This episode reaches far to portray the Army in a negative light. Ultimately, a general officer clearly abuses his position by ordering the military court marshal of a civilian -- Blue Cannon -- for first degree murder of the General's son, who is a Lieutenant stationed at the same post as his father.
Worse, the Major who, is the Judge Advocate General, and appointed prosecutor in the case, tears up a lawfully binding letter from the US Attorney General, that orders the civilian defendant remanded to the custody of civilian justice.
A First Lieutenant who witnesses the destruction of this order, and was appointed the defense attorney, is then subject to an attempt of bribery to remain silent. The Major bribes the other officer with a promise of promotion to Captain if he cooperates to keep the destruction secret and continue with the court marshal.
There are several serious plot holes at work in this episode.
First, the general is in overall command of the post. It was his son killed in an altercation. The general would be required to recuse himself from any role in the tribunal. Second, the Lieutenant would be required to tell the presiding judge at the tribunal that the US Attorney General ordered the defendant remanded to civilian custody. Had this tribunal continued and resulted in a conviction, most certainly the AG would have learned that his order was ignored, and there would have been severe consequences. John Cannon telegraphed Washington to challenge the legitimacy of the military trying the case. It was his action that caused the AG to wire his order for the military to stand down. He would have not allowed a conviction to go without following up with the territorial governor on his original wire.
Most critical of all, had the Lieutenant simply stood up and told truthfully what the Major had done, the tribunal would have immediately ended, the presiding judge would have ordered the arrest of the Major, and the General would have been under severe pressure to avoid taking any action against the Lieutenant. Implied in the script was that the Lieutenant was somehow cowered into silence on the matter of the letter, and so had to form an alternative defense angle, which had to be carried out not by him, but by John Cannon.
In this manner, the Lieutenant was shown as an essentially gutless officer. Yes, he made two perfunctory protests, but failed to leverage the most powerful option he had, which was to illuminate the tribunal with the AG's order.
The entire purpose of this episode appears to have been an attempt to portray officers in the US Army as willing to blindly follow orders, including illegal orders to engage in a criminal conspiracy. Even in the time period after the Civil War, the codes of military tribunals were strict enough to have required that nothing like this would have taken place.
The acting in this episode is good. But, the blatant rebuke of the military in the script brings it down. This is sad. The concept of the script is solid, and with a more balanced portrayal, could have resulted in a script that matched the professionalism of the actors.
Worse, the Major who, is the Judge Advocate General, and appointed prosecutor in the case, tears up a lawfully binding letter from the US Attorney General, that orders the civilian defendant remanded to the custody of civilian justice.
A First Lieutenant who witnesses the destruction of this order, and was appointed the defense attorney, is then subject to an attempt of bribery to remain silent. The Major bribes the other officer with a promise of promotion to Captain if he cooperates to keep the destruction secret and continue with the court marshal.
There are several serious plot holes at work in this episode.
First, the general is in overall command of the post. It was his son killed in an altercation. The general would be required to recuse himself from any role in the tribunal. Second, the Lieutenant would be required to tell the presiding judge at the tribunal that the US Attorney General ordered the defendant remanded to civilian custody. Had this tribunal continued and resulted in a conviction, most certainly the AG would have learned that his order was ignored, and there would have been severe consequences. John Cannon telegraphed Washington to challenge the legitimacy of the military trying the case. It was his action that caused the AG to wire his order for the military to stand down. He would have not allowed a conviction to go without following up with the territorial governor on his original wire.
Most critical of all, had the Lieutenant simply stood up and told truthfully what the Major had done, the tribunal would have immediately ended, the presiding judge would have ordered the arrest of the Major, and the General would have been under severe pressure to avoid taking any action against the Lieutenant. Implied in the script was that the Lieutenant was somehow cowered into silence on the matter of the letter, and so had to form an alternative defense angle, which had to be carried out not by him, but by John Cannon.
In this manner, the Lieutenant was shown as an essentially gutless officer. Yes, he made two perfunctory protests, but failed to leverage the most powerful option he had, which was to illuminate the tribunal with the AG's order.
The entire purpose of this episode appears to have been an attempt to portray officers in the US Army as willing to blindly follow orders, including illegal orders to engage in a criminal conspiracy. Even in the time period after the Civil War, the codes of military tribunals were strict enough to have required that nothing like this would have taken place.
The acting in this episode is good. But, the blatant rebuke of the military in the script brings it down. This is sad. The concept of the script is solid, and with a more balanced portrayal, could have resulted in a script that matched the professionalism of the actors.
