Law & Order and its subsequent spin-offs is one of the longest running series on prime time television, as well as one of the most famous dramas involving criminal law. Whether it’s the original series or Law & Order: Special Victims Unit, each episode focuses on a criminal investigation, followed by an exciting courtroom trial sequence, and concludes with justice served, all by the end of the hour.
But just how accurate is the franchise when it comes to the pursuit of justice? Would a District Attorney like Jack McCoy really be allowed to suppress evidence to guarantee a case gets thrown out in his favor? Do detectives really get to slap around perps in interrogation rooms, and do all public defenders dress so well? The franchise, as it turns out, is a perfect amalgamation of dramatic license and authentic realism. No wonder it’s been going for over two decades.
GOT RIGHT: BASIC COURTROOM PROCEDURE
One of the areas where both Law & Order and Law & Order: Special Victims Unit both excel is in attention to detail during courtroom procedures. From opening statements to closing arguments, the trials presented adhere to the format in American criminal law proceedings, including the use of proper language in court.
While it’s true, certain creative liberties are taken when it comes to the manner in which the procedures take place (a DA like Jack McCoy would be held in contempt of court if he wouldn’t be disbarred already), but that is necessary for the ordinarily dull courtroom scenes to be dramatic and exciting.
GOT WRONG: TIMELINE OF CASE TO TRIAL
When real detectives work a case, it’s often one of many dozens they’re working simultaneously. In the Law & Order franchise, detectives are able to devote unrealistic amounts of time to an investigation, and the case itself seems to fly by in a matter of weeks. Of course, this is due to the time constraints of each 45-minute episode.
As viewers know from watching a high profile trial on the news, they take several months or even years. It’s why each episode of Law & Order is broken up with title cards. That being said, the trials are still unrealistically short, and most likely wouldn’t even happen - only 1 in 40 cases go to trial, as most accused parties accept a plea bargain.
GOT RIGHT: EFFECTS OF CASES ON CRIMINAL INVESTIGATORS
The Law & Order franchise doesn’t shy away from showing what it’s really like for its criminal investigators working a major case. From detectives to DA’s, Internal Affairs Bureau and criminal judges, every branch involved is shown working long hours, sometimes without the hope of a conviction or even the promise of justice.
Law & Order: Special Victims Unit takes it a step further, and exposes the personal lives of its detectives and attorneys, both for dramatic purposes and also to humanize them. Viewers also see what happens to the spouses, partners, and friends of the NYPD’s most dedicated personnel. The difficulties of the job have been shown to lead to substance abuse, domestic violence, and even suicide.
GOT WRONG: ARREST & PROSECUTION OF WEALTHY SUSPECTS
There’s a certain feeling of justified self-righteousness that occurs when watching a smug aristocrat get hauled out of their brownstone in cuffs, and Law & Order capitalizes on that. The franchise wishes to convey that no one is above the law, and that the wealthy get hauled in for question, go in front of a judge, and even get locked away just like petty criminals.
Unfortunately, this just isn’t accurate to real life. The wealthy are almost never led away in handcuffs - they have the option to surrender themselves with dignity. They also almost never actually appear in a trial, as they settle out of court, and if they are questioned by the authorities, their lawyers handle everything, leaving nothing of much consequence for a television show.
GOT RIGHT: POLICE CONDUCT
With some exceptions, Law & Order and its spin-offs have tried to show police conduct as accurately as possible. From conducting interviews with witnesses, to interacting with specialists in forensic labs, and interrogating suspects, the representation of how the dedicated detectives approach criminal investigation is authentic as possible.
Granted, Detective Stabler wouldn’t be able to rough up perps as often as he does, and Detective Benson would probably have a notepad in her hand when she’s questioning a witness, but for entertaining value these aspects are excused. The series knows the value of highlighting a wide variety of personality types involved with criminal investigation and prosecution as well.
GOT WRONG: SEXUAL ASSAULT INVESTIGATIONS
A paltry amount of sexual assault incidents get reported every year, but when they do, the proceedings occur not unlike the investigations on Law & Order: Special Victims Unit. From the uncertainty and fear showcased in the survivor, to the compassion displayed by the detectives and district attorneys, it all culminates in an authentic representation of a life-altering process.
While the series has been accused of using sexual assault to boost ratings, it doesn’t portray it as anything glamorous. Victims are shown harassed and shamed, with defense attorneys often using scare tactics as a means to debase the character of the victim and shame them into retracting their allegations.
GOT RIGHT: MANDATORY MINIMUM
When an episode of Law & Order inevitably goes to court, the jury reaches a verdict after the prosecution and the defense attorneys have made their cases. At that point, the presiding judge gives their verdict, which often has something to do with mandatory minimum, which in criminal law is the minimum amount of years a convicted individual can serve for their crime.
While the mandatory minimum can be reassuring in that it guarantees that if convicted, a criminal will serve some time, it’s often still too much in the case of some smaller crimes. Law & Order has depicted judges who, in rare shows of emotion, feel guilty themselves for passing out a given sentence given the nature of a crime. The US mandatory minimum is the longest in any developed nation, and 5-10x longer than France.
GOT WRONG: THE FREQUENCY OF VIOLENT CRIME
The Law & Order franchise on the whole deals with homicides, sexual assaults, and robberies, all of which are classified as violent crimes. They make for the most sensational marathons on television, but they don’t accurately reflect the state of crime in the United States by any stretch of the imagination.
Truth be told, 4% of all arrests are due to crime that is violent in nature, with the overwhelming majority of them being focused on property crime and drug-related offenses. These arrests might make an effective episode of Cops, but wouldn’t be riveting enough for the dedicated detectives of the NYPD.
GOT RIGHT: SEXUAL ASSAULT COURTROOM PREPARATION
Mariska Hargitay, who has played the character of Olivia Benson from the time she was a detective all the way to becoming Sergeant, has been a titanic force in pushing the accuracy of sexual assault counseling on Law & Order: Special Victims Unit. The attorneys she works with, such as Raul Esparza’s ADA Rafael Barba, are focused on making the preparation for a sexual assault trial as accurate as possible too.
The victims have to be grilled (sometimes mercilessly) by their attorneys, so they know what questions to be prepared for from the plaintiff’s defense in court, and have a chance at winning their cases. By displaying the very real options open to a survivor of sexual assault on the series, real victims might feel better about coming forward.
GOT WRONG: PUBLIC DEFENSE LAWYERS
By watching an episode of Law & Order, viewers just assume that high profile attorneys barge into interrogations all the time, declaring their “client” can no longer be spoken to by detectives, and that they’ll “see them in court!”. This isn’t accurate for a number of reasons, including in Law & Order: True Crimes.
Most defendants can’t afford an Alexandra Cabot or a Casey Novak, and will be given a public defender. The maximum case load for a public defender is 200 misdemeanors and 75 felonies in a single year, and most of their cases don’t go to trial. We will give the shows this - the statutes and case names the DAs rattle off would make any New York based criminal attorney proud.
