For me, giving a rating to a particular Dragnet 1967 episode is based in part on how soon I see the screen pop up with the "The story you have just seen is true" at the end of the episode, because the faster I see that screen, the more I know I enjoyed the story because it went by so fast. This was one of those less common episodes where things flew by at lightning speed!
In some of the episodes, Joe Friday gives a soliloquy on a topic being covered by the episode, such as drugs, police brutality, teenage rebellion, being a hippie, and other pariahs of the 1960s. Those episodes can really drag on because of the monologue and preachy nature of the monologue or limited dialogue.
This episode was a refreshing change of pace because it seemed to center around a burglary of a residence where $25,000 in jewelry was taken. Of special interest was a particular jade ring worth about $2000. The episode followed the detectives in their pursuit of finding not only that ring, but all of the other stolen jewelry as well, or as Gannon stated at one point, the other $23,000 worth of jewelry.
Because this episode seemed to go by so fast, I rated it higher than the episodes that seem to take forever to get that final screen. The plot of this episode is fairly straightforward and follows the detectives as they attempt to recover the stolen merchandise and arrest those responsible.
Two things about the episode seemed a little different: For one thing, they did not pursue the dog kennel angle which seemed would be a logical thing to do since many wealthy people might board their pets when they go on short trips or excursions. The second thing that seemed to be a possible error in the script is how did the bartender not have the ring on his hand one moment, and then virtually a few moments later the ring is clearly visible. There is no explanation of how it just magically showed up on his hand with the detectives and undercover police woman watching at the bar.
One question that did not seem to be answered was how the burglar knew that the homeowner was not going to be home, which brings us back to the possible dog kennel connection and a possible insider at the kennel who knows which wealthy patrons will be away from home and for how long.
The only preachy part of the episode was when Joe Friday briefly lectures the homeowner on how she may have inadvertently contributed to the loss of her jewelry by not doing everything possible to reduce chances for thieves to make entry when she is gone. Turns out his advice is still good for homeowners four decades later.
The summary of the episode mentioned that the jewelry was hidden in a very highly unlikely spot. That, of course, is intriguing because where in a home would be a highly unlikely spot? On this point, the episode does not disappoint, and was almost a case of where the jewelry was hiding in plain sight. Who would've ever thought to look there? A surprising and delightfully different ending compared to most episodes.
In some of the episodes, Joe Friday gives a soliloquy on a topic being covered by the episode, such as drugs, police brutality, teenage rebellion, being a hippie, and other pariahs of the 1960s. Those episodes can really drag on because of the monologue and preachy nature of the monologue or limited dialogue.
This episode was a refreshing change of pace because it seemed to center around a burglary of a residence where $25,000 in jewelry was taken. Of special interest was a particular jade ring worth about $2000. The episode followed the detectives in their pursuit of finding not only that ring, but all of the other stolen jewelry as well, or as Gannon stated at one point, the other $23,000 worth of jewelry.
Because this episode seemed to go by so fast, I rated it higher than the episodes that seem to take forever to get that final screen. The plot of this episode is fairly straightforward and follows the detectives as they attempt to recover the stolen merchandise and arrest those responsible.
Two things about the episode seemed a little different: For one thing, they did not pursue the dog kennel angle which seemed would be a logical thing to do since many wealthy people might board their pets when they go on short trips or excursions. The second thing that seemed to be a possible error in the script is how did the bartender not have the ring on his hand one moment, and then virtually a few moments later the ring is clearly visible. There is no explanation of how it just magically showed up on his hand with the detectives and undercover police woman watching at the bar.
One question that did not seem to be answered was how the burglar knew that the homeowner was not going to be home, which brings us back to the possible dog kennel connection and a possible insider at the kennel who knows which wealthy patrons will be away from home and for how long.
The only preachy part of the episode was when Joe Friday briefly lectures the homeowner on how she may have inadvertently contributed to the loss of her jewelry by not doing everything possible to reduce chances for thieves to make entry when she is gone. Turns out his advice is still good for homeowners four decades later.
The summary of the episode mentioned that the jewelry was hidden in a very highly unlikely spot. That, of course, is intriguing because where in a home would be a highly unlikely spot? On this point, the episode does not disappoint, and was almost a case of where the jewelry was hiding in plain sight. Who would've ever thought to look there? A surprising and delightfully different ending compared to most episodes.