Season 6 Episode 12

Dear Dad ...

Aired Friday 8:00 PM Jan 15, 2010 on CBS

Episode Fan Reviews (2)

Write A Review
out of 10
95 votes
  • A very poor episode of a favorite show which got almost everything wrong.

    I have watched every episode of the show, have considered it a favorite, and have even defended it in the Skeptical Community as an enjoyable fantasy series -- more easy once they stopped mentioning the supposed original of the main character who is -- as are all 'psychics' -- a total fraud, though perhaps an unconscious one.

    I have continued to enjoy it through this seaon, despite the fact that the plotting has fallen down to where the surprises are as obvious as the early Jessica Fletcher shows. The acting, the interplay of the characters, the dialogue, the believability of the DuBois family and the cleverness in working out the predictable endings have kept me loyal, and will.

    But this show was a disaster, only saved by the acting and interplay. They got almost everything possible wrong, particularly legally, making mistakes it wouldn't take a lawyer to catch. Even the subplot with the Nigerian scammer didn't work, forst because such people don't work out of the US, more importantly because it made Brigette's vision be a lie. She saw him as a prince, even after he revealed himself as a fraud, going entirely against the 'rules' of the show.

    But it was the main story that was totally wrong. Davalos DID commit a breach of ethics, not by sending the tapes to the DA, but by sending them anonymously. There was no violation of lawyer-client confidentiality, since the tapes were discovered by Davalos' detective, not because the client told him about them, and having them, he was required by canons of ethics to report them, or at least to withdraw his client's 'not guilty' plea. In fact, despite lawyer-client confidentiality, a lawyer who is told by a client "I did it" is forbidden from pleading such a client not guilty unless he has reason to doubt his client's confession.

    Nor did he need such an action to 'stick it' tyo the guilty client. Once he received his daughter's suicide note -- the timing is unclear, but it seemed to be after the tapes were sent but before the verdict was in -- he was required to recuse himself from the case, and ask to be removed as the client's attorney, and he could have done so by taking the note to the judge, in front of the prosecutor.

    I even believe the note would have been usable as evidence by the prosecutor, since it, arguably, fell under the 'dying declaration' exception to the hearsay rule.

    In short,there was no need for the ghost of his daughter to have Brigette write the letter -- and imagine what it would have done to the girl had she discovered that she had been responsible for writing a letter that had gotten a person killed.

    And one final point. Much was made of the fact that 'no one knew who sent the tapes' but the detective would have had to have known -- unless I missed a mention of his being killed right away. Had the sending been the ethical violation thjat it was purported to be, Davalos could have been blackmailed by a detective who had already been shown to be a somewhat unethical character, especially once he became the DA.

    C'mon guys, you can -- and have -- done much better than this.