefore like she said, to the best of the team's ability, all evidence supported self defense.

As for Nick he may have supported Ray and believed in him, but if it was him instead of Brass, Nick would not have picked up those cuffs. In the end he does what is right and doesn't commit a crime. He would have brought Ray in no matter how much it would have hurt him to do it.

I, also, believe that Sara, Greg, and even Catherine wouldn't have done it either.

I agree completely, Speedy.


You know what's kind of ironic? The scene where Ray picked Haskell up and threw him over the balcony looked very similar to the scene in the movie "Fear" where William Petersen's character picked up his daughter's abusive/psycho-killer boyfriend and threw him through the window to his death. :lol:

Several folks have mentioned Brass and his past. He turned in his fellow officers who were taking bribes and were corrupt.

Which seems to contradict what he did in this episode, right?

Yes, Haskell was a bad, bad man and deserved what he got, no doubt. However, Ray is in law enforcement and did not have the right to be judge, jury and executioner. I wish they'd just let him have killed Nate only in a rage over learning Nate raped Gloria... instead of him saying all that about what all Nate had done to HIM. If you kill someone because they hurt you months ago, that's revenge killing. If you kill them in a sudden rage over just having learned they raped and tortured the person you love, what's that called? I'd say crime of passion, but I"m not sure if that's the correct term or not.

 

[kaylyne]

a few things still intrigue/puzzle me here.
1. Thinking back on it, when Mrs Parkes said to Cath - "he scares me. He's always scared me. Doesn't he scare you?" I'm wondering if Ray had some low-level fighting/arguing in his past. It doesn't seem that he has a criminal record of any kind, but I can see him being upset and intimidating Mrs P & Gloria at some point.

2. His comment to Mrs Parkes - when she apologized a bit to him and said "it's not for me to blame or judge you" and he responds with "that's okay, she'll do that". It almost makes me think that he & Gloria have also gone a few rounds (especially since they went through a divorce).

I can see Ray doing something like picking up an item & throwing it against a wall or punching a wall, etc, without actually harming Gloria or Mrs Parkes. And I can see Ray also inflicting a lot of emotional trauma on those two just with a quiet stare.

Noting Catherine's reaction to Mrs Parkes' comment on whether Ray scares her, I think it gave her pause to actually think about the past year and how she's had to discipline him and especially in the past few episodes where he was so out of control and not following her instructions, thus putting everyone in danger.

There's no way to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that RAY put the cuffs on. There are two days where Haskell was 'missing' (between LA and Vegas) and anything could have happened. So them signing off saying 'Well, we saw the wrists but it wasn't a cause of death, and we didn't find evidence of them anywhere, so logically it occurred somewhere else.' is accurate.

which, to me, would have been easy to prove that it was done at/during time of death by Doc Robbins in his autopsy - if he would not have been willing to gloss over everything and done a half-assed autopsy because it was his new best friend, Ray, involved.

 

[GregNickRyanFan]

a few things still intrigue/puzzle me here.
1. Thinking back on it, when Mrs Parkes said to Cath - "he scares me. He's always scared me. Doesn't he scare you?" I'm wondering if Ray had some low-level fighting/arguing in his past.

Ray said that when he was little his father was abusive to his mother, or he alluded to that. So he could be an aggressive arguer because of that.

 

[beaujolais]

I think Brass's actions in this episode could be seen as the natural consequence of the bad habit he'd fallen into of not letting Ray suffer as the result of displays of Ray's bad temper. In the episode where Ray and Nick chase Jeckyll thru the hospital, Brass convinced the doctor that Ray threw against the wall not to file charges by pointing out the bad publicity the doctor and the hospital would suffer when word got out that nuclear medical equipment had been stolen on the doctor's watch. And I'm pretty sure that there's another episode where Brass got Ray out of trouble caused by Ray's temper.

While Brass did convince the doctor not to file charges, he also gave Ray a dressing down before he left. I don't remember the exact words but basically, it was something along the lines of if Ray has a bug up his a$$ he needs to get it out before it causes him a lot more trouble. I think it was Brass's way of saying he had his back that time but next time he was on his own. Too bad Brass didn't remember that.

I seem to recall there was another time in a parking lot with Ray, Catherine and Brass and Brass was telling Ray to back off because I want to say he was harassing some guy at the time. I don't recall what it was about or what episode. Maybe that's what you're also thinking of? Except I don't recall it being a time when Brass got Ray out of trouble. More like holding him back from getting into trouble.

I know no one watched Mascara but at the end of the episode, Brass and Ray are talking to the guy who did it and Brass leaves the room and Ray alone with the guy. I want to say we then hear yelling from Ray and Brass just keeps walking. I don't have the episode to go back and look but does anyone else remember that?

 

[byline]

Sara, Doc Robbins, Greg and Catherine (who processed and signed off on the cuffs part) can be legally cleared pretty easily.

True, but I'm not convinced that politically, it will be such a clear dodge. When things go wrong, higher-ups often look for someone on whom they can pin the blame so that it looks like they're doing something about it. Being in the clear, legally, doesn't always mesh with perception, and if anyone needs to be made an example of, Catherine could easily be singled out. I hope she isn't turned into a scapegoat . . . but it could happen.

 

[Ipstenu]

There's no way to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that RAY put the cuffs on. There are two days where Haskell was 'missing' (between LA and Vegas) and anything could have happened. So them signing off saying 'Well, we saw the wrists but it wasn't a cause of death, and we didn't find evidence of them anywhere, so logically it occurred somewhere else.' is accurate.

which, to me, would have been easy to prove that it was done at/during time of death by Doc Robbins in his autopsy - if he would not have been willing to gloss over everything and done a half-assed autopsy because it was his new best friend, Ray, involved.

Defining the age of bruises is, IRL, a lot more inexact than on TV. In the CSI world, they should have been able to say something like 'The bruising on the wrists took place within 2 hours before his death.' In reality they could probably get 24 hours, but some of it depends on how quickly someone bruises (much of which depends on health, diet and just you... I don't bruise much at all, my partner does at the drop of a hat).

That said, it WAS totally half-assed to not dig deeper into it. Illegal, not at all. Neither is it super suspicious, since the evidence doesn't really point one way or the other for the WRISTS.

The blood/footprints did however. That I'm a bit flummoxed as to how they explained!

 

[Smokey]

That said, it WAS totally half-assed to not dig deeper into it. Illegal, not at all. Neither is it super suspicious, since the evidence doesn't really point one way or the other for the WRISTS.

The blood/footprints did however. That I'm a bit flummoxed as to how they explained!

I think despite the footprints showing that Ray picked him up, they still couldn't be sure at that point if it was in self-defense or not. They had no way of knowing who had the upper hand (although Ray is much bigger and stronger, so duh!), whether or not Haskell still had the gun, etc.

The fact that Ray at some point had Haskell cuffed is what changes it from self-defense to murder.

 

[Ipstenu]

Oh indeed. The fact that he had him cuffed and UN cuffed him is why it's murder and not self defense.

But the evidence the CSIs have is:
1) Abrasions on Haskell's wrists.
2) Footprint evidence of only Ray's feet charging to the railing
3) Blood spatter on the wall being all Ray
4) The only Ray blood spatter is in the other room

Looks hella suspicious.

 

[KaiLUxO]

I just re-watched with my dad & boy he is conflicted about what can happen next season lol. How in the world call Ray pull self defense with that evidence? And being that they signed off on it will make them look guilty of something. I think someone said before if Cath is to take blame and be punished maybe that's why she's leaving. Same thing with Brass if Paul doesn't sign.

 

[Otie]

The blood/footprints did however. That I'm a bit flummoxed as to how they explained!

Well... if we ignore the marks on the wrists and just look at the evidence of the blood and footprints...

It could be theorized that Ray had dominated the fight on the ground in the hallway... and that somehow the two became separated long enough that Haskell was able to get to his feet again. From there... in a new scuffle... it wouldn't be hard to visualize Ray once again getting the upper hand, perhaps going to the banister to knock the wind out of and pin Haskell against it while waiting for backup... and surprise the banister breaks instead.

In that sense, Greg was entirely correct in his thoughts on fight mechanics.

Heck, when I was a kid and getting beat up by boys in my class than me (as if that wasn't bad enough, they went after me because I wouldn't let them pick on the first graders - we were in 8th grade)... I ended up winning the fight while pinned to the ground. Looking at the fight mechanics of that, I should have gotten pummeled... an on-looker would NOT have predicted that.

So the blood/footprint evidence could support that while Ray dominated the fight, he never fully managed to subdue Haskell. It's only when paired with other evidence that the full story of the fight would emerge.

 

[Mementomm]

spam

 

[Lt.Sugar]

this was the worst episode ever.
I thought highly of the CSI team but this episode let them look like they don't care about the oath they swore. At least most of them.
Even if I can understand what Ray did, he killed Haskell and should take responsibility for his actions.

 

[Ipstenu]

The blood/footprints did however. That I'm a bit flummoxed as to how they explained!

Well... if we ignore the marks on the wrists and just look at the evidence of the blood and footprints...

It could be theorized that Ray had dominated the fight on the ground in the hallway... and that somehow the two became separated long enough that Haskell was able to get to his feet again. From there... in a new scuffle... it wouldn't be hard to visualize Ray once again getting the upper hand, perhaps going to the banister to knock the wind out of and pin Haskell against it while waiting for backup... and surprise the banister breaks instead.

[...]

So the blood/footprint evidence could support that while Ray dominated the fight, he never fully managed to subdue Haskell. It's only when paired with other evidence that the full story of the fight would emerge.

But. As Sara pointed out, the only footprints from the doorway area to the railing was Ray's. That means Haskell's feet never touched the ground. So Ray had him up off the floor, out the door, down the hall, and into the railing. AND hit Haskell against the railing so hard it left a massive bruise right before death.

It's possible, certainly, but it's not as plausible as other scenarios, and it's lax work for the CSIs to accept it.

 

[Desertwind]

My daughter watched the last two episodes with me yesterday and she cried when Ray cried over the horrific acts Haskell did to Gloria, and I had to put it on pause. She goes "OMG, LF is a great actor as this character Ray", but in the end she goes "He did kill him, with good reason, but there's no way it was self-defense" She also raved about how great they are are, and superb actors everyone of them. She's partial to Nick and Greg said "their both so cute". So watching it again the pieces seemed to fit, on why Haskell was so adamant about getting to Ray. He wanted to show everyone that the MOA DNA that violent gene was in him, even though it lead to his demise. If Cath turned in that report that it was self defense then she's on the wrong path and all the rest of the team as well. When he was being interviewed the whole team was waiting outside the room. We don't know the answer he gave to Schultz on the question "was it self-defense, or murder" Ray beat him to a pulp and then he did throw him over the bannister. And on Brass this was the 3rd time he stepped in and protected Ray. In "Mascara" when Ray and him were interogating that other serial killer freak and he was rambling on about how "he didn't do it, the devil inside of him blah-blah-blah made him do it, and Ray attack him, and Brass stepped in and told him to stop. He ran out in the hall. The 2nd time in "Irradiator" when the doctor was tormenting and in his face and on his case about the book, Ray slammed him against the wall. Brass once again stepped in and bascially told him to "cool it" with a bit of good advice. Now again in the finale Brass did something that was out-of-line with the cuffs. If all of them are lying, then what does that say about their integrity, as CSI's? A big can of worms. Even Ecklie said "it's pretty cut and dried", and he's Cath's boss. when will this all end and where?