Trial By Fire - Episode 85

[amyk]

Just finished this one. I give it a 9 on the Sidney scale ("Excellent") tonight. My primary complaints about it are that Murdock changes his tune too quickly regarding Frankie (in my opinion) and I don't really like the Stockwell stuff too much, although perhaps this proves that Stockwell is indeed engineering the whole trial, as well as putting words in the mouths of those who testify, such as Curtis and Quyet. I still believe that Stockwell had Curtis killed so that he could not be brought back to the trial. And I also believe that Stockwell is behind Quyet's original testimony as well as his testimony here at the trial. I think he has something over Quyet or perhaps arranged for Quyet to come to the US in the first place.

In any case, in this episode we learn that Morrison was apparently buried in Arlington Cemetery. But in THE SOUND OF THUNDER, obviously there was no body brought back to the US, another inconsistency.

Also, if Quyet revealed Morrison as a traitor, would that have been kept under wraps? And would they have allowed his body to remain buried at Arlington Cemetery? I would assume that Morrison's body must already have been buried before Quyet gave testimony or else they would not have allowed a traitor to be buried at Arlington. I think Quyet has lied all along about both Morrison and that he was not even involved in discussing the Hanoi job with Morrison. If Quyet is the only one who claims that Morrison is a traitor, and Morrison is not alive to defend himself, then it does not seem right to just take Quyet's word for it.

At one point Murdock makes it clear that he believes Frankie's story about Stockwell withholding his dad's pension money is "fiction" which is interesting because Murdock apparently thinks Hannibal is mistaken to believe Frankie's story.

I also read that the date of the bank robbery (in January 1971) was long before the Vietnam War ended, but in the pilot episode, Zack told Amy that the A-Team committed the robbery 4 days after the war ended (although I thought maybe he said they walked out of the DMZ 4 days after the war ended). So I guess there are inconsistencies all along. In that case, I suppose whatever we want to make up for fanfiction doesn't matter all that much. Maybe we have to pick one of the scenarios (either from the pilot, from THE SOUND OF THUNDER, or from the court-martial trilogy) and accept it, while ignoring the other scenarios.

[HoudiniDerek]

If no one knew Morrison was bad, a burial in Arlington makes sense. I am guessing there are a number of empty coffins in Arlington because no bodies could be found or returned.

[amyk]

Oh, do they really bury empty coffins? I guess I just thought if someone was MIA, then there would be no gravesite for them.

I understand that Morrison could have been initially buried in Arlington. After learning he was a traitor (if indeed he was), would they keep his body buried there? Would they somehow take away his honors?? I guess it would be pretty difficult to make a family exhume their loved one's body and re-bury it (not to mention super-expensive), so maybe they would just let them continue to be buried there. But it seems wrong to have a traitor buried in Arlington.

[HoudiniDerek]

Jan 28, 2019 22:30:21 GMT -5 amyk said:

Oh, do they really bury empty coffins? I guess I just thought if someone was MIA, then there would be no gravesite for them.

I understand that Morrison could have been initially buried in Arlington. After learning he was a traitor (if indeed he was), would they keep his body buried there? Would they somehow take away his honors?? I guess it would be pretty difficult to make a family exhume their loved one's body and re-bury it (not to mention super-expensive), so maybe they would just let them continue to be buried there. But it seems wrong to have a traitor buried in Arlington.

I believe they do.

Based on the trial, I was never sure if they were convinced Morrison was a traitor. Without solid evidence, I'm sure they left it alone. If proven, I think they would probably remove him, yes.

[amyk]

Well, apparently Quyet had testified somewhere (maybe before some governmental committee?) and given the names of 20 or so in the US military who had given information to the VietCong, if I remember this part of the trial correctly. So either Quyet lied or was mistaken about Morrison or Morrison really was a traitor. For some reason, I always want to think of Morrison as one of the good guys, perhaps because I feel like he really entrusted the A-team with this mission for a good reason, to help bring the war to an end. I don't believe he gave them the mission to try to embarrass the U.S. And I also like to believe that, had Morrison lived, or if they had somehow been able to find him yet alive, he would have cleared the team.

[HoudiniDerek]

I'm never for sure what to think about Morrison either. Clearly, Curtis is a dirt bag, but I never get a clear picture on Morrison.

[amyk]

I also feel like Hannibal would have figured it out if Morrison really was working for the North Vietnamese. I hate to think something like that would slip by him, although I guess he may not have had all that much personal contact with Morrison. Still, if Morrison gave the team the mission in order to embarrass the U.S., I would like to think that Hannibal would have seen through that.

[HoudiniDerek]

Jan 30, 2019 22:30:41 GMT -5 amyk said:

I also feel like Hannibal would have figured it out if Morrison really was working for the North Vietnamese. I hate to think something like that would slip by him, although I guess he may not have had all that much personal contact with Morrison. Still, if Morrison gave the team the mission in order to embarrass the U.S., I would like to think that Hannibal would have seen through that.

I feel the same. Plus, I would like to think that Hannibal wouldn't have been so blind to what is going on that they robbed the bank after the war was over. He's always so in touch with the plans and mindsets, even of the bad guys, that I find it hard to believe he wouldn't have known something was up.

[amyk]

Yes, although we do know that Hannibal's plans don't always go according to plan. Still, I don't see how he could have led the legendary A-Team if he was unaware that robbing the bank was feeding into the enemy's plans.

[Eclipse139]

Onto part 2 of the trilogy. I don't really enjoy watching these three episodes, although I appreciate they are good on many levels. For me, I just find them an uncomfortable watch. Personally, I don't enjoy watching the team in this seemingly helpless situation and it doesn't make sense that Hannibal would have allowed it to happen. The inconsistencies and contradictions with the established backstory that you've already mentioned in this thread make it difficult to follow the story.

I love the moment when BA loses his cool and starts the fight in the courtroom. The team had an opportunity to make their escape at that moment, but they chose to put down the guns and continue with the trial because they knew they were telling the truth. You'd think this would make the judge realise they weren't guilty!

Can they call a man to the witness stand who has been declared clinically insane?

I quite like the idea that Murdock doesn't trust Frankie, but then he seems to change his mind and they start working together which I suppose they had to do to progress the story, but it was a very sudden change of heart. The comedy scenes bring some light relief, but at the same time it feels out of place with all the drama going on. That's why I think I find it all so uncomfortable.

It's a pity they made no obvious attempt to make Hannibal, BA or Face look any younger in the flashback scenes.

I love the way Hannibal changes his plea to guilty - and of course Face and BA do the same - to prevent them from suspecting Murdock of murder... but does that mean the team now think it's possible he really could have murdered Morrison? They say earlier in the ep that they don't believe he could have, then they seem to change their minds. Also, as they have then entered guilty pleas, why does the jury have to deliberate over the verdict with the judge declaring them guilty at the end? That doesn't make sense.

I'm saving part 3 until tomorrow because I know what's coming and I know I have to deal with it! (I wish I wasn't the kind of person who gets so wrapped up in TV characters that I know it'll make me cry even though I've seen it all before!  )

[amyk]

I love the moment when BA loses his cool and starts the fight in the courtroom. The team had an opportunity to make their escape at that moment, but they chose to put down the guns and continue with the trial because they knew they were telling the truth. You'd think this would make the judge realise they weren't guilty!

I think this is a really dramatic and good scene. In some ways, BA's temper hearkens back to his behavior in ONE MORE TIME, which I just watched last night. In that episode, he was also upset about being called a liar. That was why he had punched General Ludlum (or Ludlow or whatever his name was) way back in 1971. I like that consistency that BA loses his temper when he's being called a liar. He has such a strong sense of integrity and truth. Maybe that is why he does not like to be involved in scams, because he hates lying so much.

Can they call a man to the witness stand who has been declared clinically insane?

I don't know the answer, but the other side would surely be able to question the credibility of such a witness, I would think.

I quite like the idea that Murdock doesn't trust Frankie, but then he seems to change his mind and they start working together which I suppose they had to do to progress the story, but it was a very sudden change of heart. The comedy scenes bring some light relief, but at the same time it feels out of place with all the drama going on. That's why I think I find it all so uncomfortable.

That sudden change is one of my big hangups with the whole Frankie situation, too. And I think you have a good insight about the comedy scenes and how they feel out of place with this episode.

It's a pity they made no obvious attempt to make Hannibal, BA or Face look any younger in the flashback scenes.

I think they could have even hired other younger actors to portray them in the flashback scenes. That could have been interesting!

I love the way Hannibal changes his plea to guilty - and of course Face and BA do the same - to prevent them from suspecting Murdock of murder... but does that mean the team now think it's possible he really could have murdered Morrison? They say earlier in the ep that they don't believe he could have, then they seem to change their minds. Also, as they have then entered guilty pleas, why does the jury have to deliberate over the verdict with the judge declaring them guilty at the end? That doesn't make sense.

Don't they change their pleas again after the attorney talks with them?

[Eclipse139]

Hiring younger actors for the flashback scenes would definitely have been interesting. It was supposed to be about 15 years ago, but they looked no younger. At least in SOUND OF THUNDER they wore helmets in the flashback scenes which disguised the fact their hair was exactly the same - I can't believe BA would have been allowed a mohican as a serving soldier.

And I'm not sure about changing their plea back again. If they did I missed it, but it would make sense. I'll admit I lost track of some of the plot points at times!

[amyk]

Yeah, I think the military has pretty strict standards about how one's hair is worn, and perhaps even more so back in the Vietnam days.

I was thinking that after meeting again with their attorney, maybe they withdrew their guilty pleas and went ahead to finish the trial.

[HoudiniDerek]

Dec 8, 2020 18:31:07 GMT -5 amyk said:

Yeah, I think the military has pretty strict standards about how one's hair is worn, and perhaps even more so back in the Vietnam days.

I was thinking that after meeting again with their attorney, maybe they withdrew their guilty pleas and went ahead to finish the trial.

I don't think we officially see it. But after the lawyer goes off on the team, Hannibal tells him something along the lines of "Okay, we'll do it your way." To me, that is the moment where we know they are going to plea not guilty again.

[Eclipse139]

Dec 9, 2020 16:00:41 GMT -5 HoudiniDerek said:

Dec 8, 2020 18:31:07 GMT -5 amyk said:

Yeah, I think the military has pretty strict standards about how one's hair is worn, and perhaps even more so back in the Vietnam days.

I was thinking that after meeting again with their attorney, maybe they withdrew their guilty pleas and went ahead to finish the trial.

I don't think we officially see it. But after the lawyer goes off on the team, Hannibal tells him something along the lines of "Okay, we'll do it your way." To me, that is the moment where we know they are going to plea not guilty again.

Thanks, Derek.   I didn't pick up on that, but it makes perfect sense, or there would be no reason for them to have continued the trial.  The storyline is a little confusing in places, I wonder if there was more that was cut out?