WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD
Don't you hate when in a wuddunnit is blatantly obvious who actually did it ?
There are many ways to completely botch up this kind of plot. One of the most common of those, expecially when almost every thriller nowadays tries to be "clever" giving the audience the "big shock" of the "most unexpected", is to give in to a big temptation. "Let's make a friendly character the culprit!", the writer thinks. Sounds good on paper, but it is not so good in reality when said character is introduced so abruptly and gratuitously that the first thing an experienced viewer has to think is: "Ok, and what has this guy to do with the case?".
Same things happens here; the identity of the killer is obvious from the first scene where appears, an overused cliche, not a genuine shock like, for instance, in the first episode of this season. And when the main plot device is so painfully obvious, all that is left for the viewer is counting the minutes towards the end... Well, not really and not necessarily. After all, when the mistery doesn't deliver, you can always enjoy the ride, watching the investigation unfold. Well, what can I say about that... I liked the first part, when the coroner character got to show a more serious, intense side of his personality. Almost every other thing about the sleuthing process, duh...you gotta "love" how those big forensics geniuses managed to botch completely their case, failing to analyze correctly sperm and/or being completely unaware of the basic background of suspects...a plot device that Agatha Christie (over)used, justa bit unlikely nowadays.
And as for the humour, which seems to play such a big part in this series' success... Well, I laughed out loud at the "CSI" jab: nice and clever, good writing!
Whiiiiich I'm not sure I can say of the gazillion o' slapstick comedy this episode was filled of. Jeez.
In short: didn't like the plot at all, and the execution in general wasn't my cup of tea. Most important, I hate when in a movie/book/episode they make the "do-not-pay-attention-to-me-I-am-no-suspect-no-really" person the bad guy. It's the king of cliches, the thing that cementes the idea that every single bit of casual information featured is obviously part of a case's solution. It's third rate writing, really. This is not the only episode of this series that pulls this stunt on the viewer (duh, just watch the NEXT episode to see this lame trick exploited once again!), but this installment seemed very poor to me, much worse than other efforts seen right on this season.