Uncle JUICE

I said exactly the same thing the second her segment started. That house must absolutely reek. And seriously, what the fuck, it's not hilarious that your dog tried to pee on a person inside your house. That means none of them are housebroken. Disgusting.

How fucking stoned was Tyler in that amazing moment MTV happened to capture, when they both mused that...MAci might be...pregnant??? I mean she was looking for gym memberships because she put on weight, y'all! And just happened to have a rpegnancy test in the bathroom. And didn't drink champagne, thank goodness, she didn't even know there was a baby in there! Wait, do you think that's why she was complaining of being so tarred all the time? Give me a fucking break, MTV. Also, those leather pocket tee shirts are idiotic, and his beard looks like pubes. I rewound (sidenote, is this even still a word?) the whole Amber trying to explani the child support thing like four times, I just couldn't make hide nor hair of her argument. First, "I told Gary I was going to pay child support," great, because as the non custodial parent, you're obliged to by law, so good on you. "Then he's all "Pay your child support, or I will maintain the legal minimum of visitation," and I'm all "How are you going to tell me to pay child support when I told you I was going to pay it? I was the one who SAID I would pay it!" And I don't get Matt's tats at all, but I know I was a big fan of that artist throwing shade his direction every second of that experience. Good for her. His friend is his con partner, you figure, right? He's the Paul Newman to Matt's Redford? Least surprising moment: "Dr. Drew, you don't have to be on camera if you don't want to" / "Oh no, I don't mind one bit!" I'm sure Kathleen the lazy therapist was thrilled that this celebrity douche was now basically overseeing her treatment. How many people have to die inside a house for it to be worth $73K? And nice job editors, the second she talked about weight watchers, they zoomed right in on her dripping with cheese, manhole cover sized quesadilla. "But it's got chicken!" is not an argument for health value. Scrape some more sour cream onto it. Look, I don't give a fuck if you're heavy, but don't pretend you're now on the healthy path with tha tin your hand. Tyler, you married this person. Shut the fuck up about her weight, you asshole. Also, he wore Fonzie's jacket front out to date night after telling his mom he thought his wife was fat, AND he seemed to have a polo / half hoodie / leather vest on. What a dick. And finally, I disagree with anyone who doesn't think Simon is the best part of Farrah's storyline. I loved that SHE called HIM a loser, because he didn't want to pay her back for a ring she bought herself completely of her own volition. There is zero chance he siad anything about paying her back for a ring. These two deserve each other. And Debra, get it together.

LOL, of course I did not know that, yet it changes nothing for me :).

Yeah, but with a decent attorney / legal defense, you only need to establish reasonable doubt. Which gets easier when, say, the chain of evidence is inexplicably broken by a veteran police officer prior to the defendant retaining counsel.

Guys, isn't it likely she paid for most of the house, or at least laid by enough money so that they aren't going to have the stress of a mortgage like most people? It's South Dakota, that house can't be more than what, $600K (which I think is probably overstating it by 25%, but let's be safe). We know she's got Aubree's college paid per Randy, why wouldn't she have used some of her clearly invested money to buy most of a house?

The open refrigerator begs the question "wouldn't the prospective second assailant have noticed the light in the kitchen on?", except that detail is lost, because presumably Naz closed the refrigerator befor ehe left (but for some reason took the knife).

But in fairness, this is NYC, not someplace in rural middle America where they don't deal with capital crimes on a regular basis. The level of familiarity here has to be taken into account.

It implies that you could come in from the basement (where the lock was broken), come up the stairs to where the victim was murdered, do the murder, and exit along the same path, without ever knowing anyone was passed out in the kitchen at the table. Though Chandra could have simply made this point by saying "based on your photographs, is it fair to say that you believe it would be possible, easy, even, to traverse this path, murder the victim, and leave via the same path, without ever seeing if someone was in the kitchen, if the lights were out and it was quiet?" To which the answer is "Yes, it's very possible, in fact that's why I included that picture in my files."

Stan Beamon's kid from The Americans.

The defense has to put up more of a fight. Cross examine the kid and note that he's a drug USER, as much as Naz is a drug DEALER, and therefore his testimony may be questioned. Ask if he'd ever bought drugs from someone other than Naz, and if so, was the market value correct (undercutting the 'cheated' implication). To leave that witness uncrossed seems derelict to me.

That makes more sense, thanks for clarifying. I guess I didn't pick up on the whole victimizing part, I thought they were both consenting. Granted I've been sort of in and out on the details of the prison adventures, because I think they have too much story to tell in not enough time there.

That part I got, but why kill the other guy?

At this point, we're now talking about a much better but not as great as it started out version of The Killing. This show is the classic example of less than the sum of its parts. Why exactly did Freddy have to kill that guy, because he was gay with the other guy? I missed something.

I don't believe they can depose the prosecution witnesses prior to trial, but they SHOULD get a list of witnesses the prosecution plans to call, so that they can have the conversation with their client about what these people are likely to say, what MIGHT they say, and then prepare. I also hated so much the idea that she brought up people like the funeral guy and Duane Reid, and Box couldn't summon the response "It's a big city, there's a lot of people on video surveillance and peripheral to other key testimony, we can't round up every car that went through a toll booth. Only one of these people you want me to talk to were actually at the scene of the crime, and he's sitting right next to you." ETA in the case of the coach, even if his name is on a witness list, and Naz tells you who he is, the right due dilignece there would lead you to request his high school transcripts and disciplinary measures. And even her cross, "What was the mood of the school at that time?", "OBJECTION, the witness cannot be expected to speculate on the mood of X number of students, 15 years ago." His testimony has to be limited by the prosecution ONLY to the disciplinary matter at hand (i.e. he shoved a kid down stairs and through a coke can at another), it's enough of an effect to give the jury. Any questions as to why the coach thinks he did it are objectionable.

Wait, wait, wait a minute. None of her blood is on his clothes? How is this trial even proceeding at all? I totally forgot that!!!

OH MY GOD, so did I. The whole testimony of the kid he sold drugs to, "Objection, irrelevant," as she was not in any way tying it to the murder. There were at least three instances where "Objection, calls for speculation" or "Objection, speculation" would have been proper, mainly with the pathologist. I mean you might have run into the Few Good Men problem where the judge overrules and calls the witness's speculation an expert opinion. "Now you can answer the question I didn't ask," "Objection, vague." Make her work. Make her rephrase "Was this wound caused by," which is definitive and absolutely speculation, to "COULD THIS have been caused by," where the doubt is inherent, or at the very least, cross examine and ask the numerous ways it could have been caused. I like proecdural courtroom, but not when it's done so poorly. I know Stone isn't lead counsel, and she's green, but seriously.

You must not be succeptible to her fuckboy magnetism.

100%. Meanwhile one of her six dogs is shitting on the kitchen floor.

Ugh #soblessed. #whatanasshole.

I don't think anyone's arguing that it's "Smart," just that as usual, Chelsea seems "least stupid."

The kilt thing somehow raises more questions...anyway, I always wondered this too: what did a chick like Val need these group of fuddy crumb bums for?

Add that to the VERY strange choice of a full on men's suit, ill fitted at that, for her trip to the museum, and pretty clearly someone seems to have said "Let's make this character, who's supposed to be a sex-positive seductress, look like the girls in that one Robert Palmer video, for some reason, in drag." Lots of girls in the 90's were like "Nope, I don't have quite enough pomade in my hair. Where's my hair trowel?" Ugh. And like you said, she's a very pretty girl, that somehow they made really not so attractive. @Klaw, I'm not our spokesperson or union shop steward or anything, but speaking for this one, and most of the ones I know, the answer is fuck no. If someoen accused me of date rape, even privately, I don't think it's unfair to say "That's someone I want to avoid." It actually works both ways: if date rape is somehow on the table, isn't that basically a neutron bomb for future relationship? Like if someone says "rapist," they're pretty much saying "I'm permanently done with this person." I am assuming based on their interaction in the first place along this storyline the implication from the writers is that Laura was not, in fact, date raped by Steve (would any girl invite their date rapist into ANOTHER position of intimacy like this?). This means Steve would be like "I'm a fucking idiot if I even talk to this ticking time bomb, I will wake up sedated, bound and probably with my own underwear in my mouth as a gag if I'm not careful." She did, if you follow this logic, not only falsley accuse him but nearly did so in a public way AND told his friends. If, in fact, Steve DID date rape this woman, wouldn't he (a) be ashamed, based on his character, too much so to talk to her without being PROFUSELY apologetic at first (not "I owe you one!") and (b) think "I really dodged a bullet that first time, I am better off letting this poor girl be"? Also, total Team Brenda on this one. There's no way Kelly should have done what she did. She's shown no interest in theater and she knew it meant a lot to her friend. She should have at least broached the topic.

Well, I stand very Britishly corrected. :) Still, that hairstyle, while it might be realistic because the man still wears it (calling into speculation the possibility that he got this part, decided "This is what a director would look like," then loved the look so much he hasn't changed it in 25 years...that facial hair is only associated with William Shakespeare, The Green Arrow, and Jason Carter, that's it) there's no excuse for it. He looks like a roadie for Creed, or like one of Dylan's Villains (new band name, called it) in his fever dreams when he's on dugs / drinking, like that time he dreams he fucks Donna on a pool table. Until you get to that vest. I can't quite put my finger on it. It's like something you would wear when you thought "Well, I'm completely done trying to have sex with anyone for the rest of my days" at like 65, except he's wearing it as some lecher who's trying to bang coeds. Improbably, at that.

What the fuck look is Roy going for with his hair? Foofy Musketeer? Fey deckhand on the Black Pearl? Troubador? When the fuck was that hairstyle cool? I lived through the 90's, and it wasn't. Also, the pistoallaire face hair configuration, come on. Why not just wax the moustache tips and go all the way? And I'm pretty sure that in the history of the British Isles, like six guys have been named ROY. Rory is far more common. God, how I wish Brinda Wash was reading for Rory Randoff's production of The Rural Juror.

Someone with Steve's permullet would not get work on a CW show nowadays, #truth.