MovieChat Forums > The Closer (2005) Discussion > Peter Goldman

Peter Goldman

posted 12 years ago by PlayitagainPam
10 replies | jump to latest

I've skimmed through the posts here, but I haven't found a topic for this. I'd like to find an answer to this before the board quiets down since the show has closed out.

Anyway - does anyone have an idea as to why Peter was so personally invested in Brenda's destruction. I know that defense lawyers have an interest into winning their cases, breaking down opponents cases etc. His interests seem to have some kind of personal interest in destroying Brenda - especially during his interview with that guy in lockup. He says you can take her job, her reputation, her savings, more - I can't remember. That is beyond what a normal attorney would be talking about with a possible, already convicted client.

I've watched all this season and most of the last. Prior seasons I've seen more hit and miss so in a previous season maybe he has established some kind of fixation on her. I just don't get why he is so focused on her destruction. Again, I get the competition between the ADA attorneys and defense attorneys. It's just that his aggression is so targeted and malicious against her personally instead of the office. Anyone? Why is Peter so determined to destroy Brenda - not only professionally, but personally?

[–] zabbree 12 years ago

It was all about MONEY. He referenced taking all of her money more than once. He saw it as a way to get rid of her and earn at least 30% of a multi-million dollar settlement. His sanctimonious BS was just that. He did many unethical things during his "investigation," but he claimed he wanted to stop the unethical and illegal practices of the LAPD.

[–] Helena727 8 years ago

I think money was secondary, tho certainly not unimportant and not far behind motive number 1. Early on he referred to Stroh as "my friend," so I think a vendetta against Brenda was the primary motive for him. And money -- taking it away from someone, and thus endangering their survival -- is a powerful way to punish or destroy.

"All you need to start an asylum is an empty room and the right kind of people."

[–] jester7734 12 years ago

Even though we didn't see it in the last episodes, I strongly suspect that there is a tie-in between Goldman and Stroh. And I have the feeling that since Stroh is still alive and supposedly facing trial that we haven't seen the end of either one of them. Hopefully we'll learn more about the core of Goldman's white hot hatred of Brenda.

[–] maryrose1123 12 years ago

I still suspect it is all about the big "payoff" that Peter saw coming. but the Stroh link is intriguing.

[–] Crowsley 12 years ago

I think that this will take us to the end of the first season of Major Crimes and next season it could bring Brenda back for a visit or 2. This storyline will not have the same impact without Brenda.

[–] jester7734 12 years ago

I agree that it would be a good vehicle for Brenda to make a guest appearance. And it certainly won't happen this season. But it's something to look forward to.

[–] poohlover1983 12 years ago

Goldman and Stroh were not only colleagues, they were friends too. Goldman mentioned it when he started with the federal lawsuit. He said she was harassing his friend by calling everyone, constantly investigating Stroh and even sending him flowers on the anniversary of the death of the woman he killed that got him introduced to Brenda.

When Goldman lost the civil lawsuit , he found out from Stroh and Gabriel's girlfriend that there were other cases where it seemed like Brenda became Judge & Jury and her kind of justice happened. That's how he had so many clients during the Federal suit and why to settle it they created the Johnson Rule (which I found offensive).

[–] cbjslp 12 years ago

Been checking the actors' sites on IMDB on future roles for I've thought the same thing re: Stroth and Goldman's re-appearance on Major Crimes. Also possible for the characters of Reggie Moses, Marvin Evers and Crolick.

[–] etiennestories 9 years ago

Short answer: Philip Goldman was a typical bleeding-heart liberal jerk

Shorter answer: Goldman was a greedy blood-sucking bottom-dweller.

Take your pick.

[–] Helena727 8 years ago

Nothing in any of the eps hints at his poliical leanings, but hey -- why let facts get in the way of some liberal-bashing?

Oh, those damn LIBERALS and their insistence on, and fights for, clean water, clean air, safe workplaces, a 40-hour workweek, no child labor, fair wages, a fair tax code .... They're AWFUL. All of their initiatives are AWFUL.

"All you need to start an asylum is an empty room and the right kind of people."