As the season premieres of the three Law & Order (L&O) series are now just a month away – and there’s been word that NBC may review its decision to cancel L&O: Trial By Jury (TBJ) and bring it back – I’m going to take this time to elaborate on why I think TBJ was worth keeping.

Yes, it seemed to be getting to the point where there were too many spinoffs (although, I myself can’t get enough of Dick Wolf’s quality shows, which also included LA Dragnet until that was canceled a couple of years ago).

Does anyone remember the Simpsons’ take on the issue? (Law & Order: Elevator Inspectors Unit: “This elevator seems to be missing a “3rd Floor” Button.” “I think I’m going to be sick.”) Very funny, but I digress.

I must admit that TBJ didn’t have the same bite that the other L&O series had. And in some episodes, you could hardly see what differentiated it from the original series.

However, it did have something that you never see on any of the other series. Namely, interaction between the defendant and his attorney alone as they prepare their case.

Yes in the first three series, you might see scenes involving just the suspect, or you might see the defendant interacting with his/her attorney, but it would also have McCoy or Cabot or Carver, or some ADA present.

You would never see the defendant and council strategizing how to beat the charge whether innocent or guilty. This was unique and it had the potential to be very interesting. Some episodes were. Some were not so much. Yet, either way, it was definitely worth giving it more of a go. I mean, not every single episode of the other series were excellent – though most were more likely than not, which is what makes the whole L&O franchise so good.

But I think what really killed TBJ was the way the opening words diverged from the original series. Check it out.

The original series’ narration went:

“In the criminal justice system, the people are represented by two separate yet equally important groups: the police, who investigate crime; and the district attorneys, who prosecute the offenders. These are their stories.”

Special Victims Unit (SVU) had a slight twist:

“In the criminal justice system, sexually based offenses are considered especially heinous. In New York City, the dedicated detectives who investigate these vicious felonies are members of an elite squad known as the Special Victims Unit. These are their stories.”

So both start with “In the criminal justice system…” and end with “These are their stories.”

Criminal Intent (CI) dropped the opening, but it kept the trademark ending:

“In New York City's war on crime, the worst criminal offenders are pursued by the detectives of the Major Case Squad. These are their stories.”

But Trial By Jury went in a completely different direction:

“In the criminal justice system, all suspects are innocent until proven guilty, either by confession, plea bargain, or trial by jury. This is one of those trials.”

Apart from the fact that this is the only one that doesn’t end with the trademark line, there are a couple of other distinct differences.

In this narration, it is being specific about the singular event you are about to watch (“This is…” instead of “These are…”) which is more restrictive. And it’s also incorrect, because the episodes of TBJ don’t just show the trial but the events leading up to the trial and the preparation for it.

Secondly, the other openings refer to the people (the detectives, lawyers, etc) involved and their stories, whereas TBJ does not. This makes it impersonal and not promote a connection with the characters as you follow along in their missions.

Did this actually play a role in its lack of popularity or success, if even only on a subconscious level? Maybe, maybe not. But we may never know

If it were up to me, the TBJ opening would have been the following:

“In the criminal justice system, all suspects are innocent until proven guilty. In the absence of a confession or plea bargain, the attorneys for the defense and the prosecution prepare their cases for a trial by jury. These are their stories.”

And while I’m at it, I would suggest that CI change its opening to:

“In the criminal justice system, the worst offenders are those considered to have acted with the greatest criminal intent. In New York City, such offenders are pursued by the detectives of the Major Case Squad. These are their stories.”

This would maintain the consistency among the series in two ways: 1) By keeping the same opening, and 2) by having the words of the L&O subtitle “Criminal Intent” in it, just as “Special Victims Unit” was.