7.1/10
40
2 user

41 Shots 

Kibre and Gaffney take on a confusing case of murder and police corruption when a criminal is accused of killing a police officer. However, the A.D.A. must disregard the fact that the accused was shot 41 times by police.

Director:

Writers:

(created by),
Reviews

Photos

Add Image Add an image

Do you have any images for this title?

Edit

Cast

Episode cast overview, first billed only:
...
Tracey Kibre
...
Kelly Gaffney
...
Hector Salazar
...
Arthur Branch (as Fred Thompson)
...
D.A. Investigator Lennie Briscoe
...
Mike LaSalle
...
Bruno Johnson (as Treach)
...
A.D.A. Sigrun Borg
...
Detective Hagen Burke
...
Detective Kwame Blakely (as Curtiss I'Cook)
Aliya Campbell ...
Amanda Johnson
...
Frederick Merriwether
...
Elena Hernandez
...
Jamie Ross
...
Judge Amanda Anderlee
Edit

Storyline

Kibre and Gaffney take on a confusing case of murder and police corruption when a criminal is accused of killing a police officer. However, the A.D.A. must disregard the fact that the accused was shot 41 times by police.

Plot Summary | Add Synopsis

Genres:

Crime | Drama | Mystery

Certificate:

TV-14
Edit

Details

Language:

Release Date:

4 March 2005 (USA)  »

Filming Locations:


Company Credits

Show more on  »

Technical Specs

Runtime:

Sound Mix:

Color:

Aspect Ratio:

1.78 : 1
See  »
Edit

Did You Know?

Trivia

By the end of this episode, Jerry Orbach was so sick he could barely speak. In one scene they pulled back and added his voice later. Also, the verdict scene was rewritten so that all the dialog had to be whispered so that the Briscoe character could be featured. To explain this unusual use of the handicam perspective, the 'walkout' scene was added where the judge bars uniformed officers from being present in the courtroom after the police leave in protest. See more »

Frequently Asked Questions

This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.

User Reviews

 
Stretching the premise by episode two
23 June 2014 | by See all my reviews

There's what this episode really wants to be about, and what the episode is actually about due to the premise of the show. The circumstance is a defendant who killed a police officer and was shot a number of times in return. The episode sets him up as a very greedy man, along with his lawyer, who wants to sue the police department for his injuries. That would be an interesting case, whether the police department is liable. Unfortunately it's not a criminal case. Trial By Jury is about criminal cases, and so we see the defendant being tried for the murder of the police officer. We are given a jury that is hesitant to convict such an injured man. This never quite comes across as believable. He killed cop, and doesn't dispute killing the cop. His self-defense argument is propped up with mentions of police corruption that are poorly explained. The viewer doesn't believe for a second that the jury will really let a cop killer go without more powerful evidence than the episode provides. If it had been about whether the police had used excessive force, that would be an episode worth watching.


0 of 0 people found this review helpful.  Was this review helpful to you? | Report this
Review this title | See all 2 user reviews »

Contribute to This Page

'La La Land' Producer on the Art of Espionage

Jordan Horowitz shares some "secret" information about his new spy-thriller series, "Counterpart." Plus, Kevin Smith reveals his favorite Sundance movies of all time.

Watch now