S01.E10: The Brass Verdict

[Whimsy]

Quote

Mickey confronts Trevor as the pieces fall into place, and his chance to right a past wrong could have dire consequences for Maggie.

Original airdate 5/13/22

[preeya]

Done.

Finished all 10.

Very good series.

[sashayshante]

Spoiler

Who was watching Mickey surf? Was it Trevor?

 

[AZChristian]

55 minutes ago, sashayshante said:

  Hide contents

Who was watching Mickey surf? Was it Trevor?

 

Spoiler

According to this article, it is intentionally ambiguous.  It may tie in with the original "Lincoln Lawyer" book.

 

Edited May 15, 2022 by AZChristian

[Irlandesa]

I thought the first few episodes were meh but it got better as it went on.  Even though I'd read a book or two, I still had a hard time accepting some of the characters and/or comparing this to the movie.

For instance, I thought Marissa Tomei was terrific as Maggie in the movies.  I thought Neve Campbell was just okay as Maggie here.  And I liked the time we spent with Lorna more.  It took me a while to warm up to Cisco as well. 

I did like the casting for Izzy.  She was natural and she and Mickey have a good vibe.

I feel like I might have read this book so the I knew Trevor would be guilty but I didn't remember the twist about the lawyer at all. One thing I didn't get is why she had Jerry killed.  Did he get cold feet or something? 

6 hours ago, sashayshante said:

Who was watching Mickey surf? Was it Trevor

He's dead. 

The person watching Mickey surf had a specific tattoo on his left arm.  I think the show is implying it's the guy who beat up and killed prostitutes that Mickey's innocent client (who got out of jail at the end of the ep) was convicted for.

[memememe76]

I thought the guy at the end was Trevor too, because they had similar hair styles colouring. 
 

I thought it was a pretty good series, even though I don’t watch legal shows, but the cast is so appealing (also, Mickey looks good in a suit). I wish the Prosecution was seen as less incompetent. The series made mention of Twitter and public approval, but there would have been some Reddit Sleuth who could have picked up that police car or that drone. 
 

I liked that the teenaged girl acted like a teenager, not a total brat or some know-it-all beyond her years. 
 

I also liked how they captured Los Angeles. 

[sacrebleu]

I liked it overall, the gun shot residue stuff was a twist I haven't seen before ( as was the drone) , but I question how the dead lawyer figured out the cop car thing so quickly that he showed up to take Eli Wynn's case. 

I assumed the tattooed guy at the end was the guy who killed the prostitute who Mickey's client was wrongly imprisoned for 

[Whimsy]

On 5/15/2022 at 12:29 PM, sashayshante said:

  Hide contents

Who was watching Mickey surf? Was it Trevor?

 

Spoiler tag not necessary, but they showed the tattoo of the guy who actually committed the murder that Mickey’s client was convicted of. 
 

I liked this. I never read any of the books or saw the movie. I wish it was getting more attention. I’d really like to see a 2nd season. 

[LuvMyShows]

Hadn't read the book or seen the movie.  Now I'm going to watch the movie!

Some questions:

We saw that Maggie called that Sarah Walker person, and she came in after Soto was released to arrest him.  Was she filing federal charges for corruption, whereas he had been previously on trial locally for murder?

What did Cicso see on that list of charges or whatever he was looking at, that caused him to go visit the Saints, especially since I thought he already knew Mickey was working for them pro bono?  When Cisco went back to the Saints, and we saw at the end that the leader guy said there was a way Cisco could pay off his debt, one of the last scenes we saw was Cisco riding his motorcycle.  Did we ever find out what the debt repayment was?

On 5/15/2022 at 7:25 PM, Irlandesa said:

One thing I didn't get is why she had Jerry killed.  Did he get cold feet or something? 

Yeah, so, looking back now that it's over, I'm not putting it together.  Why did the judge care in the first place about having Trevor found innocent, such that she would have done the jury tampering thing, and also why did she have Jerry killed?  What was shown on that phone log that implicated the judge?  Why did she want Mickey killed?

On 5/15/2022 at 7:25 PM, Irlandesa said:

He's dead. 

The person watching Mickey surf had a specific tattoo on his left arm.  I think the show is implying it's the guy who beat up and killed prostitutes that Mickey's innocent client (who got out of jail at the end of the ep) was convicted for.

Yes, Trevor is dead and they lingered on the tattoo on the guy's left arm, definitely implying he's the guy that did the prostitute killing that Jesus had been wrongly imprisoned for.  But I have a few questions about that.  First, why did the cops care so much about having Jesus take the fall that they would go to those lengths, especially when it's not like they were even trying to protect the real killer, since they didn't know who the real killer was?  Second, the real killer would be crazy to harm Mickey, now that Jesus re-trial is over, because it would probably renew interest as there would be close scrutiny of people who might have had it in for Mickey, whereas now it doesn't seem like anyone is actually pursuing who the real killer was.

[Irlandesa]

37 minutes ago, LuvMyShows said:

Why did the judge care in the first place about having Trevor found innocent, such that she would have done the jury tampering thing, and also why did she have Jerry killed?  What was shown on that phone log that implicated the judge?  Why did she want Mickey killed?

She did it for money.  I can't figure out if it's Trevor who payed her. Or Jerry who then decided to change his mind/got cold feet and filed for an extension.  As for Micky, I think his dogged pursuit of trying to find out who the fixed juror was threatened the setup.

38 minutes ago, LuvMyShows said:

First, why did the cops care so much about having Jesus take the fall that they would go to those lengths, especially when it's not like they were even trying to protect the real killer, since they didn't know who the real killer was? 

It could be a big conspiracy.  But bringing real life into it, cops and prosecutors deciding someone is guilty to the point where they eventually ignore evidence that points to that person's innocence and another person's guilt happens in real life.  The cop could have been protecting someone but given his attitude about Mickey, it's more likely he legitimately thought they had the right guy.  He either thought Mickey was up to something with the prostitute or she was mistaken and her testimony would let a killer go free.

[sashayshante]

11 hours ago, Whimsy said:

I wish it was getting more attention.

Right? It was certainly interesting enough that I binge-watched all 10 episodes in 24 hrs. I think the main challenge it had was a cast nobody recognized except for Neve Cambell. (Who looks amazing, btw.) Though I did like the cameo from Rebecca from The Practice (another David E. Kelly series) as the judge who handed over all of Jerry's coaches to Mickey.

Manuel Garcia Rufo made a great lead. Handsome without being pretty. A little weathered to make his year of addiction believable. I thought Cisco was well cast. Loved Becki Newton. Hopefully since it was Netflix's top show for the week it will get more press.

[Keywestclubkid]

Ok I get why the other attorney did it cause it was about the conviction and getting a guilty verdict no matter what cause it looked good on him ... I am lost on the judges part tho ... why was she part of it? 

[AZChristian]

10 minutes ago, Keywestclubkid said:

Ok I get why the other attorney did it cause it was about the conviction and getting a guilty verdict no matter what cause it looked good on him ... I am lost on the judges part tho ... why was she part of it? 

$$$$$$$$

Elliott was paying her off to manipulate the juror pool to get the crooked "engineer" on the jury.

[preeya]

Now that I've read this entire forum, it looks as if there are quite a few questions (loose ends) that were either misunderstood, not sufficiently closed or properly answered.  Perhaps a re-watch is in order.

 

Edited May 17, 2022 by preeya

[Chicago Redshirt]

On 5/15/2022 at 6:25 PM, Irlandesa said:

I feel like I might have read this book so the I knew Trevor would be guilty but I didn't remember the twist about the lawyer at all. One thing I didn't get is why she had Jerry killed.  Did he get cold feet or something? 

Judge was accepting bribes to fix jury pools with her access. Jerry paid her one such bribe.

It wasn't 100 percent clear if Jerry got cold feet, if the judge just prematurely worried that he might or what. But the inference is that she didn't want to be exposed as corrupt and so had him killed.

On 5/15/2022 at 9:09 PM, memememe76 said:

I wish the Prosecution was seen as less incompetent.

I don't think the prosecution, at least in the Trevor case, was incompetent. Although I think in the real world, the cops might have looked at his phone records and/or figured out that Trevor used a drone to dispose of the evidence. Or at a minimum, the concept of "this timeline doesn't make sense" would be an obvious hole in the prosecution case that Mickey would not need a last-minute epiphany to come up with and the prosecution would have to come up with an explanation for.

I do wish we had a "this is how it happened" style re-enactment. It's not 100 percent clear if Trevor in fact planned the murder out of jealousy over the affair, planned the murder out of fear that Lara was going to be revealed as the true genius, spontaneously killed the two on encountering them, or what.

Because if he planned it out at all, it seems kind of silly.

On 5/16/2022 at 8:15 PM, LuvMyShows said:

Some questions:

We saw that Maggie called that Sarah Walker person, and she came in after Soto was released to arrest him.  Was she filing federal charges for corruption, whereas he had been previously on trial locally for murder?

What did Cicso see on that list of charges or whatever he was looking at, that caused him to go visit the Saints, especially since I thought he already knew Mickey was working for them pro bono?  When Cisco went back to the Saints, and we saw at the end that the leader guy said there was a way Cisco could pay off his debt, one of the last scenes we saw was Cisco riding his motorcycle.  Did we ever find out what the debt repayment was?

Yeah, so, looking back now that it's over, I'm not putting it together.  Why did the judge care in the first place about having Trevor found innocent, such that she would have done the jury tampering thing, and also why did she have Jerry killed?  What was shown on that phone log that implicated the judge?  Why did she want Mickey killed?

Yes, Trevor is dead and they lingered on the tattoo on the guy's left arm, definitely implying he's the guy that did the prostitute killing that Jesus had been wrongly imprisoned for.  But I have a few questions about that.  First, why did the cops care so much about having Jesus take the fall that they would go to those lengths, especially when it's not like they were even trying to protect the real killer, since they didn't know who the real killer was?  Second, the real killer would be crazy to harm Mickey, now that Jesus re-trial is over, because it would probably renew interest as there would be close scrutiny of people who might have had it in for Mickey, whereas now it doesn't seem like anyone is actually pursuing who the real killer was.

Yes, Sarah is apparently a federal prosecutor and Maggie called her in to prosecute him federally on the whole she-bang of charges, whereas he previously was being tried in state court on murder and human trafficking charges. It raises the question why the feds weren't involved in the get-go since the underlying case was slave labor being imported from the Philippines, but oh well. 

Cisco was looking at what seemed to be Mickey's accounts, a list of clients and either how much they had charged/received. He saw the real name of the Saints member "Hard Case Casey" and the amount of $0.00 and the initials "pb" for pro bono, or free. As he told the Saints leader, he was under the impression that any work Mickey was doing was paying work, and he knew that Mickey would never just donate his time to help a Saints member. We don't yet know what the Saints leader asked Cisco to do, or if the shot of him riding his bike is him doing it, thinking about doing it, or fleeing from doing it. At a guess, he's doing it.

The judge didn't care about Trevor being acquitted. The judge cared about protecting her reputation and power as the presiding judge. Jerry was involved in setting up the fake engineer juror and could expose her and her husband, so he had to go. Mickey figured out about the existence of a bribe and wasn't willing to play ball, and he wasn't willing to just take the W. So he could have shone uncomfortable light on the judge. So he had to go.

Langkford presumably honestly believed Jesus was the right guy and hated Mickey and was worried that Mickey would get a guilty person off. He presumably thought that Glory Days was a desperate, sleazy ploy from Mickey rather than someone who was telling the truth. I mean, without knowing the details of the killing Jesus was accused of, doesn't it sound far-fetched that she was attacked by someone who spontaneously confessed to a specific other killing and threatened to kill her, but then she somehow managed to escape, and she never reported the attack on her or this confession to the cops? Just to the defense attorney before someone was about to stand trial for the murder? Also it wasn't much in the way of lengths -- send a cop to threaten her with a criminal charge. (Although the notion that the cop would have gone so far out of the way here -- taking a service elevator to avoid being picked up by security cameras and making an in-person threat when it would have been way easier to call the Bonaventure and make a threat over the phone, or to get Glory Days to meet her at a location outside the hotel seems a stretch).

As to the real killer, presumably he is at least a little crazy because he's an apparent serial killer with at least two deaths on his hands. But he may just be in a monitoring mode.
Tattoo Guy may just think he can stay ahead of the cops.

Mickey would potentially have other suspects who might want to harm or kill him that would come to mind before Tattoo Guy. Just within the span of the two weeks of the show, he had at least an attempt on his life by the judge's minion. Other possible suspects might include the Israeli security guy (pissed off about Mickey painting him as the bad guy, has access to money, weapons and intel), corrupt cops (the number of friends Langkford might have on the force is probably pretty sizeable), former clients of his/Jerry's, the judge (even if she can't get the corruption evidence back in the can, she can make Mickey pay for exposing her in the first place), Soto and anyone interested in hurting Maggie through her family. So "Tattoo Guy" who has never been shown to exist and who could for all the police and prosecutors know could just be a fiction meant to introduce reasonable doubt is probably not going to be high on the suspect list. 

There are lots of ways to kill someone without being obvious. This Netflix series is my first exposure to Mickey. But I wouldn't be surprised if Mickey's accident was not truly an accident and was an attempt by Tattoo Guy or someone else to kill him. (See Lethal Weapon II, for an example of what seemed to be an accident actually being a hit attempt.) So if Tattoo Guy is the brand of serial killer who is careful and organized, he could probably kill Mickey and make it look like a random street crime, an accident, an overdose, etc etc.

[twoods]

Great series. It was refreshing to watch a good Netflix show that relied on a few intriguing storylines with a lot of twists that kept me interested, without the usual excessive gore and nudity that Netflix has been throwing at us lately. 
I hope we get a second season because there are a lot of loose ends, and I really want to see Soto go to jail. What a pile of shit.

[Anela]

I really enjoyed this. I had some trouble getting into it, because of a stressful weekend, and then I was falling asleep once I finally dug in (last night), so I put off the last two episodes until tonight. I feel like some of the story line was too convoluted (like the judge being the one behind it all), but I still liked it. I wish we had more to watch.

 

[Ursula Parrott]

Why on earth would a judge be anywhere near the jury summons process? A whole clerical staff randomly selects, mails notices, processes postponements and excuses, and manages the jury pool showing up each day before the judge summons prospective jurors to a courtroom. I would also imagine there is some sort of check and balance to the system so that jury services staff do not have the opportunity to tamper with selection.

Those tidy little piles of notices were hilarious. LA County probably mails summons in giant bales. Usually Connelly is smarter than this about procedure. Or did a screenwriter get creative?

[Chicago Redshirt]

7 hours ago, Ursula Parrott said:

Why on earth would a judge be anywhere near the jury summons process? A whole clerical staff randomly selects, mails notices, processes postponements and excuses, and manages the jury pool showing up each day before the judge summons prospective jurors to a courtroom. I would also imagine there is some sort of check and balance to the system so that jury services staff do not have the opportunity to tamper with selection.

The culprit was the presiding judge, so she had broad authority of all aspects of the court system. Unlike a run-of-the-mill judge, she would have had the ability to select/manipulate the clerical staff or the randomizing program or however the stacking of the juror system was actually done.

But I have some other questions.

Let's say that despite being relatively rich and smart, the presiding judge is still willing to be corrupt, and engage in this particular form of corruption, and it works. She can have things manipulated so that particular jurors can get routed to particular juries, and she can fix things so that those jurors are unlikely to be struck. All of this is sort of far-fetched, but OK.

Why would someone in the market for a fixed jury pay a bribe to have a single corrupt juror? At best, a corrupt juror can maybe influence the other jurors, but there's no guarantee of that. More likely, that juror will just cause a mistrial and they will have to do the whole thing all over again. Heck, getting 8 or even 11 corrupt jurors is not a guarantee that the jury will find your way because the remaining honest juror(s) could still vote against them and cause a mistrial.

How do you pitch this particular corruption scheme?

Am I wrong, or isn't it just strictly better to bribe/intimidate randomly selected jurors than it is to manipulate the whole jury selection system? Or to for the presiding judge to just enlist a corrupt judge or two to make rulings that basically steer the trial the way they want it?

Edited May 20, 2022 by Chicago Redshirt

[LuvMyShows]

On 5/16/2022 at 9:13 PM, Whimsy said:

I liked this. I never read any of the books or saw the movie. I wish it was getting more attention. I’d really like to see a 2nd season. 

I really liked it too. When it ended, I said to myself that I really wanted to continue following these people for longer.  And I've been recommending it to people, so maybe word of mouth will result in something.  Netflix for the past several days has shown it as its #1 show.  It sure seems like they set it up for a 2nd season, with the unsettling ending.

I can't say the same for the movie, which I watched after finishing the TV show.  I know there are limitations in that the movie was only 2 hours, and the TV show had substantially longer, but still...there was zero character development or backstory explanation in the movie.  And I was stunned by the enormous difference in the plots, but also the characterization of Mickey.  The Mickey of the movie was more of a slicky-boy, and certainly a scammer (the thing he did with the photographer and splitting the money), and seemed to have very little conscience, whereas TV Mickey seemed like a soft-hearted man.  The relationship between Mickey and Maggie in the movie was a joke, but the one on TV was genuinely nuanced and fraught with subtle emotions.

[Hava]

I had such low expectations going into the series. It looked super low budget and corny at first blush. But, it was surprisingly really, really good! The only aspect I didn't love was the Maggie character and subplot. Otherwise, I am looking forward to another season!

[SnapHappy]

As a super-Bosch fan, I wasn't prepared to love this series, but I did.  I've read all the books, and they did a great job capturing that Mickey Haller.   Matthew Mc. was so pretty, and the movie was fine, but he just wasn't Mickey. 

Loved Becky Newton as Lorna.  She & Chris Gorham (Trevor) were both in "Ugly Betty" back in the day.  He's matured, but she looks exactly the same! I liked her & Cisco together.

Connelly is so good at making L.A. almost another character in his shows.  Beautifully filmed and a real love letter to the city.  He does the same thing with the "Bosch" series.  

Anybody think Manuel (Mickey) looks like Ron Livingston from "Office Space"?  Just me?  *LOL*

I definitely want a season 2.  They've got lots of material to develop.  

[babs1226]

I really enjoyed this series, but I would have enjoyed it more if they used subtitles for all the text messages.  Maybe it's just me, but I couldn't read them, so I didn't bother.   I didn't feel like grabbing the screen and putting it close to my face every time there was a text.  

[SnapHappy]

3 hours ago, babs1226 said:

I really enjoyed this series, but I would have enjoyed it more if they used subtitles for all the text messages.  Maybe it's just me, but I couldn't read them, so I didn't bother.   I didn't feel like grabbing the screen and putting it close to my face every time there was a text.  

Excellent point, they definitely should have done that!   Luckily, I was watching the last episode on my laptop, so I could just pause & stick my face up to the screen to read them....*LOL*

[twoods]

I feel that’s how most movies and shows are, with me struggling to read the texts against a blue or green background. Do they think we can read that one second glance at the screen?

[BellyLaughter]

I really enjoyed this series ... took a while to really get moving but definitely above average for a law drama.  I will admit to being very tired whilst finishing off the last 3 episodes so will have to do a rewatch because I am pretty sure I may have dosed off and missed a few things...

[circumvent]

I liked the series. Easy to watch, entertaining, without the over the top tropes some series involving lawyers and cops use - like having a family member kidnapped because of a case. At least they haven't done that in tis season.

One little detail that  nerd like me would see: When Mickey gets up and walks to the ocean, I can tell that that scene was filmed at least once before. As he starts to walk, there are foot prints almost exactly where he stepped before, but just where the sea didn't wash them off. Continuity issue. They should have asked people to walk along the surf to mix up many foot prints. 

I said I was a nerd. I like to observe how scenes are directed

[Raja]

On 5/19/2022 at 10:34 PM, Ursula Parrott said:

Why on earth would a judge be anywhere near the jury summons process? A whole clerical staff randomly selects, mails notices, processes postponements and excuses, and manages the jury pool showing up each day before the judge summons prospective jurors to a courtroom. I would also imagine there is some sort of check and balance to the system so that jury services staff do not have the opportunity to tamper with selection.

Those tidy little piles of notices were hilarious. LA County probably mails summons in giant bales. Usually Connelly is smarter than this about procedure. Or did a screenwriter get creative?

I know that on the days when L.A. County jury summons come in the mail stream I normally deliver to one to about every 75 to 100 housholds in the neighborhood.  Federal jury summons are far less frequent. The aside showing up with a notice and fake I.D. to check in day one the entire jury pool plot seemed preposterous  to me. From how does anyone know the fake juror would be amongst the first chosen so the jury is decided upon before that got down to him to the Presiding Judge investigating all the names generated randomly for their Bull like instincts to find the right one to impersonate before a stack of summons are mailed out.

The explanations out of nowhere of the last episode and a half were the weak part of the series to me.

On 5/16/2022 at 6:15 PM, LuvMyShows said:

Hadn't read the book or seen the movie.  Now I'm going to watch the movie!

Some questions:

We saw that Maggie called that Sarah Walker person, and she came in after Soto was released to arrest him.  Was she filing federal charges for corruption, whereas he had been previously on trial locally for murder?

What did Cicso see on that list of charges or whatever he was looking at, that caused him to go visit the Saints, especially since I thought he already knew Mickey was working for them pro bono?  When Cisco went back to the Saints, and we saw at the end that the leader guy said there was a way Cisco could pay off his debt, one of the last scenes we saw was Cisco riding his motorcycle.  Did we ever find out what the debt repayment was?

Presumably LAPD ran across an international human trafficking case, and even before the murder of the witness the County of L.A. decided to do it themselves rather than turn it over to the feds. With their case fallling apart they called the US Attorney's office and A.U.S.A.  must think they have a case. Strong enough to immediatly arrest their suspect as soon as the Californian charges were dismissed.

I think that whatever the Road Saints have in mind for Cisco was just to seed a follow up season's plot

Edited May 22, 2022 by Raja

[Hava]

On 5/21/2022 at 6:49 AM, SnapHappy said:

Anybody think Manuel (Mickey) looks like Ron Livingston from "Office Space"

To me, he is a cross between Mario Lopez and Mark Paul Gosselaar. LOL. 

[Chicago Redshirt]

13 hours ago, Raja said:

I know that on the days when L.A. County jury summons come in the mail stream I normally deliver to one to about every 75 to 100 housholds in the neighborhood.  Federal jury summons are far less frequent. The aside showing up with a notice and fake I.D. to check in day one the entire jury pool plot seemed preposterous  to me. From how does anyone know the fake juror would be amongst the first chosen so the jury is decided upon before that got down to him to the Presiding Judge investigating all the names generated randomly for their Bull like instincts to find the right one to impersonate before a stack of summons are mailed out.

Presiding Judge hypothetically either has the selection algorithm and/or the clerk's staff fixed so that when she needs to have Crooked Fake Juror get a summons, he gets one, and that he is routed to the appropriate jury with a low enough number (1-12) so that he is pretty much guaranteed to be seated. Heck, you technically don't have to have that low a number because some people with low numbers will get struck for cause and some will be struck by one side or the other. 

In other words, things proceeded something like this:

Jerry: Man, this is a tough case..

Presiding Judge/Presiding Judge's husband: we can make life easier for you. What if we got a corrupt juror on the panel for you? Would that be worth $100,000?

Jerry: Boy, would it!

PJ works her magic and has a summons routed to Crooked Fake Juror, who has created a persona unlikely to get him struck by the prosecution and since the defense knows that he's Crooked, they aren't going to strike him either. PJ further manipulates things so that among the possible juries he could get routed to, he's routed to Trevor's trial. (Which would be relatively easy, as there are likely only a couple jury trials starting at a given time, even pre-pandemic.)

I recently had real-world jury duty, and I could see an even less complicated form of this happening where Crooked Fake Juror shows up and fills out the jury questionnaire. It seems perfectly plausible to me that a clerk staff would not be screening to see if someone was trying too hard to participate in jury duty, as the stereotype has some reality to it that most people are trying to avoid it. Especially if we're talking something like the Trevor case, which in real-life would take at least a couple of weeks.

[SnapHappy]

Could the judge grab a small stack of the summons before they go out for delivery, hand them off to fake juror and fake juror gets a fake ID to match one of the names on the summons?  I can't imagine a fake license is too hard to get.  Then he just throws the rest away and reports on his specific day with his new ID that matches the summons.   

[dleighg]

So why did the new DA send Maggie off to the hinterlands?

[Chicago Redshirt]

17 hours ago, SnapHappy said:

Could the judge grab a small stack of the summons before they go out for delivery, hand them off to fake juror and fake juror gets a fake ID to match one of the names on the summons?  I can't imagine a fake license is too hard to get.  Then he just throws the rest away and reports on his specific day with his new ID that matches the summons.   

The easiest way to do it would be to either direct a clerk's office employee to send the Corrupt Fake Juror a summons under his fake name or to mess with the randomization program data so that it picks Corrupt Fake Juror. Alternatively, PJ could know that Real Juror had been selected and tell her accomplice to intercept the valid summons and get a fake ID in the name of Real Juror. 

I seem to remember in this case there might have been something said about how the Real Juror was dead or very different from who/how Fake Juror presented himself.

It probably would be hardest to take a physical summons before they circulate and then physically give it to Fake Juror. 

17 hours ago, dleighg said:

So why did the new DA send Maggie off to the hinterlands?

Take your pick of the following:

1. He honestly wanted to have strong people in the Van Nuys courthouse to handle the occasional high-profile cases that come up there.

2. The fact that she turned on her immediate boss, the person she frigging was introducing at a fundraising dinner, as quickly as she did means that he couldn't rely on her loyalty longterm.

3. He was punishing her for the loss in the Sato case/being as close as she was to corrupt cop Langkford. Remember, she and Langkford were basically working hand-in-glove. So not only did Langkford's corruption allegedly tank the Sato prosecution, not only did it basically mean that Sato stood a good chance of getting away with at least two murders and his human trafficking ring in a pretty big embarassment for his office, but it also was a reflection on Maggie that she either knew about and tolerated Langkford's corruption or she should have and didn't have the best perception about such things. And indeed, we know that Maggie effectively looked the other way when Langkford set up that one gangbanger to have his phone cloned in what seemed to be in a pretty grey area.

Edited May 24, 2022 by Chicago Redshirt

[slowpoked]

Finished it in two days - great, easy series to watch. I hope they get a season 2.

The one thing I don’t get is that if Judge Holder and Trevor are in cahoots with each other, and that Judge Holder pressured Trevor to get Jerry as his lawyer because she already knows from prior experience that Jerry is corrupt (it isn’t his first time dealing with a potential tampered juror, or done bribes w/ the judge, etc.) 
 

Because in the real world, I would imagine that someone like Trevor who has unlimited resources would go to a high-powered, high star-wattage criminal defense attorneys, kinda like OJ’s “dream team,” not a lone wolf like Jerry Vincent, especially because he also wants to prove himself innocent in the court of public opinion. That was something that sort of bugged me throughout the entire series, and the corrupt judge reveal didn’t exactly clear that. 

[Chicago Redshirt]

1 hour ago, slowpoked said:

Finished it in two days - great, easy series to watch. I hope they get a season 2.

The one thing I don’t get is that if Judge Holder and Trevor are in cahoots with each other, and that Judge Holder pressured Trevor to get Jerry as his lawyer because she already knows from prior experience that Jerry is corrupt (it isn’t his first time dealing with a potential tampered juror, or done bribes w/ the judge, etc.) 
 

Because in the real world, I would imagine that someone like Trevor who has unlimited resources would go to a high-powered, high star-wattage criminal defense attorneys, kinda like OJ’s “dream team,” not a lone wolf like Jerry Vincent, especially because he also wants to prove himself innocent in the court of public opinion. That was something that sort of bugged me throughout the entire series, and the corrupt judge reveal didn’t exactly clear that. 

My understanding is that Jerry was supposed to be a very successful lawyer despite his lack of organization and other issues. Mickey seemed to think that Jerry was pretty good (though Mickey was better). Of course, the fact that Jerry had a bunch of run-of-the-mill clients suggests that he's not exactly "high-powered." But then there are a couple reasons why he might not want high-powered. Because a high-powered attorney isn't going to just bend to his will. 

It wasn't clear to me how long Jerry had been corrupt. It may have just been on Trevor's case. I don't think that Judge Holder pressured Trevor to hire Jerry as his lawyer. My read on the situation  (which may be all head-canon because I don't think the show actually gave us the details on most of this) was:

• Trevor hired Jerry on his own after doing whatever due diligence he felt necessary
• Jerry started panicking when he realized he didn't have that great of a defense and/or Trevor started to push for Jerry to win by any means necessary,
• Judge Holder's husband (who knew Jerry) floated the notion that she could help at the cost of $100k and explains the basics of the insert a corrupt juror scheme
• Jerry makes the payoff and tells Trevor at least the outline of the scheme (so that he knows that there is a corrupt juror and that he needs to insist on veto power on strikes)
• Jerry starts to get squeamish about having bribed Judge Holder
• Judge Holder finds out and has Jerry killed.

One thing the show does not establish is why Jerry willed his practice to Mickey. There are obviously numerous good lawyers in L.A., and we do know from the show that Jerry and Mickey were not particularly close. Also, it seems strange that Judge Holder would have had any role in administrating Jerry's succession plan. Are we meant to think that Judge Holder orchestrated Mickey taking over Jerry's cases? And if so, why?

Edited May 29, 2022 by Chicago Redshirt

[slowpoked]

11 hours ago, Chicago Redshirt said:

My understanding is that Jerry was supposed to be a very successful lawyer despite his lack of organization and other issues. Mickey seemed to think that Jerry was pretty good (though Mickey was better). Of course, the fact that Jerry had a bunch of run-of-the-mill clients suggests that he's not exactly "high-powered." But then there are a couple reasons why he might not want high-powered. Because a high-powered attorney isn't going to just bend to his will. 

It wasn't clear to me how long Jerry had been corrupt. It may have just been on Trevor's case. I don't think that Judge Holder pressured Trevor to hire Jerry as his lawyer. My read on the situation  (which may be all head-canon because I don't think the show actually gave us the details on most of this) was:

• Trevor hired Jerry on his own after doing whatever due diligence he felt necessary
• Jerry started panicking when he realized he didn't have that great of a defense and/or Trevor started to push for Jerry to win by any means necessary,
• Judge Holder's husband (who knew Jerry) floated the notion that she could help at the cost of $100k and explains the basics of the insert a corrupt juror scheme
• Jerry makes the payoff and tells Trevor at least the outline of the scheme (so that he knows that there is a corrupt juror and that he needs to insist on veto power on strikes)
• Jerry starts to get squeamish about having bribed Judge Holder
• Judge Holder finds out and has Jerry killed.

One thing the show does not establish is why Jerry willed his practice to Mickey. There are obviously numerous good lawyers in L.A., and we do know from the show that Jerry and Mickey were not particularly close. Also, it seems strange that Judge Holder would have had any role in administrating Jerry's succession plan. Are we meant to think that Judge Holder orchestrated Mickey taking over Jerry's cases? And if so, why?

My husband watched it earlier than me, and separately, and he has a different perspective. Trevor wanted a surefire acquittal, and found a corrupt judge in Holder who was willing to take bribes to tamper a jury. Trevor hired Jerry independently, and maybe really thought he was a good criminal defense attorney despite being a lone wolf in Los Angeles. (That was unusual for me too - LA has more than its fair share of high-powered, high star-wattage crim defense lawyers for the Trevor Elliotts of the world. This wasn’t like some rural, far-off area where there’s only a couple of good lawyers. I mean, imagine Zuckerberg hiring a crim defense attorney off a Facebook or a bench/bus ad. I would think someone like Trevor Elliott has his own internal corporate lawyers who could recommend him to the Johnny Cochrans in LA).

While Jerry was working the case, he found out about the potential tampered juror through his own investigation. He asked for a continuance to look into it, and that’s why he got killed.

Incidentally, did we ever find about that “FBI investigation” of Jerry that Haller and Griggs were discussing about? Or is it just one of their theories that went nowhere?

[dleighg]

5 hours ago, slowpoked said:

I mean, imagine Zuckerberg hiring a crim defense attorney off a Facebook or a bench/bus ad.

This just made me laugh because the former president's lawyer is, essentially, a woman like that- she operates out of a NJ strip mall. So I guess some billionaires do that!

https://www.reuters.com/legal/legalindustry/trump-turns-small-nj-law-firm-latest-lawsuits-2021-12-20/

[Lakebum]

On 5/20/2022 at 4:55 PM, LuvMyShows said:

I can't say the same for the movie, which I watched after finishing the TV show.  I know there are limitations in that the movie was only 2 hours, and the TV show had substantially longer, but still...there was zero character development or backstory explanation in the movie.  And I was stunned by the enormous difference in the plots, but also the characterization of Mickey.  The Mickey of the movie was more of a slicky-boy, and certainly a scammer (the thing he did with the photographer and splitting the money), and seemed to have very little conscience, whereas TV Mickey seemed like a soft-hearted man.  The relationship between Mickey and Maggie in the movie was a joke, but the one on TV was genuinely nuanced and fraught with subtle emotions.

The difference in the plots is because the movie "The Lincoln Lawyer" is based on the book of the same title, while the series "The Lincoln Lawyer" is based on the second book in the series, The Brass Verdict. (Well, season one was; I hope there are future seasons, and I would expect them to be based on subsequent novels in the series.)

And yes, the book version of Mickey Haller is much closer to the Mickey we see in the series, and not much at all like the Matthew McConaughey version from the movie.

[Chicago Redshirt]

13 hours ago, slowpoked said:

My husband watched it earlier than me, and separately, and he has a different perspective. Trevor wanted a surefire acquittal, and found a corrupt judge in Holder who was willing to take bribes to tamper a jury. Trevor hired Jerry independently, and maybe really thought he was a good criminal defense attorney despite being a lone wolf in Los Angeles. (That was unusual for me too - LA has more than its fair share of high-powered, high star-wattage crim defense lawyers for the Trevor Elliotts of the world. This wasn’t like some rural, far-off area where there’s only a couple of good lawyers. I mean, imagine Zuckerberg hiring a crim defense attorney off a Facebook or a bench/bus ad. I would think someone like Trevor Elliott has his own internal corporate lawyers who could recommend him to the Johnny Cochrans in LA).

While Jerry was working the case, he found out about the potential tampered juror through his own investigation. He asked for a continuance to look into it, and that’s why he got killed.

Incidentally, did we ever find about that “FBI investigation” of Jerry that Haller and Griggs were discussing about? Or is it just one of their theories that went nowhere?

It may well be, but some potential holes with that theory:

Trevor would have had no reason to have had previous contact with Holder or to suspect that Holder is corrupt. He also would have little reason to think that a corrupt Holder could do much to influence his trial since on paper her area of responsibility does not have much direct sway over what the trial judge might do. It would probably make more sense for Trevor to just go after bribing the trial judge.

It would be pretty ballsy of him to initiate a bribe in the first place. Which isn't necessarily offbrand for Trevor, but still...

I think we have to accept the notion that Jerry was an active participant in the bribery scheme because of the $100k that was missing from his accounts. The inference is that he used it to make the payoff. The show went out of its way to mention that Judge Holder's husband and Jerry were familiar, which makes it possible that the husband let him know that Holder was for sale. 

[Irlandesa]

On 5/16/2022 at 8:13 PM, Whimsy said:

I liked this. I never read any of the books or saw the movie. I wish it was getting more attention. I’d really like to see a 2nd season. 

This is an old post but this was #1 on Netflix until Stranger Things was released.  And it was at 2 last I checked.  It reminds me a bit of Bosch.  Bosch isn't a particularly buzzworthy show, although I do know critics who have mentioned liking it.  It just quietly did 7 seasons on Amazon and it's semi-spinoff (basically a retired Bosch) will have at least two seasons on Freevee.  All said and done, it'll be one of the longest-running streaming shows even though it's far from the sexiest. 

It's just reliable.  As is this show.  Of course, Netflix is a mess right now so you never know but I would think it has done enough for a second season.

[memememe76]

Yes, it’s still number 2 here in Canada due to Stranger Things and it’s been weeks. That is impressive. Kinda like Virgin River in its quiet popularity, although this show probably has a higher budget. 

[Cristofle]

I binged this over the weekend - I liked it! I had enjoyed the movie, but I haven't read the books - this series is nudging me closer to starting on the books, lol. I knew Trevor had really killed his wife, but I didn't really see the judge's involvement coming, so Mickey's confrontation of her was a great twist in the finale for me. I like the core cast, especially Mickey, Lorna, Izzy, and Cisco, so if they get another season, I hope they keep the core cast. I did see some plot similarities between this season and the movie, but that may be a discussion for another thread.

[slowpoked]

On 5/29/2022 at 11:25 PM, Lakebum said:

The difference in the plots is because the movie "The Lincoln Lawyer" is based on the book of the same title, while the series "The Lincoln Lawyer" is based on the second book in the series, The Brass Verdict. (Well, season one was; I hope there are future seasons, and I would expect them to be based on subsequent novels in the series.)

I didn’t know this until recently. I thought the movie and series were one and the same, and I was really confused with the movie (because I watched the series first), although I saw some similarities.

If that’s the case, shouldn’t the Jesus Menendez case be already case closed/re-appealed as of The Brass Verdict? I wonder why they need to shoehorn it in, unless they’re planning on revisiting the first book/movie in future seasons. 

[PurpleTentacle]

So why did the cops set up the old client? Just to close the case with a conviction? I guess there have been quite a few of those instances in real life. Probably waaaay more than the ones that were discovered. Kinda underwhelming for a TV show. But maybe that's the point.

I'm not that surprised about the judge. She seemed shady from the beginning. But I forgot about her for most of the season, I have to confess.

Overall this was interesting and entertaining show. Let's hope there is going to be a second season and lets hope that they wrap the show up after that, because Netflix is most definitely going to cancel it after that.

[PurpleTentacle]

On 5/17/2022 at 2:55 PM, sashayshante said:

I think the main challenge it had was a cast nobody recognized except for Neve Cambell. (Who looks amazing, btw.)

I think she had a few too many plastic surgeries, but ymmv.

On 5/20/2022 at 3:18 PM, Chicago Redshirt said:

Why would someone in the market for a fixed jury pay a bribe to have a single corrupt juror? At best, a corrupt juror can maybe influence the other jurors, but there's no guarantee of that. More likely, that juror will just cause a mistrial and they will have to do the whole thing all over again. Heck, getting 8 or even 11 corrupt jurors is not a guarantee that the jury will find your way because the remaining honest juror(s) could still vote against them and cause a mistrial.

Is this opposite day, you poking holes in a shows plot and me defending it? :D

I'd say as long as you have a persuasive enough guy and make the rest of the case convincing enough, you can probably sway the rest of the jury. Nobody wants a mistrial. Judges will send juries back a bunch of times, before they'll declare one. If you can be sure that one juror is never going to flip, you don't have to worry about it much. He can just chip away at the other jurors, sow doubts in their minds, etc. Worst case scenario, you get a mistrail and try again.

Now, where I will concur with you is that this random goon wasn't the guy you'd want on the jury. I don't buy that he could have convinced the other jurors.

Also, and I mentioned that in the episode 9 thread already, had the police not put Trevor into a contaminated squad car, he would have had no explaination for the GSR on his hands and there goes his reasonably believeable story. Even the corrupt juror could have never sold how a guy who never shot a gun got GSR on his hands. So that was total luck and by all rights he should have been convicted. And it was so avoidable. Just go to the gun range now and then, before you do the murder. Say you did it as research for your game, to make it more authentic. Or hell, just for fun. Take your wife with you, to make it less suspicious. Done. I mean this takes place in america. It's more suspicious when you haven't shot a gun in your life.

On 5/24/2022 at 4:31 AM, Chicago Redshirt said:

I seem to remember in this case there might have been something said about how the Real Juror was dead or very different from who/how Fake Juror presented himself.

Real Juror was alive but had never gotten a summons.

So I assume they just intercepted the summons and got their fake juror a fake ID that had the name of the real juror on it. That's the path of least resistance here.

On 5/31/2022 at 4:40 AM, Irlandesa said:

It just quietly did 7 seasons on Amazon and it's semi-spinoff (basically a retired Bosch) will have at least two seasons on Freevee. 

I probably should get back to Bosch. Just fell off at some point. Cop shows just get a bit bland after a few seasons. Not necessarily because they are bad, but if you watch too much at once you see all the repeating patterns.

[Chicago Redshirt]

4 hours ago, PurpleTentacle said:

I'd say as long as you have a persuasive enough guy and make the rest of the case convincing enough, you can probably sway the rest of the jury. Nobody wants a mistrial. Judges will send juries back a bunch of times, before they'll declare one. If you can be sure that one juror is never going to flip, you don't have to worry about it much. He can just chip away at the other jurors, sow doubts in their minds, etc. Worst case scenario, you get a mistrail and try again.

Now, where I will concur with you is that this random goon wasn't the guy you'd want on the jury. I don't buy that he could have convinced the other jurors.

Also, and I mentioned that in the episode 9 thread already, had the police not put Trevor into a contaminated squad car, he would have had no explaination for the GSR on his hands and there goes his reasonably believeable story. Even the corrupt juror could have never sold how a guy who never shot a gun got GSR on his hands. So that was total luck and by all rights he should have been convicted. And it was so avoidable. Just go to the gun range now and then, before you do the murder. Say you did it as research for your game, to make it more authentic. Or hell, just for fun. Take your wife with you, to make it less suspicious. Done. I mean this takes place in america. It's more suspicious when you haven't shot a gun in your life.

"12 Angry Men" is a famous movie where a single holdout juror who manages to eventually sway the other 11 that the defendant is innocent by raising questions about gaps in the evidence. And I suppose there's a possibility of a real-world trial working that way. But my point is there isn't a very high possibility of real-world people operating like that in a case like the one here, where there is a lot of evidence that points toward guilt and not much that points to potential innocence. 

Mickey was (rightfully) worried that some jurors would jump to the conclusion that Trevor was guilty just because he's a rich douche who drives a fancy car. Against that backdrop, the notion that any one juror is going to be so persuasive as to get an acquittal, seems extremely thin.

The notion that even someone in the market for a bribe would say, "This is a good way to spend my bribe money that is likely to win me an acquittal" is even thinner. I guess $100k to Trevor is like $50 to you or me so it might not even matter to him.

The best I can fanwank is that Corrupt Juror would be in a good position to identify any pro-prosecution jurors and then create conditions for those jurors to be intimidated/bribed/threatened. But that seems super risky as well. 

I don't claim any particular forensics expertise, but I'm pretty sure gunshot residue is not very likely to remain on one's hands days after the fact, assuming normal hygiene of daily showers, handwashing after bathroom use, etc. It might even be limited in how much it would show up after just one day or one good handwash.

Admitting that you had access to a gun and had been shooting it within a relatively short time frame before the murder seems like it points to guilt more than the presence of GSR points to guilt. A possible explanation for GSR without the mass-shooter guy is that Trevor had the GSR transferred from touching things in his place after the shooting, and that the prosecution GSR expert had misinterpreted the data to come to the conclusion that the only way he could have as much on him was if he had himself fired a gun. The defense almost certainly would have been able to find a forensics expert to argue that the GSR found in the test was explainable by contact with other things that had GSR on them, and any other significant forensic findings. 

It is an open question for me if this was supposed to be a spontaneous murder that then required Trevor to act quickly to cover up or a murder that Trevor simply planned really badly. If it's the former, he couldn't do the gun range thing even if he had wanted to. If it's the latter, there are probably a ton of ways he could have pre-planned the murder to be in a better position to get away with it. Such as actually make the reservations for the coastal getaway, send e-mails or texts talking about how he wanted to reconcile with the wife, wearing gloves so he didn't get GSR on his hands and disposing of them with his clothes and the gun via drone, Occam's razor suggests to me it was supposed to be spontaneous, but people's mileage may vary. 

Fivethirtyeight found a poll from 2007 that said about 31 percent of Americans had never fired a gun, noting that there were not more recent numbers when they did the article in 2015. I'd assume that figure is probably way lower in parts of America, and way higher in other parts. In any case, it doesn't seem facially doubtful that Trevor never shot a gun before. 

[TiredMe]

I’m still confused why the feds charged Soto immediately when basically the evidence (corrupt cop testimony) was gone. Otherwise I enjoyed it. My favorite character was the dog. 

[Mattipoo]

I enjoyed this series more than I thought I would. Like many others, I went into this with low expectations, but was pleasantly surprised. The lead actor playing Mickey Haller is good and believable, and I also liked the characters of Cisco, Lorna, and Lorna's cute pug. There were some plot contrivances which I didn't love, but it is to be expected for courtroom dramas like these. Initially, I was expecting a lot more sex, nudity and violence, given this is a Netflix show, but this played more like something that would be broadcast on a basic cable channel like USA, TNT or CBS. The "vibe" of the show was more late 1990s or early 2000s network TV procedural, rather than an edgy, 2020s Netflix series. Overall, an okay first season. Not the best, but it kept me interested throughout the 10 episodes.

[Ottis]

On 5/15/2022 at 10:29 AM, sashayshante said:

Who was watching Mickey surf? Was it Trevor?

Spoiler

It was the guy with the tattoo, which they focused in on on his arm as he watched Mickey, that the ep earlier had revealed had been the killer (and instead the wrong guy had been convicted, and we watched Mickey get that guy out). 

I am not a fan of Maggie. Mickey may have  ended up screwing up part of her case, but he had a great cause, it was his grail AND the only reason it mattered was because *her* case rested on evidence that was screwed up or tampered with. She knew all that. She is supposed to be like him, by her own admission, but she clearly cares more about her own needs than morals. And on top of all that, she brought in her fed to arrest Soto on what is likely wispy evidence, just for spite, instead of taking the L. 

As I noted in the prior ep thread, was glad to see yet another twist for Elliott. Though I still don't know exactly why that happened. Still, it showed Lorna has good instincts - she was terrified of the shooter.

I knew Holder was sneaky in her second scene, though I'm not sure why. Something about her delivery. I don't really understand how that scheme could have worked, but honestly, that's fine. 

Overall the series was easy to watch and I generally enjoyed it. 

[Chicago Redshirt]

On 6/5/2022 at 7:05 PM, TiredMe said:

I’m still confused why the feds charged Soto immediately when basically the evidence (corrupt cop testimony) was gone. 

In real life, this would have been a federal case, or at least a case worked in conjunction with the feds, from the start because it involved international trafficking.. 

But anyway, part of the reason why he was immediately charged was because drama. It's the season finale and there's not additional time to let things develop.

Also, the show misled somewhat on the impact of the reveal of the corrupt cop testimony on this case.

Yes, the new D.A. made a political decision that he didn't want to pursue a case that he thought was tainted by the corrupt cop. That doesn't mean that every prosecutor would. Especially when the corruption is relatively light and relatively unproven. Yes, the other cop claimed that she pushed the witness to get out of town at Langkford's direction. But that cop had also just perjured herself. We the viewers know that she's telling the truth. But it's unclear if this would even be admissible at a trial of Soto to try to impeach Langkford.

Also, there is certainly a way to prosecute the attempted murder case both without Langkford and Soto's girlfriend's testimony. Maggie can now serve as a witness to what she had heard on the wire, as well as most steps in the investigation. She and a dozen SWAT guys personally witnessed Soto choking his girlfriend and heard him make an incriminating statement after his arrest. So he is done as to attempted murder. 

The feds can pick up the investigation as to the trafficking with the hope that with their increased resources and the likelihood that Soto's going down on one charge that they can get people to flip on him as to the trafficking.