Justice the Right Way

This summer, I watched Rizzoli & Isles, a new show on TNT.


Basic Overview:


Jane Rizzoli is a cop for Boston PD, and Dr. Maura Isles is a medical examiner with the same police department. Essentially, the show is about their friendship and the different criminal cases they handle. That's pretty much it in a nutshell; there's no need to get more technical than that.





Getting to my point/actual blog:


Last week, Rizzoli was investigating a murdered "John Doe." Isles examined the body and sent a DNA sample to the lab. The lab called Isles, requesting another sample because the previous sample was contaminated (somehow Isles' DNA was mixed). Isles, being the perfectionist that she is, knew for sure she didn't contaminate the sample. She checked the results sent to her by the lab and came to the conclusion that the body she examined was none other than her own half-brother (she's adopted). When the father came to identify the body, he willingly gave Isles a sample of his blood, knowing that he was her biological father and that she was seeking answers.



**I swear I'm getting to a point.**



Isles' father turned out to be a well-known hit man, and the mob wanted him dead. So, they came to the conclusion that their victim was killed by the mob to get the attention of Isles' father, the mob's real target. Isles' father explained to her that when she and Rizzoli had a solid suspect, call him (he provided her with an untraceable cell phone) and he would handle it.



**Getting closer...**



Isles of course told Rizzoli and they contemplated this option. In my opinion, the main question that they asked themselves is: "Is it so bad to rid the city of this nuisance by allowing a known killer to 'handle it'?"



Almost immediately, Rizzoli responded by saying they should call once they had a suspect. Isles, the "do-gooder" didn't like the idea. Some things that Rizzoli may have been thinking:

• "This could minimize my paperwork/make my report on this case much easier."


• "He's one of the best hit men in the city, so why not let someone else do the dirty work."


• "They're both scum; I hope they take each other out in a gruesome shoot out."

My conclusion (I know you're really excited about it):

I can definitely see why this may have been a hard decision; on the other hand, I think it's wrong to allow criminals to be the judge and jury for each other. Yes, the life and paperwork of a cop would be much easier. But is it civil? Is it right?

Take it a step further: How would police departments be able to redeem their respect and their authority after allowing this type of scenario to go on for a period of time? I know this would cause an uproar because the police departments would essentially send out the message that criminals have no rights to a trial.

This is mainly why laws and rules and regulations are important. And ethics (whether professional or personal) are vital to the decisions we make. Hasty decisions without considering consequences and how actions will affect our lives, as well as the lives around us, is a dangerous practice.

I won't ruin the ending for you. I have included a link to TNT's Website and what I hope is the actual full episode. I think I also made the title a link, so try either one of those to see how the episode ends. If they don't work, TNT's Website is easy to navigate so you can try that as well. www.tnt.tv

Cheers!