S05.E12: Evidence to the Contrary (2)

[thewhiteowl]

Bull and the team worry about jury bias when Bull mounts a murder trial defense for a Black Lives Matter activist.

[Dowel Jones]

Well, they rose up the water's surface last week, but sank right back down into the morass this week, even with the surprise on jury selection.  Courtroom antics?  Check.  Surprise witness?  Check.  Rules of Discovery violation?  Check.  Hallmark ending?  Check.

You would think there would be CCTV covering the PD parking lot.  Bull's team could subpoena the footage to see if Leon had in fact touched the car. 

You would also think that the DA's office would have some questions about how TAC accessed Kominsky's phone from the outside, too.  I'm pretty sure that's a violation of law, possibly federal law.

[jabRI]

OK, I'll start.  Very weird message from Bull. He didn't want his client to testify on his own behalf, because that would open the door to his being a Black Lives activist.  Isn't that something to be proud of??

[Dowel Jones]

That was actually a smart request on Bull's part.  You don't want you client put in a position to damage themselves.  It wasn't the BLM membership that he was afraid of, it was the arrest (for criminal mischief) that the DA would bring up.  Anything that would tilt the jury in her favor is a bad idea, although, as we saw in the end scene, the juror was already going to vote guilty no matter the evidence.

[Sarah 103]

I felt this was a stronger episode than last week's, but I was dissapointed the flashbacks didn't carry over. I was really looking forward to seeing how the rest of the team came on board and possibly seeing them work together for the first time on their first case/client. 

[Sake614]

Well I was clearly wrong about Kosinsky being on the take. He looked pretty shady to me throughout lol! I also thought his wife was lying through her teeth on the stand. Still not sure I’m wrong about that. 
 

I agree with Dowel about it being smart to prevent Leo from testifying. If it was just his BLM involvement, it wouldn’t be an issue. But he was arrested, and that would have played right into the DA’s hand in portraying him as hotheaded and violent. Combine that with his ‘threats’ at the courthouse and the disclosure that he wanted to buy a gun, and you have motive for murder. That’s the last thing the defense wants. 
 

all in all, I thought the first half was the stronger episode, but this wasn’t awful.

[Mrs. Stanwyck]

Quote

You would also think that the DA's office would have some questions about how TAC accessed Kominsky's phone from the outside, too.  I'm pretty sure that's a violation of law, possibly federal law.

I don't think they actually hacked his phone (this time - not saying they don't do it at other times).  They were reviewing phone records (I don't know if that is illegal or not) because Danny or Taylor said it was impossible to see the text messages just looking at the phone records.  I believe Danni mentioned something about waiting on a subpoena for access to his phone so they could actually read the texts.  It sounded like, at least this time, they played by the rules.

[Netfoot]

31 minutes ago, Sake614 said:

I thought the first half was the stronger episode, but this wasn’t awful.

My opinion is similar but different:

I believe this episode was nowhere near as good as really bad, compared to the one last week, for a variety of reasons. 

[jabRI]

You may all be right about his not testifying, I just think it sent a bad message about tying that to his BLM activism, which in my opinion, he should put on his resume! 

[LuvMyShows]

 

On 4/20/2021 at 6:55 PM, Dowel Jones said:

Anything that would tilt the jury in her favor is a bad idea, although, as we saw in the end scene, the juror was already going to vote guilty no matter the evidence.

Bull's juror analysis concluded that she would stick with an opinion in spite of facts...but why did he conclude early on that her opinion would be that he was guilty? 

[Dowel Jones]

That's a good question.  Maybe her body language implied that she didn't like the defendant, or maybe it was something she said during the interview.

[mythoughtis]

On 4/23/2021 at 6:59 PM, LuvMyShows said:

 

Bull's juror analysis concluded that she would stick with an opinion in spite of facts...but why did he conclude early on that her opinion would be that he was guilty? 

He assumed that all the jurors first impressions would be that Leo was guilty due to the fact that the detective had testified against his father. So Bull wanted jurors that knew first impressions weren’t always correct. 
The detective wasn’t on the take, but he was taking illegal drugs that could affect his cognitive abilities .... so he was shady. Just not as shady as the cops that killed him. 
Amazingly Marissa actually had a functioning brain in this episode too.  I like her much better when she behaves in a competent manner.