Up on the Roof

[mlm828]

I'm not sure whether we're seeing an innate lack of character or the final stages of a downward spiral which began at the bank.

I think Terry was basically a decent guy who was truly horrified at what happened at the bank and his role in those events. He seems to have rationalized his actions--"I was pinned down, couldn't make a move"--in order to live with himself afterward. But the crux of Terry's problem is that he can't forgive himself. In the Pilot, when he seeks Jim out, he says he's not looking for forgiveness. But I think that's exactly what he's looking for -- if not forgiveness, then at least some kind of response from Jim which will enable him to forgive himself. He doesn't get it, of course.

When he sees Jim again, in "Up on the Roof," he spins out of control and, I suspect, becomes someone Jim would hardly recognize as his partner of three years, who never let him down, before the bank. It can be argued Terry's "true" character was revealed by these events. But I prefer to see him as someone who started out as a basically decent person and made a terrible mistake he was unable to come to terms with.

Edited to add: I think Jim's summary dismissal of Terry's rationalization in the Pilot ("We both know what happened that day. Don't you make it worse by trying to pretend differently.") also contributed to Terry's disintegration. Terry knew what really happened, of course, but Jim's rejection of his rationalization took away the one thing that had enabled him to keep it together.

[hoosier]

Why does Jim give that little smirk when Terry says that he will "get help" ie:therapy when he is begging Jim not to force him to come clean? Gosh, I wish that they had given us more on the back story between Jim and Terry because I think there is a lot more going on there.

As we saw on Marlon's Brando, the department is quick to make psychologists available to any cop who needs their services after an incident. Jim could not have known that Terry had not seen one after the bank. What his partner, who had let him down, was or was not doing would have been the furthest thing from his mind. And evidently counseling is just "made available" and is not mandatory; the individual must decide if and when to seek it. Funny that as a proviso for his returning to the force ,Jim had to see a psychologist so they could ascertain his fitness for duty. He had no choice in the matter. If Terry hadn't talked to someone to help him deal with the trauma of the shooting at the bank, why would he now except to save his own skin? Jim knows this. Its only a ploy to get Jim to let him off the hook and to give him some breathing space so he can figure some way to make things right. While Jim agreed with Terry that he had never given him any reason to doubt or question him before, that smirk seems to reveal that he knows exactly what kind of person Terry is.

[mlm828]

hoosier said:

Why does Jim give that little smirk when Terry says that he will "get help" ie:therapy when he is begging Jim not to force him to come clean? . . . If Terry hadn't talked to someone to help him deal with the trauma of the shooting at the bank, why would he now except to save his own skin? Jim knows this. Its only a ploy to get Jim to let him off the hook and to give him some breathing space so he can figure some way to make things right. While Jim agreed with Terry that he had never given him any reason to doubt or question him before, that smirk seems to reveal that he knows exactly what kind of person Terry is.

These are very good points. My take on it is as follows. As I recall, Jim was responding to Terry's plea to let him change his story (so Titus wouldn't be charged with shooting him) and then get help. I always interpreted Jim's response as, "Oh, please, give me a break." I think he recognizes Terry's statement for what it is -- as you stated, a last-ditch effort to get Jim to let him off the hook so he can stay on the job -- and Jim isn't buying it. I think he's telling Terry, "That won't fly, and we both know it." I also think that by this point, he's decided Terry needs to be off the job, and his goal is to make this happen in a way that won't involve dredging up what happened at the bank.

[hoosier]

Exactly! There is so much history between these two, good and bad, and Terry plays on that history to try and get Jim to cut him some slack. One thing I noticed--Jim states to Karen that you never know how someone will react in a situation (Terry at the bank) and Terry overestimates his influence with Jim (reminding him of their past partnership). Both of them are surprised at how little they really knew each other after three years!

[Chris]

I have been reading through this thread recently and there are some really interesting discussions here

One thing I would like to comment on is whether or not Jim would let Titus take the fall for shooting Terry had he been guilty of the two other murders???

mlm828 said:

As for Jim not saying anything if Titus had committed the two murders, possibly. But after his session with Galloway, not likely. He knows that letting an innocent man be convicted of a crime he didn't commit (even if guilty of other crimes) is not "who he is" (to use Galloway's phrase).

maggiethecat said:

Would Jim have let Terry skate free, perhaps "keeping his mouth shut" as Kyt suggested, if Titus had been guilty of the attendant crimes? I can't believe he would have, especially after that trenchant scene where Galloway asks him, "Is this who you are?" And -- even if Titus had been the most despicable kind of gang scum, which he may once have been but has risen above -- we know the answer. Jim would have come forward with his knowledge that Terry staged the shooting. A black man shooting a New York City cop carries a terrible weight, far more than shooting two gang members.

Even though he says to Terry that he would have "let it slide on the count of Titus being charged with the double murder" I don't think he would based on what happens later in the series.
In "Leap of Faith" Dunbar wants to get Warren Doyle off the streets more than anything. He knows he is a "bad guy" and that he has molested Sam Berglass and is probably molesting Ethan Archer too.
Then he, sorry, Karen ( ) finds the evidence that proves that Berglass committed suicide.
Dunbar is tempted to make the receipt "disappear" thus putting Doyle away for murder, but Tom asks him that if it does disappear; "You're gonna be able to sleep at night??"
And no, he is not. That's just not "who he is."
He is not going to let Doyle be convicted of a crime he didn't commit neither would he let that happen to Titus, not even for a fellow cop.
So either way, in my opinion Terry was not going to get away with framing Titus for shooting him.

- Chris