Re: Journeyman - season 1 thread
Either Dan said something to Jack about time travel very early on or Kate did, because Jack brings it up to Dan in the first or second episode. (They are having lunch or coffee or something at an outdoor cafe. The clip - where Jack
says "...and you go back in time?" with regard to Dan's disappearances. The clip has been included in the opening recap of several episodes, including the last one.
Quote:
| I don't understand how someone could be "put away" for saying they go back in time. |
Well, maybe that's because nobody
is being put away simply for saying they go back in time. Dan has been missing work, late on deadlines, did something freaky with an airline flight - which also screwed up a special trip with his wife. He wrecked at least one car and "left the scene of the accident." He has been disappearing without explanation. He's had a history of drinking and gambling, and now when his behaves oddly he blames it on
time travel. So now you have highly suspect and sometimes dangerous behviour, including apparently abandoning his son in a public place, combined with a delusional explanation - time travel.
That's reason enough to get someone involuntarily comitted for 72 hours for psychological evaluation. Again, this is
not "poor writing" (why is that always the
first thing that
non-writers assume when they miss a plot point or dont understand something in a movie or TV show?

) This is
good writing by people who actually researched the relevant law instead of making assumptions about it.
Quote:
| On that note, he should have been charged with theft. He basically stole a $100 bill from his brother's house when he was babysitting. |
The $100 was itself stolen property, and Jack was brought to the money by his nephew, he didn't go looking for it. So there was no illegal search. Because he was familiar with his brother and his finances, he knew there was no legitimate way Dan could have that kind of money. Either he was gambling again, in illegal games, or something worse was going on. Either way there was a good chance the bill's serial number might provide a clue. Dan was already suspected in a robbery, so Dan had probable cause to suspect that the money was evidence in a criminal investigation. So he not only had a
right, he had an
obligation to run the serial number. He didn't take the money and spend it, he took it to work and did his job.
And when you think your brother might be slipping back into drinking and gambling, you
do push and you
don't take his word for it because addicts are very good at lying and hiding things and denying their problems. So are their wives. If you want to help someone like that, you
have to push. Which Jack knows very well, not only from his job, but from past experience with Dan.
Regards,
Joe