Photo credit: www.tvfanatic.com
Critic’s Rating: 2 / 5.0
2
There are multiple issues I have with “Law & Order: SVU” Season 26 Episode 17.
The episode titled “Accomplice Liability” aimed to provide closure for Carisi, which is commendable to a point.
However, the focus seems misplaced; this show was meant to uplift and support survivors, yet this episode leaned heavily into Carisi’s emotional turmoil, overshadowing its core message of empowerment for survivors.
The Tess Subplot Continues a Questionable Trend
The scenario involving Tess during her prior assault in the Season 26 Episode 8 felt forced, as if her trauma was included to justify a narrative focusing on Carisi’s experiences as a hostage.
This episode did little to counter that impression; in fact, it reinforced my concerns.
The show has consistently portrayed testifying against a rapist as a universally positive choice, which is misleading. Historically, Benson has acknowledged that the decision to take legal action is personal and may not align with every survivor’s path to healing.
In “Accomplice Liability,” Tess’s well-being felt secondary to the narrative’s need for justice. Her struggles post-assault showed her spiraling, seeking solace in drugs even after a near-fatal overdose.
The pressure from Benson and Rollins, suggesting that Tess would heal through testimony, was troubling.
Benson has previously understood that for some survivors, avoiding the legal system may be a valid and empowering choice.
There appeared to be no compelling rationale for Tess to testify; even ADA Rourke voiced skepticism about the viability of the rape case.
In an emotionally charged moment, Carisi sought justice for Tess, driven by guilt over his inability to prevent her attack while they were held captive.
This motivation misconstrued Tess’s autonomy; she didn’t owe Carisi—or anyone—closure at the trial’s conclusion.
It came as no shock when she sought drugs minutes before her court appearance; her turmoil should have highlighted the complex realities numerous survivors face, including the impact of addiction as a coping mechanism for trauma.
A narrative centered on Tess’s struggles might have provided a compelling exploration of her situation. Yet, the episode failed to position her experience as the primary focus, favoring Carisi’s emotional journey instead. While Carisi’s struggles are acknowledged, they should not eclipse Tess’s right to narrate her own story.
Carisi Should Not Have Dominated the Narrative in Episode 17
Initially, I considered Carisi’s insistence on directing ADA Rourke’s handling of the case as a side effect of his own legal expertise.
However, it quickly became clear that Carisi acted as if he were the ADA leading the prosecution.
Carisi: What do we do now?
Rourke: You keep saying ‘we’ as if we are partners. We’re not. There is no ‘we.’ There is only me, and this is my case.
Despite Rourke’s correction, Carisi continued as though he were an active participant in a trial rather than merely a witness.
This behavior disrespected the boundaries of the legal process. His singular role was to testify, not to commandeer the case.
While it’s acknowledged that trauma can influence one’s conduct, SVU seems to be offering excessive leniency towards Carisi’s recent behavior. The intent to depict the effects of trauma on a male survivor through a popular character is evident, yet the execution has not resonated positively.
Despite initial encouragement from Benson to pursue therapy, the show’s narrative quickly shifted focus after their brief conversation, neglecting Carisi’s need for ongoing support.
Since then, Carisi’s character has presented as increasingly unlikable, exhibiting judgmental and aggressive tendencies. While these may be responses to trauma, they do not justify his actions.
Unrealistic Resolution in Episode 15 Detracted from the Narrative
The outcome wherein Deonte was not convicted of rape was justifiable; while he didn’t intervene, legally, he wasn’t the perpetrator. The jury was unlikely to convict him based on moral grounds alone.
However, Tess’s response post-verdict felt incongruous. In the midst of navigating mental health challenges and substance use, her sudden sense of resolution felt disjointed.
Post-verdict, she appeared unaffected and embracing Carisi, which muddied the complexities of healing from trauma.
Benson’s remarks about Tess choosing to “move on” oversimplified the recovery process, sending an unfortunate message that healing is merely a decision. This diminishes the profound struggles many survivors endure.
In conclusion, while the episode may have been engaging, its underlying messages were problematic. Given SVU’s legacy of supporting survivors, there is a critical responsibility to avoid undermining that message, ensuring that narratives align with the realities faced by those they seek to represent.
What Are Your Thoughts on Season 26 Episode 17 of Law & Order: SVU?
I invite you to share your opinions on this episode. Your insights are valuable whether you agree with my take or have a differing perspective.
Law & Order: SVU airs on NBC on Thursdays at 9/8c and is available for streaming on Peacock on Fridays.
Source
www.tvfanatic.com