S02.E05: Chapter Thirteen

[Door County Cherry]

Quote

As the Gallardos’ trial nears, Perry attempts to negotiate with the DA. Rafael and Mateo recount the real-life consequences of the McCutcheons’ Los Angeles expansion. Later, the pursuit of a lead lands Paul in danger, and Perry makes a convincing demonstration in court.

 

[Starchild]

I'm confused, did the Gallardo's actually kill Brooks, or have they just accepted money to take the blame for it?

[Chicago Redshirt]

1 hour ago, Starchild said:

I'm confused, did the Gallardo's actually kill Brooks, or have they just accepted money to take the blame for it?

My guess is that the Gallardos took money and were in a position to shoot Brooks, but are somehow factually innocent of the deed itself.

It would be a relatively rare approach for Perry to be repping an actually guilty party. 

[thuganomics85]

I might need to watch again, but I was under the impression that the Gallardos are still claiming that they pulled the trigger, but that they were basically doing it as hitmen for someone who really wanted Brooks dead (granted, it certainly looks like they have some legit grievances with that guy as well.)  I'm not sure why they'd keep lying to Perry at this point, but I'm still kind of surprised if this is all true and Perry is actually representing clients who are guilty (even if they weren't the mastermind/ringleader.)  Granted, HBO in general wouldn't be against this, but I would be surprised if those behind the Perry Manson name would be interested in this approach.  Who knows?

Outside of going hard against that one witness (and having it blow up in his face with the maggot quip), Perry continues to show that he is quite savvy in the courtroom with the way he was able to place doubt about the fingerprint evidence: right down to hinting about possible police corruption.  A common approach, but as the saying goes, he just needs one juror to buy into it.  Despite the times and bigotry surrounding this case, it's not far-fetch to believe that one of those twelve thinks very little of "L.A.'s finest."

Looks like something will come out of Drake's struggle with the community after-all, as he basically had to turn himself into a henchman in order to get assistance from that guy he inadvertently got arrested for racketeering.  He definitely wasn't going to make it out of there in one piece if he refused, but it clearly will effect him going forward.  Chris Chalk did an excellent job here.

Glad Hazel figured out the score and told Della off.  Love you, Della, but that wasn't cool at all what you were doing and, yes, quite cowardly.  It's also worrying that we saw that mysterious guy following her and Anita to that lesbian bar.  Possibly trying to find a way to use that against her?  Maybe that's what caused Hamilton's sudden about face when it comes to making deals and just trying to close out the case.

Please don't let me down, Pete!

Perry and Ginny are charming, which naturally makes me believe this is going to end horribly for one of them, if not both.

[paigow]

Pete assembled the train set... as a warning from Milligan???

Is Ozzie playing a macho game? Only tell the truth AFTER a face-punch?

That was like Jack Bauer asking a question, when no answer, he repeats the question loudly, then gets an answer

[paigow]

7 hours ago, thuganomics85 said:

Perry is actually representing clients who are guilty 

$2,000 buys A LOT of pickles

[aghst]

So the reversed fingerprint means what, it was lifted from somewhere else and then placed on Brooks' car, causing it to come out reversed?

Della is carefree and enjoying her time with her lover.  Then reality came crashing down and she feels bad.  That lesbian bar seems luxurious, given how times are tough for a lot of people.  She doesn't seem to feel any effects of the Depression.

Perry was scrounging for money in season 1 too but now he can get takeout -- did it even exist back then? -- for his little dalliance with Ginny, his son's teacher.

Paul is doing a lot of work, a lot of things he doesn't want to do.  Seems like he should get more of the grocery store money too.  He's making all the discoveries.

Speaking of which, it's probably about time for the grocery store guy to cause trouble for Perry and company.

I'm not getting the model train.  Someone got run over?  Kind of a lot of work to send a message.  There used to be model train and car sets which all came in a nice box.  But I'm guessing back in the 30s, it was a bit more work.

Perry senses political pressure on Burger's office.  Paul is making headway on who bribed the Gallardos.  But it's not enough, he has to completely solve the case so his clients get off free.  

Perry Mason doesn't do plea bargains!

 

Also, Brooks pretty much built the stadium?  That would be costly, because he probably took out a big loan and doesn't have any income coming in since we know that there were no baseball teams in LA then, unless maybe some minor league teams were playing in that stadium.

Building a stadium in a city is not a minor undertaking.  Brooks may have been promoting the hell out of it -- if you build it they will come! -- but to get the cops to clear out residents, burn homes down and then to construct something which sits empty, that's got to be a lot of pressure on Brooks.  He must have owed a lot of people.

 

 

[meep.meep]

They're re-writing history for this.  To build the Dodgers stadium, properties in Chavez Ravine were seized by eminent domain and the majority Mexican-American tenants and property owners lost their homes.  But that was in the late 1950's - the stadium opened in 1962.  This is supposed to be mid-30s.

Increasingly the parts with Paul Drake are the most interesting in the episode.  Paul Chalk did a great job in the scene where he had to beat the information out of the suspect.

It does look like the Gallardos are getting guiltier by the minute.

[aghst]

But that was a govt. agency using eminent domain right?

Brooks can't do it on his own unless he bribed some govt. officials.

Must be what happened because it was the cops forcibly removing the Gallardos and then setting their home on fire.

[Starchild]

Perry got that train set for his son, right?

Maybe McCutcheon's "representative" has just used a child's toy to make an implicit threat against his family, one that could never be proven in court to be such?

[paigow]

3 hours ago, aghst said:

Perry senses political pressure on Burger's office.  Paul is making headway on who bribed the Gallardos.  But it's not enough, he has to completely solve the case so his clients get off free.  

Way too many coincidences... Husband of junkie hires dealer [Ozzie] to find hitmen / patsies. The shanty town is not likely bursting with Heroin addicts... so how would Ozzie know the Gallardos well enough to hire them?

[shapeshifter]

2 hours ago, meep.meep said:

They're re-writing history for this.  To build the Dodgers stadium, properties in Chavez Ravine were seized by eminent domain and the majority Mexican-American tenants and property owners lost their homes.  But that was in the late 1950's - the stadium opened in 1962.  This is supposed to be mid-30s.

Poetic historical license? 

2 hours ago, meep.meep said:

Increasingly the parts with Paul Drake are the most interesting in the episode.  Paul Chalk did a great job in the scene where he had to beat the information out of the suspect.

Yes, the acting was superb, and the visuals were not gratuitously violent, but the implication of the violence was too much for me. If my daughter & son-in-law cancel our HBO access, I won't complain or subscribe. 

 

 

47 minutes ago, paigow said:

Way too many coincidences... Husband of junkie hires dealer [Ozzie] to find hitmen / patsies. The shanty town is not likely bursting with Heroin addicts... so how would Ozzie know the Gallardos well enough to hire them?

If anyone asked in the shanty town for someone wanting to do a hit on someone responsible for building the stadium that made them all homeless, probably the Gallardos name would come up because of their sister who died in the fires set by the men who came to "evict" them.

 

Edited April 4, 2023 by shapeshifter

[paigow]

26 minutes ago, shapeshifter said:

If anyone asked in the shanty town for someone wanting to do a hit on someone responsible for building the stadium that made them all homeless, probably the Gallardos name would come up because of their sister who died in the fires set by the men who came to "evict" them.

Ozzie seems like a competent drug dealer who has a substantial contact list of lowlifes and miscreants.  It is too risky recruiting Shanty Town strangers who fortuitously have a grudge against the target... 

[mjc570]

I hate to say this, because I am a huge Matthew Rhys fan, but I'm giving up on this show.  To me, the only interesting part is Perry pulling off some dazzling feat in the courtroom, which was about 1% of this episode.  The rest, involving what seems to me to be a cast of thousands, isn't holding my interest at all.  Maybe this would have been better binged, because I'm either not able to (or more likely, can't be bothered to) remember who is who or doing what to whom.  Frankly, I just don't care about any of them.  Maybe it's because the core cast (Perry, Paul, Della) are so very separate.

I'm also pretty turned off by how very dark the show is, in terms of lighting.  I realize it's supposed to be noir, but does that have to be literal?  I am old and, frankly, it's too much effort to have to discern what is going on.

I don't mean to offend anyone who likes it, I'm just old and cranky.  

[Jodithgrace]

I have a question: Except for Randall on This is Us, has there ever been a town councilman in a movie or tv show who wasn’t corrupt? Politicians, in general, always get a bad rap, but town councilmen always seem to be the worst. I think maybe the woman in the hospital is the former junkie, who either fried her brains out on heroin, or was injured in sex games with Brooks, who paid the councilman off as part of the stadium deal, but who privately wanted him dead. 
 

Della, Della, Della…you are a coward! Not a good look at all. 
 

Paul Drake just beat a man up…why are his knuckles not swollen and bloody? True, it was dark when he got home, but he should have had problems even unbuttoning his shirt. And he gave no other indication of pain. That stuff really annoys me. 
 

What were those shoes burning in the end credits? Is that a hint for next week? 

[shapeshifter]

28 minutes ago, Jodithgrace said:

What were those shoes burning in the end credits? Is that a hint for next week? 

Those are the shoes of the Gallardos' sister who died in the fire set to drive them out of their homes to make way for the stadium. 

 

30 minutes ago, Jodithgrace said:

Paul Drake just beat a man up…why are his knuckles not swollen and bloody? True, it was dark when he got home, but he should have had problems even unbuttoning his shirt. And he gave no other indication of pain. That stuff really annoys me. 

I thought the same, and also that there'd be blood spatter on his shirt when he took it off.

[paigow]

1 hour ago, shapeshifter said:

Those are the shoes of the Gallardos' sister who died in the fire set to drive them out of their homes to make way for the stadium. 

Unless they are lying again... maybe no sister ever existed....

[shapeshifter]

1 hour ago, paigow said:

Unless they are lying again... maybe no sister ever existed....

I don't think so because it seemed like the flash back was "real." 🤷🏻‍♀️

[MBayGal]

I think the stadium seen in this episode was the LA. Coliseum.  It opened in the 20's and is by USC, only a few miles from LA City Hall. 

[Blakeston]

Today I learned that Converse sneakers were around in the 1930s!

I don't think we've learned the whole truth about the murder. But if the Gallardos knew that McCutcheon was murdered, then they're complete idiots for pawning that coin.

[cdnalor]

Just looked it up and the Converse All-Star sneaker first came out in 1917 (!) as a high top canvas and rubber basketball shoe looking pretty much as it does today.

[tennisgurl]

It really is looking like the Gallardos did do it, even if they were just the triggermen working for someone way more powerful, but I would still be shocked if it turns out that Perry really is representing someone who's guilty. Certainly HBO would be alright with that kind of moral ambiguity and the Gallardos are more sympathetic than Brooks, but they still killed a guy in cold blood. I think there will be one more twist, like their mom/aunt or fiancé actually killed Brooks and they're covering for them, that she was the real triggerman/woman for the real mastermind to get money and revenge. 

I love Della but Hazel was absolutely right to call Della a coward, she is absolutely being one as well as being an awful girlfriend. The way she's treating Hazel, sneaking around with another women, is really shitty, she absolutely deserved that.

Interesting seeing Paul's story is getting pulled more into the main plot, now stuck working with this charming but scary gangster, who might not be the worst crook around and actually does some good things for the community, but he's still very much someone you don't want to mess with.

Other than getting rattled by the bus driver, Perry did what he does best in court, throws out a ton of drama to see what sticks and gets people talking. Nothing about the fingerprint proves anything, let alone police corruption, but all they need is for one person to think he's got a point.

[paigow]

3 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

like their mom/aunt or fiancé actually killed Brooks and they're covering for them, that she was the real triggerman/woman for the real mastermind to get money and revenge.

The only way that works is if the brothers are too TALL to have fired the kill shot.

[sistermagpie]

3 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

It really is looking like the Gallardos did do it, even if they were just the triggermen working for someone way more powerful, but I would still be shocked if it turns out that Perry really is representing someone who's guilty. Certainly HBO would be alright with that kind of moral ambiguity and the Gallardos are more sympathetic than Brooks, but they still killed a guy in cold blood. I think there will be one more twist, like their mom/aunt or fiancé actually killed Brooks and they're covering for them, that she was the real triggerman/woman for the real mastermind to get money and revenge. 

 

One thing that seems odd to me about that was the younger brother pawning that coin. Maybe they're not completely up on how traceable it would be, but as bad as it would be to pawn a coin you took off a dead guy, you'd think he'd have seen the danger in pawning a coin from the guy he just got paid a lot of money for murdering (so why the need for cash from the coin right away)?

[shapeshifter]

18 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

you'd think he'd have seen the danger in pawning a coin from the guy he just got paid a lot of money for murdering (so why the need for cash from the coin right away)?

When the Gallardos were talking to Perry earlier, the older brother berated the younger one for taking the coin that he (the older brother) had said to leave. 
Still:
Excellent point about their allegedly already having been paid a LOT more than the value of that coin. 
This seems to imply they weren't paid until afterwards.

[sistermagpie]

1 hour ago, shapeshifter said:

When the Gallardos were talking to Perry earlier, the older brother berated the younger one for taking the coin that he (the older brother) had said to leave. 
Still:
Excellent point about their allegedly already having been paid a LOT more than the value of that coin. 
This seems to imply they weren't paid until afterwards.

Right, I remembered that. But back then it seemed like he was talking about a coin they found on a dead guy, iirc. It's much stupider if they murdered him and got thousands of dollars for it to boot. (Not just taking it, but pawning it.)

[paigow]

On 4/5/2023 at 5:38 PM, tennisgurl said:

It really is looking like the Gallardos did do it, even if they were just the triggermen working for someone way more powerful

When Brooks saw his killer, his reaction seemed to combine recognition, surprise and fear... so it is unlikely that ANY of the Gallardos pulled the trigger.

[shapeshifter]

4 hours ago, paigow said:

When Brooks saw his killer, his reaction seemed to combine recognition, surprise and fear... so it is unlikely that ANY of the Gallardos pulled the trigger.

I missed Brooks look of recognition of his killer. 
It kind of makes sense that the person who wants Brooks dead might not trust the Gallardos to successfully pull the trigger.
We know that the Gallardos practiced with the gun, but maybe they didn't have to master it after all?

Or maybe somebody else wanted Brooks dead and wanted the satisfaction of pulling the trigger?
If so, even though the Gallardos may have been hired to do it, and prepared to do it, if someone else got there first, and, if that person is publicly found out and even arrested, would the Gallardos still be convicted in 1932?

In a 1957-1966 Perry Mason episode, this would be a typical plot denouement, with the Gallardos going free. But probably not in 1932 on HBO.

Likely in this 2023 version, the Gallardos actually did fire the gun that killed Brooks, but someone else was in Brooks face pointing a gun at that moment.

Edited April 10, 2023 by shapeshifter

[paigow]

24 minutes ago, shapeshifter said:

Or maybe somebody else wanted Brooks dead and wanted the satisfaction of pulling the trigger?

Suspect List:

• His wife
• Daddy
• Councilman Dirtbag
• Rich Pool Lady Camilla
• Whoever killed Goldstein

[topanga]

2 hours ago, paigow said:

Suspect List:

• His wife
• Daddy
• Councilman Dirtbag
• Rich Pool Lady Camilla
• Whoever killed Goldstein

Great list. 

• Who is Brooks's wife? I simply can't remember. And what would be her motivation for having her husband killed?
• The Dad really seemed to hate his son, but is he too obvious a suspect?
• The councilman does seem very dirty, but what's his connection to Brooks? Was Brooks somehow responsible for the hospitalized sister's car accident? 
• Camilla Nygaard -- great dark horse suspect. What would be her motive?
• Who did kill Goldstein? Who owns the failing boat (the Morocco)? Who commissioned the fire on the other boat? Who scraped up the laborer's face on the machine? And who's the (dirty?) cop who questioned the injured laborer? And who hired the laborers to make after-hours deliveries of free produce to the Morocco?

--I'm sticking with this show because Matthew Rhys, Chris Chalk, and Juliet Rylance (Della Street) are amazing. And I do like complex mysteries, but this season's plot confuses me a bit. (See my questions above). I'm grateful for this discussion thread. 

[paigow]

2 hours ago, topanga said:

Great list. 

• Who is Brooks's wife? I simply can't remember. And what would be her motivation for having her husband killed?
• The Dad really seemed to hate his son, but is he too obvious a suspect?
• The councilman does seem very dirty, but what's his connection to Brooks? Was Brooks somehow responsible for the hospitalized sister's car accident? 
• Camilla Nygaard -- great dark horse suspect. What would be her motive?
• Who did kill Goldstein? Who owns the failing boat (the Morocco)? Who commissioned the fire on the other boat? Who scraped up the laborer's face on the machine? And who's the (dirty?) cop who questioned the injured laborer? And who hired the laborers to make after-hours deliveries of free produce to the Morocco?

His wife has not appeared since E01.

Brooks owns / owned The Morocco. He ordered the arson in E01.

Daddy belt-sanded the dude that was subsequently questioned by dirty Det. Holcomb

Brooks & Goldstein were part of a criminal conspiracy to defraud mechanics and contractors that repaired The Morocco. D.A. Burger was investigating and Goldstein was murdered [not by Brooks] before he could testify at the Grand Jury.

Camilla knows Noreen. Maybe they were BFF and she wanted revenge on Brooks

[Chicago Redshirt]

18 hours ago, topanga said:

Great list. 

• Who is Brooks's wife? I simply can't remember. And what would be her motivation for having her husband killed?
• The Dad really seemed to hate his son, but is he too obvious a suspect?
• The councilman does seem very dirty, but what's his connection to Brooks? Was Brooks somehow responsible for the hospitalized sister's car accident? 
• Camilla Nygaard -- great dark horse suspect. What would be her motive?
• Who did kill Goldstein? Who owns the failing boat (the Morocco)? Who commissioned the fire on the other boat? Who scraped up the laborer's face on the machine? And who's the (dirty?) cop who questioned the injured laborer? And who hired the laborers to make after-hours deliveries of free produce to the Morocco?

--I'm sticking with this show because Matthew Rhys, Chris Chalk, and Juliet Rylance (Della Street) are amazing. And I do like complex mysteries, but this season's plot confuses me a bit. (See my questions above). I'm grateful for this discussion thread. 

To add to what Paigow said:

We have only briefly seen Brooks's wife. Her possible motivation for killing Brooks would be knowledge/jealousy of his having at least one affair and/or if she has been on the receiving end of the same sort of asphyxiation sex as the mistress we saw in Episode 1 of this season or other domestic violence. But I don't think she realistically has had the opportunity to shoot Brooks. We have to suspect that the killer arranged for a large payoff to the Gallardos. Maybe it's sexist of me, but I don't think Mrs. Brooks could come up with that kind of cash on her own.

Dad Lydell is capable of just about anything, it seems to me and does have motive, means and opportunity.

The big stadium Brooks built is in the councilman's district. So it is possible/probable that Brooks and Councilman have other financial dealings, and since Brooks was shady AF, it's possible that Councilman killed Brooks in revenge for being scammed or to keep their mutual shady dealings from coming to light. It's also possible that Councilman killed Brooks in revenge for what happened to his sister.

Camilla's possible motive would be revenge for Noreen. As she is also rich, it is also possible that she is somehow entwined in Brooks's shady business dealings more than we have seen thus far. 

[Dminches]

On 4/10/2023 at 7:24 AM, paigow said:

When Brooks saw his killer, his reaction seemed to combine recognition, surprise and fear... so it is unlikely that ANY of the Gallardos pulled the trigger.

I just rewatched that scene,  All I see is fear in his expression.  I don’t see any recognition of the person holding the gun.

 

[shapeshifter]

16 minutes ago, Dminches said:

I just rewatched that scene,  All I see is fear in his expression.  I don’t see any recognition of the person holding the gun.

Which episode do we see his reaction? 
And do you have the time stamp, or even the approximate time in the episode when it's shown?
TIA

[Dminches]

2 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

Which episode do we see his reaction? 
And do you have the time stamp, or even the approximate time in the episode when it's shown?
TIA

 

It is in the first episode 52:35 (on HBO Max).