We have two interesting events. First of all, a sad sixty-five year old woman dies when runs through a window and is hung up on the broken glass, bleeding out. Her lifestyle comes into question as do the multitude of prescription drugs she is using. We also have the return of the miniaturist whose routine has been interrupted. While this is going on, Greg is in court at a hearing to see whether he was justified in running over the punk who was in with the mob that tried to kill the tourist. It gets to be a police versus the minority issue.
7 Reviews
The Miniature Killer Returns
claudio_carvalho11 February 2023
Greg is in a political courtroom defending himself from the murder of the punk Demetrius James. Meanwhile the CSI team investigates the murder of an old woman. The prime suspects are her nephew Henry and her neighbor Jason. But when Grissom receives a miniature of her murder, he questions who might be the killer.
"Post Morten" is an annoying episode of "CSI". Greg needing to defend himself in a political courtroom is irritating, and the conclusion of the episode is inconclusive and irritating. Greg does not deserve the treatement spent in the court. My vote is seven. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): "Post Morten"
"Post Morten" is an annoying episode of "CSI". Greg needing to defend himself in a political courtroom is irritating, and the conclusion of the episode is inconclusive and irritating. Greg does not deserve the treatement spent in the court. My vote is seven. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): "Post Morten"
This Episode Plays On Your Emotions, And Has The Return Of The 'Miniature" Killer
ccthemovieman-116 December 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Yeah, this was an interesting CSI episode, as most of them are, but it was very unsatisfying, too.
Greg gets to go to a hearing about the thug he ran over in his auto after the guy went after him. That turns out to be unsatisfying and a continuing story. A very biased judge and an ultra-liberal jurist make those scenes annoying. Greg is considered "excused," which is a little confusing the way they word it. He's also going to be sued by the dead man's parents.
Then there is the case of the woman killed in the opening scene of this episode. This not only was unsatisfying but very misleading as certain scenes show a killer in the room with her but the conclusion, if I heard it right, was that she stumbled through a plate glass window to her death, having just been poisoned.
The only cool part of that story is that it, too, is a continuation from the "miniature" killer. Now, someone has delivered another small doll-house with clues on who poisoned her.....if you look close enough, which Gil Grissom does.
Anyway, this was a hard episode to watch because of good-guy Sanders being falsely accused by some really irritating people, such as the parents of the killed thug who think their son never did anything wrong.
Soo.....be prepared to get your emotions up watching this episode.
Greg gets to go to a hearing about the thug he ran over in his auto after the guy went after him. That turns out to be unsatisfying and a continuing story. A very biased judge and an ultra-liberal jurist make those scenes annoying. Greg is considered "excused," which is a little confusing the way they word it. He's also going to be sued by the dead man's parents.
Then there is the case of the woman killed in the opening scene of this episode. This not only was unsatisfying but very misleading as certain scenes show a killer in the room with her but the conclusion, if I heard it right, was that she stumbled through a plate glass window to her death, having just been poisoned.
The only cool part of that story is that it, too, is a continuation from the "miniature" killer. Now, someone has delivered another small doll-house with clues on who poisoned her.....if you look close enough, which Gil Grissom does.
Anyway, this was a hard episode to watch because of good-guy Sanders being falsely accused by some really irritating people, such as the parents of the killed thug who think their son never did anything wrong.
Soo.....be prepared to get your emotions up watching this episode.
Jury Trial issue
valkyreion15 January 2022
CSI and the lawyer defending Greg in this case would have more proof that the guy Greg killed was indeed part of that swarm and not an innocent bystander. One each member of the swarm was text by PIG about the fannysmackin meet up. Being that he'd have received said text message for it his family wouldn't have any way to argue that he was trying to help the guy Greg saved.
Frustrating storyline
xbatgirl-3002916 September 2023
Warning: Spoilers
The only reason I rewatched this episode is because I liked the whole Miniature Killer storyline the first time it was on. In this particular episode, I like all the twists and turns of the murder as it seems like it's first one suspect then another then they get on the trail of the real one.
But I really hate the other, on going plot with Greg and this family. All of it is so infuriating and designed to push buttons to try to get people talking and watching. If I remember correctly, it didn't work as a trending topic or anything. It's just way too heavy handed and unrealistic. Some parts, as will come up in other episodes especially, seem pretty racist. Yet other parts are too radical left. You end up hating everyone involved. I'm also a massive fan of Lorraine Toussant. I guess it shows what a good actor she is, because I hate her character here. Better writing would have made her and her family more sympathetic.
As the show points out, this episode is not about a trial. It's an inquest. Yet I agree with the other reviewers that the inquest is far too unrealistic, even if they wrote a judge running for re-election and who is pandering for votes. (This is why we should not elect judges.) No one as biased as the one juror would ever be picked either. The whole thing is enraging and really does a disservice to the subject.
But I really hate the other, on going plot with Greg and this family. All of it is so infuriating and designed to push buttons to try to get people talking and watching. If I remember correctly, it didn't work as a trending topic or anything. It's just way too heavy handed and unrealistic. Some parts, as will come up in other episodes especially, seem pretty racist. Yet other parts are too radical left. You end up hating everyone involved. I'm also a massive fan of Lorraine Toussant. I guess it shows what a good actor she is, because I hate her character here. Better writing would have made her and her family more sympathetic.
As the show points out, this episode is not about a trial. It's an inquest. Yet I agree with the other reviewers that the inquest is far too unrealistic, even if they wrote a judge running for re-election and who is pandering for votes. (This is why we should not elect judges.) No one as biased as the one juror would ever be picked either. The whole thing is enraging and really does a disservice to the subject.
Jury Trial was a joke
Valkonian16 September 2021
This jury trial in this episode was such a complete joke. No trial would ever go like this. The Judge was a joke. You would never some arrogant wise-ass juror standing up asking questions and being a smartass. I'd like see how he would react when a mob was attacking him.
They should have focused the whole episode on the miniature killer.
They should have focused the whole episode on the miniature killer.
Infuriating Trial
jmegonigal17 March 2022
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
