@Jeffrey Fun Right!? These people are making an excellent point about how it was back then, the humanity. It wasn't perfect by any means, it never will be. But, it was truly a better time for humanity, in our nation's history... Cycles, brothers and sisters... Cycles!
"I'm not saying that I'm comfortable prosecuting a man that, but for the grace of God could be me." "And if the Almighty looked away for half a second you could also be (the homeless man) Roland Kirke." Whew. That's some great writing, and Stone's reaction is perfect.
That one really got me. Made me think of the other L&O case where the homeless man accidentally beat another man to death for not sharing his orange. That episode really forced its audience to see just how fucked being homeless really gets
Yeah, he played a seemingly normal guy that you could sympathize with when calm, a guy who was angry and upset at being beaten up which we'd all feel and a psychotic demon when worked up into a frenzy. The demonic facial expressions Kirk made while ranting angrily at the end of being cross examined were scary but you could tell he was full of rage at being beaten within an inch of his life. His severe mental issues weren't the only source of his anger, they merely enhanced his expression of it which caused him to lose the sympathy of the jury. The actor who played Kirk was truly a great actor to portray a range of different emotional traits.
In closing, Harold's lawyer says Kirke deserved it, but Stone says that Harold's assault is more of a menace to society that Kirke was. Harold is found innocent of attempted murder, and assault 1, but found guilty of assault 2, the least of the offences he was charged with. Judge Stein decides to sentence him immediately, instead of waiting for sentencing recommendations, as is required; assault 2 carries mandatory jail time, but the Judge says that the two days Harold was in jail waiting for bail qualifies. Harold gets time served and two years probation and is released immediately. Stone objects and wants to appeal; Stein overrules the objection.
One thing I didn't like about the earlier seasons of law and order was that they were a little unrealistic. I don't believe a judge has the right to deny an appeal before it's made since the appeal I believe goes to the supreme court. God bless everyone.
@@acid360delta7 No, a prosecutor can appeal a sentence (From theappelatelawfirmwebsite) "A defendant or the prosecution can appeal the sentence if the judge failed to act properly in handing down the sentence,..." God bless you.
@@FeedingFrenzy91 I don't see how the judge failed to act properly. The guy got 2 years probation and time served for Assault 2. There is no case for appeal by the prosecution.
@@acid360delta7 One of the grounds for sentencing appeal is "Sentencing a defendant in a manner that is disproportionate to the crime". Either way my point wasn't whether he has grounds, it's that when a prosecution says he is going to appeal I don't believe a judge can just deny it (the appeal I believe isn't even to her so she can't just deny it I believe).
I always loved the relationship between Schiff and Stone. Stone had his moments but usually he was very calm and collected. Those conversations with Schiff always were so illuminating and thoughtful. Schiff was more like a sounding board for Stone. He was the sage who guided him in his decisions. With McCoy, Schiff always had to yank on the leash of a overly passionate and sometimes reckless prosecutor.
I enjoyed McCoy a lot, but he could really be a wildcard. Sometimes it felt like he was close to Ben Stone: chasing after justice because it's the right thing to do. Other times...? McCoy could be really heavy-handed and try to twist the law to suit his personal feelings on the matter. I think overall, Schiff and Stone were (in-universe) the end of an era. The felt like very good guys coming out of rough times like the 70's and 80's with their honor intact and their heads held high. That's why Stone's exit hurts so much, at least to me. McCoy was definitely reckless at times. I could appreciate his zeal on some cases, but others, he was his own worst enemy.
After the "victim" blew up Stone's case with his testimony, there is no way the defendant would have taken the stand. The defense had the case won, there was no upside to putting the defendant on the stand at that point.
@@MeepChangeling I cannot remember for certain if he had already testified. If he had testified before then he has waived his right to remain silent. However; if he has not testified previously, there is no way Stone could force him to take the stand. The right of the defendant to remain silent is constitutional; therefore valid in every jurisdiction.
I think that Denis O' Hare has been the most prolific character actor on all the incarnations of L&O. I just saw him this morning on at least 2 reruns of SVU and CI. He's made several appearances over the past 31 years. Cool actor.
Very amusing to see Denis O'Hare as the attacker in this episode when he returns in season 6 in the role of the homeless schizophrenic. L&O really invited him to show his range.
Adam Schiff really is a sage. The whole episode we are shown a victim who, despite being homeless which usually inspires sympathy (at least in people who aren't full of hate for the downtrodden) is completely reprehensible and difficult to feel at all sorry for. And yet, Adam Schiff, in one sentence, perfectly sums up why we still cannot let these sorts of attacks go unpunished: "If the Almighty looked away for a second you could also be Roland Kirk". It makes the viewer feel guilty for having so much sympathy for the attacker because we all know, whether we admit it or not, that he's right. I'm not religious, but with a string of bad luck, or a sudden dramatic shift in brain chemistry as a result of genetics or an accident, any of us could end up like Roland Kirk, and if we aren't willing to stick up for the rights of the Roland Kirk's of the world, no matter how reprehensible their behavior is, who will stick up for us if we end up the same way? The idea of punishing someone for exacting revenge on someone who had just robbed and injured his wife may not sit well with us, but if we don't apply the law to these cases then is there really "law and order" in society? Tough questions and I'm not saying there is an easy answer, but I have to side with Schiff.
A large part of me had sympathy for the attacker too as he was sticking up for his wife and was sick of the homeless guy's crap which also involved shoving a kid in front of a moving car, harassing the people on the street he was on, stealing from them among other things. Of course, I get that Roland Kirk had severe mental issues that kept him from having a normal life and that the system failed to provide the care he needed to be kept off the street so the ultimate cause of this whole mess was the system.
I remember this episode and I also remember that Kirk was supposed to be on medication. This wasn't a case where the victim couldn't get his meds because they explained that he had family and a place to stay, he had means. Roland Kirk made the deliberate decision to go off his meds knowing that he was violent and deranged when not medicated. He didn't care about how his behavior affected the residents of that neighborhood, only about some insane delusion he followed when not lucid. I understand that we can't simply ignore these situations but if the law had done its job right the first time, Roland Kirk would've been committed to an asylum and the people in that neighborhood would be free from his violence. The people he harassed tried all legal means to get him out of their hair and wound up losing a lawsuit they had filed against him. He got a thirty thousand dollar judgement and went right back to harassing them. I forgot to mention his drug use which just makes him more dangerous. He didn't deserve to be beaten bloody but he also had absolutely no right to assault anyone, which he did repeatedly. I'm not surprised the defendant was acquitted, most people would sympathize with him over a mentally unstable drug addict who made the decision to go off his meds when he was lucid and decided to do drugs often.
Maybe, just maybe, if the state had done it's job and took care of the homeless mentally ill guy, that dude wouldn't feel the need to take matters into his own hands. When the state fails you, what should you do ?
Schiff was such a good character, wisdom not just intelligence. Often with a short succinct point he'd strike right at the crux of the issue, cutting through all the legal arguement. There one were the physics scientist has a breakthrough and his theory is stolen by a colleague and he's discredited or something, and he sent the guy a pipe bomb, but the wife opened it. The scientist is truly sorry at the trial and reads out a sincere apology and gets man 2. Stone says 'He's not your tyical killer' and Schiff responds 'He is, he killed someone'.
I love how the conversation with his boss sets it up for what to expect. We're going to understand their fear but maybe not agree with what the guy did. But buddy really you're going to call yourself out like that?
I love Society. "I'm a law abiding citizen" "You beat a guy to death." "Um... Self defence, as stated in Article 4 of our Country's Stature. YOU'LL NEVER TAKE ME ALIVE!" *leaps out of ground floor window*
That reminds of Dallas Winston from that movie The Outsiders but he was holding a gun and said YOU'LL NEVER TAKE ME ALIVE RUMPUS! then gets killed by the police
Yeah, Stone knew that he'd lost the case because Kirk Roland couldn't hold up under cross examination which is what I knew would happen as he was insane and prone to angrily ranting if pushed hard enough.
Wow. I had forgotten this one! My first thought was Anita saying: "Hello. My *brotha* ". THAT episode was FIYAH! (The man who was passing, married to the racist wife who had to be PAID extra to care for their children.😨) my favorite with "Mr. Morrissey" was when he played a mentally ill guy who killed the women in the dress shop, & it was revealed that he used to be a LAWYER, and schizophrenia swept his life away: he became homeless. (A nice wink at karma @Law&Order!) I cry every time I see that one. The JUDGE even got choked up! That was a brilliant episode!! 💗
@R. H. Kingpin I knew it was something that started with "H", but yes!! That episode!!! His sister jumps downs Claire's throat for not returning her phone call, and explains: "It was Heber.". It is probably in my top 10 favorite eps, just for the ending.. So moving & powerful. "I touch it & it cuts me." He slinks down and & his sister weeps with him. The judge..And the END: "I got a copy of his closing. He could've hung the jury."! I get a lump in my throat just thinking about it!😢
One thing about this show, if you watched it regularly you seen a character used 3 times. Briscoe was a defense attorney before. That one guy you mentioned was on here as a man who was half black, one of my favorite episodes. Even Van Buren has been on there as a mother who's child was murdered by a kid who was illiterate and went to the wrong place instead of the the white man who owed a drug dealer.
I remember back when they would run reruns all the time... but they started right when McCoy came on, and ran through the then-present. (I think this was post-Briscoe, but Green and McCoy were still on.)
@@thefanwithoutaface8105 He could have called the police and had him arrested. He could even have legally used the rebar to hold him in custody until the police arrived. He certainly did not have to continue hitting the man in the head after breaking his legs.
@@andrewcady8827 Problem is considering he was on drugs, homeless and mentally ill he could've gotten off on an insanity charge or required to go to the rehab clinic he was already going to, which lets him out. The guy had probably been arrested before or been sent somewhere else but just got off. You heard what they said, this guy 7:53 he's been forcibly committed to a psych war atleast 12 times, likely for this exact reason and they let him go inspite of it.
@@andrewcady8827 And they had called the cops. And he had been arrested. And he then gets released and heads back to the alley. And this is after they were all sued by a self-righteous do-gooder on behalf of the crack smoking nutjob.
Even though the defendant slips a bit under Stone's questioning, I don't think the jury would convict him after the victim's testimony ended up being such a slam dunk for the defense. I miss these old episodes... it wasn't always quite as clear where the lines were. Was the defendant too aggressive in his attacks? Maybe... but then the person he attacked had been a violent threat multiple times before. Does it make it right? Good questions and scenarios that were nuanced a bit more than later seasons.
If I'd been on the jury, I wouldn't have convicted the defendant and would've seen the victim as a menace to society who got what he deserved. Of course, I wouldn't have thought of Ben Stone as a bad guy as he's legally required to prosecute those who commit crimes.
@@girlgarde Assault with premedited murder > insane homeless nut, you do the math kiddo, you get what you deserve if YOU become the problem instead of reporting it.
@@Tommy92gunner Insane homeless guy who just admitted he's been let out of Psychiatric hospitals 12 times and pushed a child in front of a moving car. The system failed and it was only a matter of time before Kirk KILLED someone, screw the homeless drug addict.
Honestly that happens a lot. The general public and even paramedics/EMTs are not very good if determining if someone has a pulse because there are times during a medical emergency that it can go so slow that you can't feel it. Because it can be difficult to determine, it is better for bystanders to do CPR than not. Even if the person has a pulse, it still might be so slow that it is not perfusing the brain and vital organs so the CPR can help that until responders get there and continue or correct the problem.
To become a crack-head kook - of his own free will, mind you - is the most egotistical and arrogant thing you can do. You are saying F*ck the world, I demand that you support me and feed me and house me and put up with my bull-sh*t 'til the end of time, and just TAKE IT! You sound like a liberal. Did you vote for Biden?
@Mister Whipple He broke his legs and almost murdered him...or did you not watch the entire clip? I'm conservative, jkass. Is there anything else you want to add
@Mister Whipple If that was me, I would have shut the hell up. He spoke too much and pretty much put his foot in his mouth. You're probably no more than a 15 year old schmuck behind the net. If you think you're so tough, we can meet up in person.
Why would a Texas Conservative be bothered by saying a crack-head menace should be bumped off? What's it to you? That's why I called you a RINO. A REAL Conservative would have fed that freak to the hogs, rather than let him harass a whole neighborhood, and drain tax-money forever and ever. How did I manage to hurt your feelings? I thing RUclips is deleting some of YOUR comments.
When Kirk said 'Rolls-Royce', he said it so angrily and in a sinister fashion, it was almost like he'd turned into a demon or something and his demonic facial expression helped a lot.
Love Michael Moriarty. Great in Who'll Stop the Rain. Which was released as Dog Soldiers. I read the National Book Award Novel by Robert Stone in Willard Park in Berkeley in a sitting '84. No Dogs or kids. Saw Stone Read and Q&A "Outerbridge Reach" I asked who Ray Hicks was based on. It was Stone's Recruit CPO in the Navy. Much of Who'll Stop the Rain was filmed there. Stone was a great one.
10:20 dude's a drug addict, a person high enough on something will ignore pain and keep attacking. Hell he probably could've tried crawling over to him.
I don't have experience with drugs but I can see how that would work, I slam into things occasionally when drinking and I barely feel it and alcohol just numbs you a bit, if you had something that could tap into adrenaline, as cocaine and it's variants are known to do I could easily see a man Ignoring all kinds of trauma and continuing to be dangerous, like how old boar spears have a cross gaurd on them because a boar with a hole in its heart will keep trying to kill you in the minute or so it takes to die.
The final sentence of Harold makes some sense. If there is a repeated nuscance that the state fails to remedy, then whatever happens next is at least partially on the state. Unfortunately, there is no real remedy for state inaction. Even if the state were to pay restitution, that actually comes from tax payer, the people who are contributory to the inaction are not personally held responsible and, as a result, have no reason to change their behavior. A lot of minor crime are disregarded as a matter of course because it's too much of a bother, incident like the one described is unfortunately a natural outcome.
Kirk can be insane but also deeply religious as his type of mental illness allows him to be somewhat coherent and have a vague sense of reality at times, he just needs to focus mentally. Just don't get him mad or else he'll angrily rant and make demonic facial expressons.
@@LordErebusBloodmoon That's why there's self defense laws in place! If someone hurt my family, I'd protect them! I would not go around looking for trouble but would be prepared if it came to me.
Don't understand why that attorney put the defendant on the stand. The victim's testimony played into the jury's fears and biases enough to get an aquittal or at least result in a hung jury.
He may have been forced to for some reason, the writers should've explained WHY the defendant was testifying. The victim's angry tirade when cross examined DID make him look bad and likely made the jury think of him as a dangerous lunatic who got what he deserved at the defendant's hands. Even if they felt bad for most homeless people, they'd regard him as a monster who should be locked up.
For those wondering, the defendant was convicted only of a misdemeanor and sentenced to three days of tine served. Adam said that repeated system failures of the publics' greatest fear. "No," Stone replied, "their greatest fear is that Roland Kirk will move into their neighborhood."
It’s terrible when people are homeless but it’s not an excuse for them to try to murder a child or do other things and I’ve learned that some of these people like being on the street.
@@FIREBRAND38 dude if you knew anything at all, you would know that one of the writers and actors on this show is an avid jazz enthusiast and performer. But go ahead and be an idiot about it
2:04 - 3:01 😅😂I'm sorry, but when I saw this guy, I just kept thinking of the guy who lost his son to the werewolf in Silver Bullet. "🥺😤My son was torn to pieces! I'm gonna hunt up a little private justice!"
This episode is way old, probably 1994. I remember what the city was like in those days, the bums ruled the streets (until people fought back) but then Rudy cleaned it up. Now, 25 years later, it's back to the old game.
The defendant is such a little weasel. Sure, Kirk is dangerous, but to attack him when he’s asleep and helpless, and then to pretend it was self-defense, is so low
So he should have walked up and awakened they guy? And risked getting hurt? This Kirk Roland was an asshole who terrorized and robbed people. He deserved what he got. Maybe he'll think twice before terrorizing and robbing people in the future.
@@Plank_Hill When someone pushes your 11 year old in to an oncoming car, you are happy they are a human being. They can suffer as much as humanly possible.
Kirk wasn't just dangerous, he was literally murderous, or did you miss the part about him pushing a child in front of a moving car. Sure, it might be dishonorable to attack the man while he was sleeping, but in a very real sense he was constantly violent, constantly harming people, and it would only be a matter of time before he actually killed someone. Self defense isn't just a thing that exists in the moment you are being attacked, it also applies to danger to yourself or others. Just as one doesn't wait for a rabid dog to start mauling you before you attempt to deal with it, so too does one not wait until a violent crack addict is literally trying to murder someone to try and prevent the danger. There are certainly better ways for it to be handled, but given the situation a man seeking to remove a violent psychopath who had just attacked his wife is not being "a little weasel."
@@Plank_Hill "you don't fix the person, you fix the system ignoring the problem." That's a great attitude to have, except for two issues. 1) it can take years, decades even, to "fix the system" and you're going to have people who oppose your fix for various reasons. For example, the system used to be fixed in such a way that people like that homeless person were kept in institutions and asylums. But people (largely through propaganda) came to believe that such institutions were inhumane and evil, so they were all shut down throwing tens of thousands of violent, mentally unstable people out onto the street. 2) you're basically saying "it is not my responsibility to do something, and we all know what the only real solution to the problem is, but I'm going to insist someone else fix my problem for me rather than even considering the fact that I could do something. All you're doing is insisting that "it's not my job, make someone else do it" as if that were a moral argument. Which its not, really. It's an excuse. It reminds me of an expression I've heard. "Remember, when you have seconds to live, the cops are only minutes away." So while you're "fixing the system" so "someone else can solve my problem" how many people die at the hands of the violent crackhead? 1? 3? Is it really more moral to let someone be murdered in order for the system to "finally work" than to take steps to make sure that no innocent is harmed? Is it really more moral to allow innocent blood to be spilled?
Didnt feel sorry for the homeless guy in this episode. The defendant was wrong but the homeless guy was a menace who thought he could get away with harassing and attacking others.
Although he's a composite, Roland Kirk was most likely schizophrenic. His talking about a "sonic convergence" in back of those Bedford St. condos seems to show he was. So even that the system had it's limits, why, you ask, did his family not step in? In Kirk's case, tough call, although when I was on the street not that many years ago, I did see the worst case come to life: DUMP JOB. No matter that the families of those I saw literally dumped on the street near a shelter had the money to help their son or daughter, they didn't want it to get around their family member was a "nut case" and ruin the family's so-called "good standing in their community." Even though Kirk, in the story, may NOT have been a dump job, his family simply never chose to help him. And as his attorney said, even when the system wanted to help him, his drug habit kept him from getting help. And that, for good or bad, is life in the big city.
The thing I really appreciated about the early seasons was the humanity and nuance on both sides.
True! (Love your screen name!!)
that and for the time it was 1rst to admit failure time to time quite refreshing
It's kind of like how it was back then and what's missing from life today
I love the appellate arguments. You think the judges on one side then they jump to the other with counters! I love it
@Jeffrey Fun Right!? These people are making an excellent point about how it was back then, the humanity.
It wasn't perfect by any means, it never will be. But, it was truly a better time for humanity, in our nation's history...
Cycles, brothers and sisters...
Cycles!
"I'm not saying that I'm comfortable prosecuting a man that, but for the grace of God could be me."
"And if the Almighty looked away for half a second you could also be (the homeless man) Roland Kirke."
Whew. That's some great writing, and Stone's reaction is perfect.
That one really got me. Made me think of the other L&O case where the homeless man accidentally beat another man to death for not sharing his orange. That episode really forced its audience to see just how fucked being homeless really gets
Great performance by the actor playing the homeless guy.
Actor's name is Marion Killinger. :)
Yeah, he played a seemingly normal guy that you could sympathize with when calm, a guy who was angry and upset at being beaten up which we'd all feel and a psychotic demon when worked up into a frenzy.
The demonic facial expressions Kirk made while ranting angrily at the end of being cross examined were scary but you could tell he was full of rage at being beaten within an inch of his life. His severe mental issues weren't the only source of his anger, they merely enhanced his expression of it which caused him to lose the sympathy of the jury.
The actor who played Kirk was truly a great actor to portray a range of different emotional traits.
In closing, Harold's lawyer says Kirke deserved it, but Stone says that Harold's assault is more of a menace to society that Kirke was. Harold is found innocent of attempted murder, and assault 1, but found guilty of assault 2, the least of the offences he was charged with. Judge Stein decides to sentence him immediately, instead of waiting for sentencing recommendations, as is required; assault 2 carries mandatory jail time, but the Judge says that the two days Harold was in jail waiting for bail qualifies. Harold gets time served and two years probation and is released immediately. Stone objects and wants to appeal; Stein overrules the objection.
One thing I didn't like about the earlier seasons of law and order was that they were a little unrealistic. I don't believe a judge has the right to deny an appeal before it's made since the appeal I believe goes to the supreme court.
God bless everyone.
@@FeedingFrenzy91 appeal for what though, re-charging him is double jeoperdy, there is no appeal.
@@acid360delta7 No, a prosecutor can appeal a sentence (From theappelatelawfirmwebsite) "A defendant or the prosecution can appeal the sentence if the judge failed to act properly in handing down the sentence,..."
God bless you.
@@FeedingFrenzy91 I don't see how the judge failed to act properly. The guy got 2 years probation and time served for Assault 2. There is no case for appeal by the prosecution.
@@acid360delta7 One of the grounds for sentencing appeal is "Sentencing a defendant in a manner that is disproportionate to the crime". Either way my point wasn't whether he has grounds, it's that when a prosecution says he is going to appeal I don't believe a judge can just deny it (the appeal I believe isn't even to her so she can't just deny it I believe).
I always loved the relationship between Schiff and Stone. Stone had his moments but usually he was very calm and collected. Those conversations with Schiff always were so illuminating and thoughtful. Schiff was more like a sounding board for Stone. He was the sage who guided him in his decisions. With McCoy, Schiff always had to yank on the leash of a overly passionate and sometimes reckless prosecutor.
When Stone resigned, Adam said he thought Stone would follow him as DA. And he reacted like a father losing a son. Broken hearted.
Yes, I was a hug Schiff fan. I hated when Stone left the series. It wasn't the same for me, after that.
Adam Schiff was SO CURMUDGEONLY BUT THAT’S EXACTLY what I liked BEST about him!!!
intldawn Sam Waterston has come a long way from the 1975 movie Rancho deluxe starring him and Jeff Bridges and introducing Charlene Dallas
I enjoyed McCoy a lot, but he could really be a wildcard. Sometimes it felt like he was close to Ben Stone: chasing after justice because it's the right thing to do. Other times...? McCoy could be really heavy-handed and try to twist the law to suit his personal feelings on the matter. I think overall, Schiff and Stone were (in-universe) the end of an era. The felt like very good guys coming out of rough times like the 70's and 80's with their honor intact and their heads held high. That's why Stone's exit hurts so much, at least to me.
McCoy was definitely reckless at times. I could appreciate his zeal on some cases, but others, he was his own worst enemy.
After the "victim" blew up Stone's case with his testimony, there is no way the defendant would have taken the stand. The defense had the case won, there was no upside to putting the defendant on the stand at that point.
Dan Harp That defense attorney really blew up his client’s spot.
Irrelevant. Prosecution has the right to call the defense up for a cross examination.
@@MeepChangeling I cannot remember for certain if he had already testified. If he had testified before then he has waived his right to remain silent. However; if he has not testified previously, there is no way Stone could force him to take the stand. The right of the defendant to remain silent is constitutional; therefore valid in every jurisdiction.
frank sanders - Except that in this case he was put on the stand by his own lawyer and Stone was questioning on the redirect.
@@classixdrummer I don't think it was my post you meant to reply to.
I think that Denis O' Hare has been the most prolific character actor on all the incarnations of L&O. I just saw him this morning on at least 2 reruns of SVU and CI. He's made several appearances over the past 31 years. Cool actor.
Very amusing to see Denis O'Hare as the attacker in this episode when he returns in season 6 in the role of the homeless schizophrenic. L&O really invited him to show his range.
I didn’t know Rolls-Royce made wheelchairs...
They don't but pay them enough they'll make it for you
A fancy six-wheeled electric one.
Can I get one with a continental kit
Crackheads see all sorts of things.
LMMFAOOO
Adam Schiff really is a sage. The whole episode we are shown a victim who, despite being homeless which usually inspires sympathy (at least in people who aren't full of hate for the downtrodden) is completely reprehensible and difficult to feel at all sorry for. And yet, Adam Schiff, in one sentence, perfectly sums up why we still cannot let these sorts of attacks go unpunished: "If the Almighty looked away for a second you could also be Roland Kirk". It makes the viewer feel guilty for having so much sympathy for the attacker because we all know, whether we admit it or not, that he's right. I'm not religious, but with a string of bad luck, or a sudden dramatic shift in brain chemistry as a result of genetics or an accident, any of us could end up like Roland Kirk, and if we aren't willing to stick up for the rights of the Roland Kirk's of the world, no matter how reprehensible their behavior is, who will stick up for us if we end up the same way? The idea of punishing someone for exacting revenge on someone who had just robbed and injured his wife may not sit well with us, but if we don't apply the law to these cases then is there really "law and order" in society? Tough questions and I'm not saying there is an easy answer, but I have to side with Schiff.
A large part of me had sympathy for the attacker too as he was sticking up for his wife and was sick of the homeless guy's crap which also involved shoving a kid in front of a moving car, harassing the people on the street he was on, stealing from them among other things.
Of course, I get that Roland Kirk had severe mental issues that kept him from having a normal life and that the system failed to provide the care he needed to be kept off the street so the ultimate cause of this whole mess was the system.
I remember this episode and I also remember that Kirk was supposed to be on medication. This wasn't a case where the victim couldn't get his meds because they explained that he had family and a place to stay, he had means. Roland Kirk made the deliberate decision to go off his meds knowing that he was violent and deranged when not medicated. He didn't care about how his behavior affected the residents of that neighborhood, only about some insane delusion he followed when not lucid. I understand that we can't simply ignore these situations but if the law had done its job right the first time, Roland Kirk would've been committed to an asylum and the people in that neighborhood would be free from his violence. The people he harassed tried all legal means to get him out of their hair and wound up losing a lawsuit they had filed against him. He got a thirty thousand dollar judgement and went right back to harassing them. I forgot to mention his drug use which just makes him more dangerous. He didn't deserve to be beaten bloody but he also had absolutely no right to assault anyone, which he did repeatedly. I'm not surprised the defendant was acquitted, most people would sympathize with him over a mentally unstable drug addict who made the decision to go off his meds when he was lucid and decided to do drugs often.
Maybe, just maybe, if the state had done it's job and took care of the homeless mentally ill guy, that dude wouldn't feel the need to take matters into his own hands. When the state fails you, what should you do ?
Schiff was such a good character, wisdom not just intelligence. Often with a short succinct point he'd strike right at the crux of the issue, cutting through all the legal arguement. There one were the physics scientist has a breakthrough and his theory is stolen by a colleague and he's discredited or something, and he sent the guy a pipe bomb, but the wife opened it. The scientist is truly sorry at the trial and reads out a sincere apology and gets man 2. Stone says 'He's not your tyical killer' and Schiff responds 'He is, he killed someone'.
@@buxadonoff he should have stayed on his meds. citizens arrest for beating his wife id argue
Aaannd there goes the case...
That's why you should never take the stand in your own defense. Cross examination is a powerful thing.
"If the Almighty looked away for half a second, you could also be Rowland Kirk." One of my favorite lines from any TV show.
Law and Order will always rule. Greatest acting and writing ever.
11:05. The equivalent of a headshot in the courtroom. Haha, Stone NAILED him!
It’s bad writing just to let the prosecutor win.
@@TriColorMonk Prosecutor didn't. Man who beat the homeless guy in retribution for him attacking his wife got off
@@Larry-Lobster Funny how the rich can assault anyone at will, claim defence, and walk away, that's 99% of all murder cases.
@@TriColorMonk Wrong but go on kid, you wouldn't know go writing if you tried.
Denis O'Hare is an absolutely phenomenal actor. He has such a great range and is just brilliant in all his roles
Denis O’Hare (Mr. Morrisee) is an amazing actor. His best performance was in the season 6 episode “Pro Se”.
One of the best episodes of the series
Absolutely, heavy, moving episode. One of the best all time. Love his interview with Olivet.
The titles of these videos are always fun.
I love how the conversation with his boss sets it up for what to expect. We're going to understand their fear but maybe not agree with what the guy did. But buddy really you're going to call yourself out like that?
Rolls Royce Makes Wheel Chairs Now? Interesting
Roland Kirk was a great jazz musician.
Still the greatest slip of the tongue I've ever seen
I love Society.
"I'm a law abiding citizen"
"You beat a guy to death."
"Um... Self defence, as stated in Article 4 of our Country's Stature. YOU'LL NEVER TAKE ME ALIVE!" *leaps out of ground floor window*
That reminds of Dallas Winston from that movie The Outsiders but he was holding a gun and said YOU'LL NEVER TAKE ME ALIVE RUMPUS! then gets killed by the police
@@thefighter5182suicide by cop, it’s a really terrible thing to happen
The actors that are in l&o are on top of there game
8:59..."We lost this case!
Yeah, Stone knew that he'd lost the case because Kirk Roland couldn't hold up under cross examination which is what I knew would happen as he was insane and prone to angrily ranting if pushed hard enough.
Wow. I had forgotten this one! My first thought was Anita saying: "Hello. My *brotha* ". THAT episode was FIYAH! (The man who was passing, married to the racist wife who had to be PAID extra to care for their children.😨)
my favorite with "Mr. Morrissey" was when he played a mentally ill guy who killed the women in the dress shop, & it was revealed that he used to be a LAWYER, and schizophrenia swept his life away: he became homeless. (A nice wink at karma @Law&Order!) I cry every time I see that one. The JUDGE even got choked up! That was a brilliant episode!! 💗
@R. H. Kingpin I knew it was something that started with "H", but yes!! That episode!!! His sister jumps downs Claire's throat for not returning her phone call, and explains: "It was Heber.". It is probably in my top 10 favorite eps, just for the ending.. So moving & powerful. "I touch it & it cuts me." He slinks down and & his sister weeps with him. The judge..And the END: "I got a copy of his closing. He could've hung the jury."! I get a lump in my throat just thinking about it!😢
It is funny how the actor playing the defendent- a man who killed a Homeless Man- later played a Homeless who had killed someone.
One thing about this show, if you watched it regularly you seen a character used 3 times. Briscoe was a defense attorney before. That one guy you mentioned was on here as a man who was half black, one of my favorite episodes. Even Van Buren has been on there as a mother who's child was murdered by a kid who was illiterate and went to the wrong place instead of the the white man who owed a drug dealer.
Which episode was it?
It's an episode about a divorced woman who is murdered by the former husband's wife because of the baby was half black
Denis O'Hare! Before he was Liz Taylor, Spaulding, Stanley - and so many others on AHS.
I remember back when they would run reruns all the time... but they started right when McCoy came on, and ran through the then-present. (I think this was post-Briscoe, but Green and McCoy were still on.)
8:42 Aaaaand that could be the ball game folks..... 11:00 Spoke too soon, looks like we could be going into extra innings. 🤣
'Dont think I've never thought of it'. Case closed, right then and there.
Thought-crime now?
8:59 "Who's brilliant idea was to get him on the stand? Oh wait, that was my idea."
I was as there when he beat me up..lol
Take your meds
He was saying, "I was in that ally when he beat me up"
But ngl, I thought that for a split second too
If I ever have to live in a wheelchair I want a Rolls Royce one!
GETTING HIGH!!!
With enough crack to last you a lifetime. Don’t forget the crack
Such a good scene. Stone has to pick the least evil essentially. A drug fiend whose been assaulted, or the entitled man who thinks he’s justice.
The drug guy almost killed a child and attacked the guy's wife, yet the drug addict was still running around. What exactly would you do?
@@thefanwithoutaface8105 He could have called the police and had him arrested. He could even have legally used the rebar to hold him in custody until the police arrived. He certainly did not have to continue hitting the man in the head after breaking his legs.
@@andrewcady8827 Problem is considering he was on drugs, homeless and mentally ill he could've gotten off on an insanity charge or required to go to the rehab clinic he was already going to, which lets him out. The guy had probably been arrested before or been sent somewhere else but just got off. You heard what they said, this guy 7:53 he's been forcibly committed to a psych war atleast 12 times, likely for this exact reason and they let him go inspite of it.
I’d send the junkie to jail.
@@andrewcady8827 And they had called the cops. And he had been arrested. And he then gets released and heads back to the alley. And this is after they were all sued by a self-righteous do-gooder on behalf of the crack smoking nutjob.
that bass riff in the beginning was sick
That crack head should get an award or something for such a dramatic turn of character in such a short line of questioning. It’s really amazing acting
"I'll sue, and he will see me every day in my Rolls Royce Wheelchair...!" LOL. I agree.
8:42 I think we've all wanted to say this at some point in our lives.
That guy on the stand was in the werewolf movie Silver Bullet!The werewolf tore his sin to pieces!
Not much seems to have changed regarding the general public in the homeless
@RobTheNotary You haven't looked in on San Francisco then or now.
@@FIREBRAND38 No Los Angeles is worse than San Francisco about the
Homeless people.
Even though the defendant slips a bit under Stone's questioning, I don't think the jury would convict him after the victim's testimony ended up being such a slam dunk for the defense. I miss these old episodes... it wasn't always quite as clear where the lines were. Was the defendant too aggressive in his attacks? Maybe... but then the person he attacked had been a violent threat multiple times before. Does it make it right? Good questions and scenarios that were nuanced a bit more than later seasons.
If I'd been on the jury, I wouldn't have convicted the defendant and would've seen the victim as a menace to society who got what he deserved. Of course, I wouldn't have thought of Ben Stone as a bad guy as he's legally required to prosecute those who commit crimes.
@@girlgarde Assault with premedited murder > insane homeless nut, you do the math kiddo, you get what you deserve if YOU become the problem instead of reporting it.
@@Tommy92gunner Insane homeless guy who just admitted he's been let out of Psychiatric hospitals 12 times and pushed a child in front of a moving car. The system failed and it was only a matter of time before Kirk KILLED someone, screw the homeless drug addict.
Kirke's testimony must've been so much fun to act...
Rolls Royce wheel chair hahaha
Anyone else going to comment on the fact that he'd perform CPR on someone who is alive and had a heart beat?
Honestly that happens a lot. The general public and even paramedics/EMTs are not very good if determining if someone has a pulse because there are times during a medical emergency that it can go so slow that you can't feel it. Because it can be difficult to determine, it is better for bystanders to do CPR than not. Even if the person has a pulse, it still might be so slow that it is not perfusing the brain and vital organs so the CPR can help that until responders get there and continue or correct the problem.
A person's ego and arrogance usually gives the person away.
To become a crack-head kook - of his own free will, mind you - is the most egotistical and arrogant thing you can do. You are saying F*ck the world, I demand that you support me and feed me and house me and put up with my bull-sh*t 'til the end of time, and just TAKE IT! You sound like a liberal. Did you vote for Biden?
@Mister Whipple He broke his legs and almost murdered him...or did you not watch the entire clip? I'm conservative, jkass. Is there anything else you want to add
Yeah. He ALMOST murdered him. That was his mistake. You still have not explained WHY a crack-head is allowed to bother people, you RINO you.
@Mister Whipple If that was me, I would have shut the hell up. He spoke too much and pretty much put his foot in his mouth. You're probably no more than a 15 year old schmuck behind the net. If you think you're so tough, we can meet up in person.
Why would a Texas Conservative be bothered by saying a crack-head menace should be bumped off? What's it to you? That's why I called you a RINO. A REAL Conservative would have fed that freak to the hogs, rather than let him harass a whole neighborhood, and drain tax-money forever and ever. How did I manage to hurt your feelings? I thing RUclips is deleting some of YOUR comments.
Rolls-royces wheel chair 😂 this is one fancy crack bomb
When Kirk said 'Rolls-Royce', he said it so angrily and in a sinister fashion, it was almost like he'd turned into a demon or something and his demonic facial expression helped a lot.
10:19 Stone is great! 👍
Now you know why a lot of people would vote for John Smith in High castle
The dude is a true hero. The CBB.
Love Michael Moriarty. Great in Who'll Stop the Rain. Which was released as Dog Soldiers. I read the National Book Award Novel by Robert Stone in Willard Park in Berkeley in a sitting '84. No Dogs or kids. Saw Stone Read and Q&A "Outerbridge Reach" I asked who Ray Hicks was based on. It was Stone's Recruit CPO in the Navy. Much of Who'll Stop the Rain was filmed there. Stone was a great one.
wish this was on netflix
And that ladies and gentlemen is how you fail a word problem 😂😂😂
Steven Hill/Adam Schiff is the most charming person i've ever seen, i hope to resemble him when old
Plot twist: he was acquitted
Nope not really he still was acquitted for the other crimes pal.
My man said he will be getting high on crack on his Rolls Royce wheelchair.
0:48 the music in the background was badass 😎
I’ve been dealing with homeless people regularly for two years. It is such a tightrope to walk. You alternate between sympathizing and despising them.
Alright still mad you didn't episode 10 of season 2 but I'll get over it eventually
10:20 dude's a drug addict, a person high enough on something will ignore pain and keep attacking. Hell he probably could've tried crawling over to him.
Lol, this is pretty ignorant of reality.
@@charlesbronson2926 Really, then you must have a lot of experience fighting against drug addicts.
Care to explain cause I assure you someone on drugs usually can take some hits trust and believe
It depends on the type of drug.
I don't have experience with drugs but I can see how that would work, I slam into things occasionally when drinking and I barely feel it and alcohol just numbs you a bit, if you had something that could tap into adrenaline, as cocaine and it's variants are known to do I could easily see a man Ignoring all kinds of trauma and continuing to be dangerous, like how old boar spears have a cross gaurd on them because a boar with a hole in its heart will keep trying to kill you in the minute or so it takes to die.
He has to be acting like that because he stole something from me?
I wish I had a RRRRolls RRRRoyce wheelchair. Powered by their jet engines.
And it was in that moment he knew he fucked up🤣🤣🤣
Back then having a Mercedes or Rolls meant you were on top of the food chain.
I love this show
Law & Order, do you ever plan on putting clips with Jack McCoy (Sam Waterston)?
I hope not.
I loved both Stone and McCoy.
Go back and do Political research on Sam Waterston you might be surprised at what you find
@@RobTheNotary what’s wrong with his views?
Ladies and gentlemen, Russell Edgington 😂
He turned to Smiggle REAL QUICK LMMFAOOO
I love that the gotcha moment was how could he come after you after busting his knee caps? sir..do you not know what crack can do to you?
Ladies and gentlemen, you can see Lionel Lockridge from Santa Barbara... Such a small world haha
The final sentence of Harold makes some sense. If there is a repeated nuscance that the state fails to remedy, then whatever happens next is at least partially on the state. Unfortunately, there is no real remedy for state inaction. Even if the state were to pay restitution, that actually comes from tax payer, the people who are contributory to the inaction are not personally held responsible and, as a result, have no reason to change their behavior. A lot of minor crime are disregarded as a matter of course because it's too much of a bother, incident like the one described is unfortunately a natural outcome.
Whenever I come back to this episode, I always die at the line, "I'm a deeply religious man, your honor."
Kirk can be insane but also deeply religious as his type of mental illness allows him to be somewhat coherent and have a vague sense of reality at times, he just needs to focus mentally. Just don't get him mad or else he'll angrily rant and make demonic facial expressons.
Just out of curiosity, does the husband get convicted or acquitted? I can’t find a detailed summary online.
SPOILERS:
He gets acquitted of all but one charge: lawandorder.fandom.com/wiki/Volunteers
Got acquitted on second degree assault and was sentenced to time served and two years probation.
Is Danny really that crazy?
Putting that homeless guy on the stand was one of Stone's biggest blunders ever.
9:00 "Ah shit, there goes this case."
2:23 - "MY SON WAS TORN TO PIECES"
“There is only PRIVATE JUSTICE.”
Sweet. Silver bullet reference.
Guy attacked my wife......he wouldn't get off so lucky.
emotionally and even a bit morally i agree with you but the law is the law
@@LordErebusBloodmoon That's why there's self defense laws in place! If someone hurt my family, I'd protect them! I would not go around looking for trouble but would be prepared if it came to me.
@@LordErebusBloodmoon It's only illegal if you get caught.
That thumbnail though...
That's my mum when she tells me off 🤣
Don't understand why that attorney put the defendant on the stand. The victim's testimony played into the jury's fears and biases enough to get an aquittal or at least result in a hung jury.
He may have been forced to for some reason, the writers should've explained WHY the defendant was testifying.
The victim's angry tirade when cross examined DID make him look bad and likely made the jury think of him as a dangerous lunatic who got what he deserved at the defendant's hands. Even if they felt bad for most homeless people, they'd regard him as a monster who should be locked up.
The King of Mississippi from True Blood & a lawyer from All the Presidents Men.
For those wondering, the defendant was convicted only of a misdemeanor and sentenced to three days of tine served. Adam said that repeated system failures of the publics' greatest fear. "No," Stone replied, "their greatest fear is that Roland Kirk will move into their neighborhood."
It’s terrible when people are homeless but it’s not an excuse for them to try to murder a child or do other things and I’ve learned that some of these people like being on the street.
Stone got 'em.
The defendant, Mr. Morrissey, looks like a cross between Sam Neill and Bashar Al-Assad.
Very good lol
Prosecutor: Guilty person says what
Defendant: What?
What's the ending to this episode ? Did Kirk win ?
Found guilty of second degree assault, judge sentences him to time served and two years probation.
@TheBrabon1 Kirk used his Rolls Royce wheelchair to win ultimate victory.
Law and order is a hood show to watch. 👍⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Wasn't Mr. Morrisey aka the defendant Oswald in Oliver Stone's JFK?
I liked Michael Moriarty but Sam Waterston was better.
I love that the victim's name is Roland Kirk. It's definitely got to be a nod to avant-gard jazz saxophonist Raashan Roland Kirk
Yeah, sure, whatever. Take this mind reading act to Vegas, try it out at the blackjack tables.
@@FIREBRAND38 dude if you knew anything at all, you would know that one of the writers and actors on this show is an avid jazz enthusiast and performer. But go ahead and be an idiot about it
The difference between Stone and McCoy... anyone?
McCoy's more go-hard.
And also obviously smart enough to prosecute victims for any crimes committed by them against there attackers that served as there motive.
The gal playing the judge has played a bag lady no doubt, or a nagging wet blanket. Range is everything to an actor.
2:04 - 3:01 😅😂I'm sorry, but when I saw this guy, I just kept thinking of the guy who lost his son to the werewolf in Silver Bullet.
"🥺😤My son was torn to pieces! I'm gonna hunt up a little private justice!"
He stopped too soon.
This episode is way old, probably 1994. I remember what the city was like in those days, the bums ruled the streets (until people fought back) but then Rudy cleaned it up. Now, 25 years later, it's back to the old game.
So you want the city to kill them all again?
@@namedidii No just bus them all to Philadelphia.
MondoBeno no thanks philly got enough bums ✌️
my peacock does have a season 4 on it
The defendant is such a little weasel. Sure, Kirk is dangerous, but to attack him when he’s asleep and helpless, and then to pretend it was self-defense, is so low
So he should have walked up and awakened they guy? And risked getting hurt? This Kirk Roland was an asshole who terrorized and robbed people. He deserved what he got. Maybe he'll think twice before terrorizing and robbing people in the future.
@James Horton except that Witherspoon this logic, you can justify going after a lot of people, and it had been done in history.
@@Plank_Hill When someone pushes your 11 year old in to an oncoming car, you are happy they are a human being. They can suffer as much as humanly possible.
Kirk wasn't just dangerous, he was literally murderous, or did you miss the part about him pushing a child in front of a moving car.
Sure, it might be dishonorable to attack the man while he was sleeping, but in a very real sense he was constantly violent, constantly harming people, and it would only be a matter of time before he actually killed someone.
Self defense isn't just a thing that exists in the moment you are being attacked, it also applies to danger to yourself or others. Just as one doesn't wait for a rabid dog to start mauling you before you attempt to deal with it, so too does one not wait until a violent crack addict is literally trying to murder someone to try and prevent the danger. There are certainly better ways for it to be handled, but given the situation a man seeking to remove a violent psychopath who had just attacked his wife is not being "a little weasel."
@@Plank_Hill "you don't fix the person, you fix the system ignoring the problem."
That's a great attitude to have, except for two issues.
1) it can take years, decades even, to "fix the system" and you're going to have people who oppose your fix for various reasons. For example, the system used to be fixed in such a way that people like that homeless person were kept in institutions and asylums. But people (largely through propaganda) came to believe that such institutions were inhumane and evil, so they were all shut down throwing tens of thousands of violent, mentally unstable people out onto the street.
2) you're basically saying "it is not my responsibility to do something, and we all know what the only real solution to the problem is, but I'm going to insist someone else fix my problem for me rather than even considering the fact that I could do something. All you're doing is insisting that "it's not my job, make someone else do it" as if that were a moral argument. Which its not, really. It's an excuse.
It reminds me of an expression I've heard. "Remember, when you have seconds to live, the cops are only minutes away."
So while you're "fixing the system" so "someone else can solve my problem" how many people die at the hands of the violent crackhead? 1? 3? Is it really more moral to let someone be murdered in order for the system to "finally work" than to take steps to make sure that no innocent is harmed? Is it really more moral to allow innocent blood to be spilled?
Love the show, but the amount of leading questions the prosecutor is allowed to always get away with without objection takes away from the realism
I liked Stone much more than McCoy
Didnt feel sorry for the homeless guy in this episode. The defendant was wrong but the homeless guy was a menace who thought he could get away with harassing and attacking others.
Not only that, he was profiting from his harassment. He had already successfully sued them.
I find old L&O clips of calm rational Michael Moriarty weird after his current role as a conspiracy theorist.
Although he's a composite, Roland Kirk was most likely schizophrenic. His talking about a "sonic convergence" in back of those Bedford St. condos seems to show he was. So even that the system had it's limits, why, you ask, did his family not step in? In Kirk's case, tough call, although when I was on the street not that many years ago, I did see the worst case come to life: DUMP JOB. No matter that the families of those I saw literally dumped on the street near a shelter had the money to help their son or daughter, they didn't want it to get around their family member was a "nut case" and ruin the family's so-called "good standing in their community." Even though Kirk, in the story, may NOT have been a dump job, his family simply never chose to help him. And as his attorney said, even when the system wanted to help him, his drug habit kept him from getting help. And that, for good or bad, is life in the big city.
How did it end?