Major Crimes - Quid Pro Quo - Review

I tuned in to this episode expecting an episode that painted Amy Sykes as a bad cop and expecting to hate it. But the episode was not what I had expected at all. Amy didn’t actively withhold evidence from the defense. It was a stunt by the defense lawyer, Linda Rothman, in an attempt to discredit the prosecution’s case.

As we’ve seen in numerous episodes, Sykes uses her personal cellphone to gather some evidence at a crime scene, but, because all of the information she gathered had been delivered to the defense in other, better documented ways, she never mentioned it.

When Raydor and the two lawyers were arguing in chambers, Rothman declared the LAPD has “enormous resources”. I laughed out loud.

I don’t know of anyone who wants to use their personal cellphone at work because our employers are not subsidizing our cellphone bills. We only use them because we’re not getting the tools we need to do our jobs. Unfortunately, there wasn’t a really good time for that argument to be made.

Even though Sykes’ faux pas was ultimately deemed not malicious and non-damaging to the defense, it did damage the credibility of the LAPD’s testimony. Most of the rest of the unit seemed to judge her, but the audience was repeatedly reminded that they all do it.

I tended to judge her as well, especially when we saw how the defense found out about the information on Sykes’ cellphone. Mark Hickman, a rather unlikeable guy that she spent a (concerning to me) large amount of time with on a case back in season four, showed up asking for help on a case he was working. Sykes shows him the information on her phone in exchange for information about Rothman’s plans for the case.

What’s odd is that, while I have always been dubious about her relationship with this guy, I think he actually likes her. I don’t mean to imply anything romantic, but he seems to appreciate the fact that, while no one else in the department would give him the time of day, she listened to him.

Hickman tries to tell her that he did NOT set out to destroy her career, but she won’t listen. However, he drops some hints that, ultimately, help the Major Crimes Unit solve the case. This attempt to help does imply that he was telling Sykes the truth.

I rather enjoyed the case this week. I was all set to put a nickel on the fact that it was the son who committed the murder. The way the father reacted to being told that his son and several other witnesses saw him make the call to a hitman the police believe he hired had me convinced that he was protecting his son. I expected him to confess to the murder in order to protect his son. But nope. The cops had it right all along. Thanks to Hickman’s hint, they find the hitman and get him to turn on his brother.

One of my favorite things about this week’s episode was the return of Judge Grove. He’s awesome. When Rothman objects to giving the prosecution a day to look into the new information about the hitman, he points out that she wasted a day over nothing, and that it was only fair to let the cops do the same. I almost choked on my water.

Rusty and Buzz only got brief mentions this week and I wasn’t unhappy about it. I was a little disappointed by the reminder of the office politics story line. Commander Leo Mason, another officer in the running for assistant chief, tried to make a ‘you watch my back I’ll watch yours’ deal with Raydor. That woman is so good at keeping her thoughts close to her vest that I am still not sure if she agreed or not.

I liked getting back to a more procedural driven episode. What did you guys think? Did the episode live up to your expectations?