Justice - 9.20.2006

[RoundBoy]

Wow... no thread yet ?

This show is still going strong for me.. and they seem to have introduced a new player in the private investigator ... more of her in the future ?

I fully thought this would be the episode where the reveal at the end would have shown the client to be guilty, but not exactly as the DA describes .. I was suprised to see her have no part in the murder, except that she was just 'there'

Since they never ask the client if they are innocent (Ron could care less?) .. is it just coincidence that none of the clients so far are 100% innocent, and not off on a technicallity, etc ?

[Amnesia]

Originally Posted by RoundBoy

is it just coincidence that none of the clients so far are 100% innocent (...)?

What about the first guy? He was completely, 100% innocent.

Anyone notice that this episode was directed by Paul McCrane? What is it with the Fox shows getting directed by er docs? First Laura Innes directed last night's House and then this...

[RoundBoy]

Actually.... my bad ... the first guy's wife died completely on accident..


and now I also remember the bartender driving the 'runaway bride' home .. he had nothing to do with it as well..

so ... 50% of them are 100% innocent so far

[AJRitz]

Haven't gotten a chance to watch this one yet, but spoilers tend not to bother me so I figured I'd stop in to the thread anyway. A lot of criminal defense attorneys specifically and carefully do NOT ask their client if they're guilty. The problem is that if the client admits to the lawyer that they're guilty, then the lawyer is ethically prohibited from allowing the client to claim on the stand that they're not guilty. If there's any chance that the client may take the stand, the lawyer would prefer NOT to know. Also, it's not a particularly useful bit of information in many cases. The client doesn't know the law like the lawyer does. It's entirely possible, in some cases at least, that despite that the client believes that he/she is guilty, the client is NOT GUILTY under the applicable law. The client's emotional/moral sense of responsibility is irrelevant to legal guilt/innocence.

[tetspa]

well, usually if the client tells the lawyer they are guilty, then the lawyer will "farm out" the client to another lawyer who thoretically COULD let the client testify since the new lawyer would not KNOW the client was guilty.

However, anyone remember the child murder case from 2 years ago where the parents were "swingers" and the nextdoor neighbor was on trial for the murder? Supposedly they had attempted to plea bargain for life if he showed the prosecutors where he buried the body (implying he admits guilt). When the deal fell through, the same lawyers argued that the parents were at fault becuase of their "swinging"...how could this be?

[Amnesia]

Originally Posted by tetspa

anyone remember the child murder case from 2 years ago where the parents were "swingers" and the nextdoor neighbor was on trial for the murder?

What show was that on?

(j/k)

[Gunnyman]

I'm cringing at the acting in this episode.
The scene on the balcony with the lawyer and the forensics guy? Horrible.

[ElJay]

I agree with the balcony scene... I was appalled at the acting/writing there. Rebecca Mader drives me nuts in a bad way.