S01.E07: Belly of the Beast

[chitowngirl]

Matty works on a case with Julian in which a young woman sues after experiencing severe symptoms from a clinical trial; at the company holiday party, Olympia learns a secret about Julian's past.
 

Air date December 5, 2024

[AnimeMania]

Yael Grobglas as Shae "Meerkat" Banfield

[DanaK]

This was a huge downer for a Christmas-themed episode, with everyone unhappy, though it looked like Matty got some kind of success at the end. Is there a voice-activated entry that could only be done by Senior that I’ve forgotten?

[AnimeMania]

1 hour ago, DanaK said:

This was a huge downer for a Christmas-themed episode, with everyone unhappy, though it looked like Matty got some kind of success at the end. Is there a voice-activated entry that could only be done by Senior that I’ve forgotten?

Sarah and Meerkat seemed happy enough. Senior's AI voice was used over the phone to trick Senior's Assistant into giving Matty the password to Senior's e-mail account.

[eel2178]

16 hours ago, DanaK said:

This was a huge downer for a Christmas-themed episode

Where did they come up with that morbid song for the acapella group? Is that a real Christmas carol?

[GHScorpiosRule]

And that's NOT how depositions work.

[possibilities]

Was taht a deposition? I thought it was a settlement negotiation.

[GHScorpiosRule]

Just now, possibilities said:

Was taht a deposition? I thought it was a settlement negotiation.

Yes, a deposition. The first scene at the beginning of the show was a settlement negotiation, until the plaintiff whipped out her cell phone; but later, Matty asked Julian to hold off on Blackwell's deposition, but he nixed it and went ahead with it, where they then showed those texts.

[MMEButterfly]

Am I right in accepting Maddie is a dark heroine and that is how she will continue to be? I can accept that premise, but can I trust it?

[marceline]

So Maddie just left all the beads from the bracelet her daughter gave her on the floor to be stepped on like so much trash? I don't buy that.

I liked how Maddie let Olympia and Julian know that she could tell they were back together.

 

[Ellee]

I figured that her daughter’s bracelet will end up being a ‘dream sequence’ or something in another episode.  Though Matty got an important win for her ultimate goal of working pharma the result in this case does not agree with Matty’s beliefs.  Thinking the broken bracelet symbolizes that and this young woman will also be in another episode with better results. 
 

Hopefully this makes sense or someone with a somewhat similar opinion can express it better. 

[threebluestars]

I love that they're showing her having a tough time working on these cases and knowing she has to put her own morals aside.

I'd love it if her wrap up on the Wellbrexa case shows them as the bad guys and allows the past cases to be re-examined somehow and get justice for all the cases she'll have to work to get the evidence she needs.

[DanaK]

51 minutes ago, threebluestars said:

I love that they're showing her having a tough time working on these cases and knowing she has to put her own morals aside.

I'd love it if her wrap up on the Wellbrexa case shows them as the bad guys and allows the past cases to be re-examined somehow and get justice for all the cases she'll have to work to get the evidence she needs.

I think we already see the Wellbrexa folks as bad guys. The doctor overseeing the testing thing certainly seemed dirty

[Bastet]

The plaintiff's lawyer was ... something.

I hated the case stuff in this one - I couldn't make myself let things go like I'd been fairly successful at doing since the second episode - and missed the dynamic with Olympia, Matty, Billy, and Sarah, so my favorite parts were the limited bits of interaction with them.  (I was very grateful not to have to endure the grandson, but the one-sided phone calls went on way too long to work.)  I love the way Olympia excused herself from Matty when she found out Julian got fired off the Wellbrexa team, too.  And Sarah's immediate comfort when she realized Claudia turned Billy down.

Also, I like that she turned him down (even though Billy is heartbroken).  When he originally said how long they'd been dating, I didn't think about his current age meaning they'd been together since high school.  It's nice to see some realism, that they just got really used to each other and stayed together, but don't belong together forever.  We don't know about her education and/or career, but he's probably been able to explore a lot more of himself and his goals than she has.  Plus, now I don't have to hear any more anti-prenup bullshit.

Olympia proud of Matty when talking to Julian about her was lovely, and makes me all the more eager yet anxious about the eventual reveal of Matty's duplicity, for how many complicated feelings Olympia is going to have about it.

 

[mythoughtis]

I think the bracelet breaking was a dream, or thought on Matty’s part.  None of the others reacted to the noise it made - or to the fact that they stepped on something. 
 

Matty is sure having to ignore a lot of ethical principles on her pursuit of ‘Justice’ for her daughter.  
 

I’m not sure if Claudia doesn’t love Billy or if she doesn’t like being part of his large close family.  She specifically mentioned his family in her comments.  
 

Sara is usually so buttoned up and gives off ‘don’t touch me’ vibes. So glad that she hugged Billy immediately. 

[Bastet]

Just now, mythoughtis said:

I think the bracelet breaking was a dream, or thought on Matty’s part.  None of the others reacted to the noise it made - or to the fact that they stepped on something. 

Something about putting on that bracelet and the cheery music made me think the opening segment was a dream, and then I thought it odd no one noticed the bracelet break (or slipped on the beads).  Maybe none of it was real?  Thus us not seeing or even hearing her husband and grandson? 

I don't really know what the point of that would be -- her nightmare of finally getting moved over to pharmaceutical cases turning out to mean that on her first case she has to let a victim get screwed out of any damage award in order to win the case?  An "it was all a dream" thing seems something this type of show would resolve at the end of the episode, though, not carry over into another one.  Plus, it would have to be just her part that was a dream, not Julian's affair reveal, Billy getting turned down, Sarah getting kissed, etc.  So I don't think that's it, but the episode did feel weird.

Just now, mythoughtis said:

I’m not sure if Claudia doesn’t love Billy or if she doesn’t like being part of his large close family.  She specifically mentioned his family in her comments.  

She loves him, she just doesn't think they're meant to stay together.  I don't think his family is a deal breaker for her (she may come from similar), in fact I think she already feels somewhat part of the family, as she said she's been wanting to talk to him about this, but didn't want to do it around his sister's birthday or his mom's something.  (She certainly didn't plan to do it during the holidays, but he forced her hand by proposing.)

[seacliffsal]

I think Mattie is trying to convince herself that she's a 'good person' and is hurting people because of a 'greater good.'  However, she is willing to hurt people so her justifications are just an attempt to excuse the behaviors that she intentionally, and willingly, does.  And, therein lies her dilemna-is she a good person or is she truly a person who will hurt others to get what she wants.  The ends justifies the means.  What it comes down to for me is that no matter what she says or how she tries to justify it, she is willing to hurt others to get what she wants.  Isn't that why she is trying to punish the drug company and law firm?  Does that mean that she is on the same level as they are?  

Just glad we didn't have to see the grandson and I guess it's okay she got him to help her as he is on vacation in Florida...

[Kleav]

6 hours ago, eel2178 said:

Where did they come up with that morbid song for the acapella group? Is that a real Christmas carol?

The Vulture recap says it was “Fleet Foxes’ “White Winter Hymnal” (or rather their version of Pentatonix’s version of Fleet Foxes’ “White Winter Hymnal”).”

[shapeshifter]

This show may be too dark for me. 
With so many shows to choose from, I am getting picky. 
Plus, tastes change. 

I keep thinking the writers and directors feel like they have to give Kathy Bates fans scenes that will remind them of Misery. 

Edited December 7 by shapeshifter
typo

[Irlandesa]

6 hours ago, MMEButterfly said:

Am I right in accepting Maddie is a dark heroine and that is how she will continue to be? I can accept that premise, but can I trust it?

I think we can trust it...for now.  They're too intentional in showing the dark side of her quest with her having health issues last week and this week where she sacrificed the woman in order to remain in the good graces of the pharma company. 

But she's also very rich so I'd imagine she could have someone drop off 50K to those women from a secret benefactor. 

Time will tell how long they'll keep that up but I like the layers it gives this show. 

The only thing I didn't love about this episode was the revelation of Julian's affair prior to his separation from Olympia.  I don't understand the point of that information. I don't understand why they'd reunite them before revealing it because I think it still could be devastating to an amicably divorcing couple, just in a different way. I assume it'll play out somehow in the future but meh. 

 

Edited December 7 by Irlandesa

[Sake614]

One thing that doesn’t make sense (well a lot doesn’t make sense but I digress) is Maddie is hell bent on protecting her identity but wants to work big pharma cases. These tend to be high profile with lots of media coverage. Clearly she hasn’t thought it through because at some point her face is going to be shown. She got lucky this time and was able to quickly shield herself with the file folder. She won’t be able to do that in court.

[Percysowner]

I have to say that as much as Matty felt that what she did was morally wrong, what she did was actually legally ethical and required. She is employed by a law firm that is employed by Wellbrexa to protect them against law suits. Yes, we are certainly being shown that Wellbrexa is a bad actor, but they are the client. Matty found out something that was true and made it part of the court record. That was her job. Frankly, if she had decided she couldn't do it, she would have needed to quit, because she would have been hiding evidence. The irony is that she is doing all this because she believes someone at the firm hid evidence to protect Wellbrexa. So, to help a sympathetic plaintiff, Matty would have had to do the EXACT thing she is trying to bring the firm down for. You really can't say, "I think this is a good person, so I will hide something to help them," and at the same time "I think this bad person hid something to help themselves and they must suffer vengeance". You can't choose to give a full defense only to the people you like, or feel sympathy for.

Part of Matty's journey may be discovering that  she has to do things that cross her morals because that's what legal ethics require She may also come to see that whoever represented Wellbrexa all those years ago did the same thing, something legal, but morally wrong. I'm also pretty sure she is going to have to reckon with how much of her soul she is willing to sell in order to get the "justice" she wants.

[Starchild]

5 hours ago, Bastet said:

Something about putting on that bracelet and the cheery music made me think the opening segment was a dream, and then I thought it odd no one noticed the bracelet break (or slipped on the beads).  Maybe none of it was real?

I think we can take it at face value.

I believe Matty put the bracelet (clearly a gift from her daughter in better days) on to remind herself who she's doing these terrible things for, to get herself through it, that the end justifies the means.

Her worrying at it through the episode was to demonstrate her conflict and how she had to keep "asking" her daughter, "is it OK for me to be doing these things to get justice for you? Tell me it's OK, tell me this is ultimately right, and I'm doing what you'd want."

And it breaking in the end was a symbol of maybe no, her daughter would not want this, that Matty compromising and debasing herself like this is not OK. That it's shifting from justice to revenge and that's not right.

Edited December 7 by Starchild

[Yeah No]

There was a lot in this episode and I thought it was a good one. I might have to watch it again to fully appreciate it.

And thank you to those above who put so well the conflict of morals and ethics in which Matty has put herself. She is continually struggling with whether what she is doing is worth it if she has to go against her own principles in the process. 

55 minutes ago, Percysowner said:

I have to say that as much as Matty felt that what she did was morally wrong, what she did was actually legally ethical and required. She is employed by a law firm that is employed by Wellbrexa to protect them against law suits. Yes, we are certainly being shown that Wellbrexa is a bad actor, but they are the client. Matty found out something that was true and made it part of the court record. That was her job. Frankly, if she had decided she couldn't do it, she would have needed to quit, because she would have been hiding evidence. The irony is that she is doing all this because she believes someone at the firm hid evidence to protect Wellbrexa. So, to help a sympathetic plaintiff, Matty would have had to do the EXACT thing she is trying to bring the firm down for. You really can't say, "I think this is a good person, so I will hide something to help them," and at the same time "I think this bad person hid something to help themselves and they must suffer vengeance". You can't choose to give a full defense only to the people you like, or feel sympathy for.

Part of Matty's journey may be discovering that  she has to do things that cross her morals because that's what legal ethics require She may also come to see that whoever represented Wellbrexa all those years ago did the same thing, something legal, but morally wrong. I'm also pretty sure she is going to have to reckon with how much of her soul she is willing to sell in order to get the "justice" she wants.

You are absolutely spot-on here. And you are probably verbalizing for me one big reason I shied away from becoming a lawyer. I don't think I would have dealt with that kind of conflict too well.

24 minutes ago, Starchild said:

And it breaking in the end was a symbol of maybe no, her daughter would not want this, that Matty compromising and debasing herself like this is not OK. That it's shifting from justice to revenge and that's not right.

Again, spot-on, that's the symbolism I took from that scene.

Also, I've noticed that as Matty gets to know the staff of the firm better she is more conflicted about getting her revenge on them because if the villain has a face, a heart and a soul and you care about them it's much harder to feel right about hurting them. I think she's pretty much now concentrating on Senior because he's the one person she doesn't know that well, plus he's the head of the firm and not all that likable, at least based on what we've seen of him so far. If what she finds out about him thanks to having his password doesn't give her the evidence against him she thought she'd find, she'll be in a further conflict about her entire crusade. But I think even if she does find something to show guilt at this point she'll struggle with how many innocent people might be hurt if she pursues it.

Did anyone notice in the first scene how Matty's phone goes dark or to lock screen while she was using it? We first see the call-in-process screen and then suddenly it goes black. Usually cell phones don't do that because the proximity sensors they have would sense that your face is near the phone and prevent it from engaging the lock screen.

 

[Boofish]

I'm probably one of 2 people in the world who loathe affair confessions. Especially one that is over. There is nothing to be ventured or gained. You feel like shit because you did a shitty thing so instead of just feeling like the shit you deserve to feel like you decide now I need to feel like shit with you. Why tell her that? Stop stop stop emotionally damaging someone trying to make yourself feel better. Confession is not good for the other soul. It's one of the most selfish acts only second to the affair itself. I have watched so many people torn apart by secrets they didn't need to know so it just really pissed me off and I hope she doesn't forgive him. 

[Yeah No]

23 minutes ago, Boofish said:

I'm probably one of 2 people in the world who loathe affair confessions. Especially one that is over. There is nothing to be ventured or gained. You feel like shit because you did a shitty thing so instead of just feeling like the shit you deserve to feel like you decide now I need to feel like shit with you. Why tell her that? Stop stop stop emotionally damaging someone trying to make yourself feel better. Confession is not good for the other soul. It's one of the most selfish acts only second to the affair itself. I have watched so many people torn apart by secrets they didn't need to know so it just really pissed me off and I hope she doesn't forgive him. 

Oh I hate them too on TV because they usually happen at just about THE WORST time, which only makes their negative impact on the relationship even worse. It's like the person feels like they just have to get it off their chest right then to feel right about themselves but that's usually not the right time or place to broach such a subject. So it backfires in a big way and is even more hurtful. But I suspect that when that happens on TV it's done intentionally to create drama. I still don't like it.

[Irlandesa]

31 minutes ago, Boofish said:

I'm probably one of 2 people in the world who loathe affair confessions. Especially one that is over. There is nothing to be ventured or gained. You feel like shit because you did a shitty thing so instead of just feeling like the shit you deserve to feel like you decide now I need to feel like shit with you. Why tell her that?

I suspect he did it because of his father's words about how the two of them (father and son) aren't as different as he thinks.  IMO, there was an implicit threat in reminding his son that he knew about the affair, especially after they butted heads.  Julian telling Olympia removes the power that nugget of information his father has over him. I'd normally agree with you about a confession over something he regrets but if he suspects it might come out anyway, it is better that he do it than Olympia finding out from her father-in-law.

[Boofish]

10 minutes ago, Irlandesa said:

I suspect he did it because of his father's words about how the two of them (father and son) aren't as different as he thinks.  IMO, there was an implicit threat in reminding his son that he knew about the affair, especially after they butted heads.  Julian telling Olympia removes the power that nugget of information his father has over him. I'd normally agree with you about a confession over something he regrets but if he suspects it might come out anyway, it is better that he do it than Olympia finding out from her father-in-law.

I don't think the father in law would tell her. I think Julian didn't want to be like his dad by keeping a secret which in turn makes it even worse. If all he wanted to do was prove he was not like his dad. Dude you're exactly like him. 

[Nashville]

9 hours ago, Bastet said:

Also, I like that [Claudia] turned [Billy] down (even though Billy is heartbroken).  When he originally said how long they'd been dating, I didn't think about his current age meaning they'd been together since high school.  It's nice to see some realism, that they just got really used to each other and stayed together, but don't belong together forever.  We don't know about her education and/or career, but he's probably been able to explore a lot more of himself and his goals than she has.  

Actually I think Claudia’s rejection, though short, spelled out her reasons a lot more specifically; years of watching Billy’s (probably frequently futile) attempts to please everybody all the time - especially his mother and sisters -  have repeatedly impressed upon Claudia the likelihood that a future with Billy would necessarily mean a future of his family’s needs and wants constantly dominating his time and attention, with their (Claudia and Billy’s) relationship coming in a distant second.

Edited December 7 by Nashville
Clarification

[Chicago Redshirt]

Enjoyable, but still a bunch of nits to pick, as per usual:

In concept, I kind of like the notion of Matty getting a Zoomer nemesis, and having a battle of so-old-people-think-she's-harmless-but-she's-not vs. so-young-people-think-she's-harmless-but-she's-not. (Or maybe it turns out some people think women of any age are invisible.) I would probably enjoy seeing her again. But the Zoomer laid it on very thick, so maybe they should tone it down if she (or another like her) comes back. Not every sentence needs to be about the 'Gram or TikTok or Zoomer slang.

By putting the settlement discussions online, I'd guess she would have violated some professional rules of conduct/the court. Settlement negotiations are supposed to be confidential. More admonishment needed to be done than a mere gag order. 

And also, I'm puzzled: how exactly did Zoomer get the text messages between doctor and his girlfriend/wife? Especially without the apparent knowledge of Julian and the Wellbrexa people? It seemed like they were caught with their pants down about that.

Indeed, it seemed like Julian and the Wellbrexa team didn't have any idea about the shadiness doctor was up to. But it seems clear that there would have to be some sort of paper trail about the people who were reporting symptoms that would make it difficult for Doctor to be like, nuh-uh no one reported any problems here.

Also, wouldn't reporting the symptoms be more than a one-time thing? In other words, at some point Cellist would say, hey doctor, I've been having XYZ problems. And then she'd say at some point, I'm still having XYZ problems/they're getting worse/now I'm having ABC problems too. It seems a lot to ignore.

It also seems like tactically it's not a smart thing to try to bury the reported symptoms. Putting aside the ethics of letting people develop side effects, and the practical difficulties of hiding a paper trail that they developed the symptoms and you knew about it, it seems like eventually, either the people in the trial or if the trial gets to the stage where the drug gets to market, people in the larger world will connect the drug to the symptoms, and then the truth will come out and cost hundreds of millions more.

A preliminary injunction is only granted when someone demonstrates that they are likely to win the overall case and if something is not stopped immediately it would do irreparable harm. I get the notion that Zoomer could show that if the drug trial wasn't stopped other people would develop the same symptoms as Cellist. But is this text message chain enough evidence to suggest that Zoomer would win the overall class-action? 

The "we're losing a million dollars a day the injunction is in place" seems to not make sense to me. It's not like the trial continuing brings in money that is now stopped with the injunction. Where is that figure coming from?

I don't know if the invocation of the spousal privilege would work. A) I would think one of the spouses would have to assert it, not Wellbrexa B) The cat is already out of the bag by that point. I don't know if there's a claw-back that can be done. 

But even assuming that we remove the text messages between Doctor and Common Law Spouse from the equation, that doesn't or shouldn't end the case. Cellist still can assert that the drug caused her injuries and countless other participants might as well. There presumably is other evidence that shows that Cellist reported her symptoms, that Doctor hemmed and hawed about reporting symptoms from various patients. Even if they can't use the specific conversation between Doctor and Spouse, the knowledge that conversation happened should be able to lead to more puzzle pieces that would prove the plaintiff's theory that Doctor deliberately hid reporting Cellist's symptoms in order to preserve the drug trial.

At the very least, there would be a credibility contest between Cellist saying "I reported these symptoms to Doctor on such-and-such a date and saw him put the paperwork in a cerulean folder, and then I got sicker, and here's whatever documentary proof before I reported it to him that I had developed those symptoms and after that I told the doctor." and Doctor's testimony of "That didn't happen." plus whatever experts each side got 

[Percysowner]

There is a lot going on this episode. First, this has raised the first possible indication that Wellbrexa itself may not have been the primary bad actor. What was shown was that the doctor (probably) buried the files and fudged the data. He may well have done it on his own. Yes, it could have been because he was told to. It could also have been because he wasn't told to, but thought it would make the company happy. He might also have done it for personal reasons i.e. if HIS drug goes through he will get paid better and become better known in the industry and worth more. We get reports all the time of scientists fudging their data including the recently revealed case of a Harvard scholar who published an article on honesty that used false data to prove his point. People are weird sometimes.

I do agree that finding the text messages to be inadmissible would not necessarily end the case. The Wellbrexa was willing to settle before they showed up, and Matty should have used that argument instead of "let's be nice". The cellist has a friend who is representing her pro bono, so she's not incurring a lot of costs and $50,000 is nuisance suit money for a big corporation, especially if the get a Non-disclosure agreement added.

I do think that the case MAY come back and maybe even tie into Matty's quest. Why? Because there is a slight chance we have Chekov's blue file folder out there. It just seems interesting that this fact, that the doctor had different file folders for some complaints, was just dropped in there. OTOH, I may have watched way to many mystery shows and read way to many mystery books and am seeing things that are unimportant.

  

8 hours ago, Yeah No said:

 

You are absolutely spot-on here. And you are probably verbalizing for me one big reason I shied away from becoming a lawyer. I don't think I would have dealt with that kind of conflict too well.

 

 

 

I totally understand. I wasn't a lawyer, I was a law librarian and boy does TV misrepresent the profession. Most of the lawyers who came in were dealing with estates, wills, divorce and bankruptcy. Immigration law was big. Labor law was used. Basically most lawyers do jobs that don't look fun.You really can't get a lot of drama over couples trying to decide who gets the TV, who gets the newer car and what the rotating custody schedule looks like. Once in a while one can get nasty, but generally no.

 

 

[Morrigan2575]

14 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

The only thing I didn't love about this episode was the revelation of Julian's affair prior to his separation from Olympia.  I don't understand the point of that information. I don't understand why they'd reunite them before revealing it because I think it still could be devastating to an amicably divorcing couple, just in a different way. I assume it'll play out somehow in the future but meh. 

My guess is because they kept dropping hints since episode 1 that Julian had a big secret which may have been related to the Opiod case. In fact when he started confessing I thought this would be the reveal, typical mid-season cliffhanger.  

Now, I can't tell if this was the show ruling him out as the bad guy, or a misdirect to throw us off the trail. Senior is too obvious and Olympia is too close to Maddie.  

I'm also really confused on when this cover up happened? Would Julian or Olympia even have that much power 10 years or so ago? I could maybe see a young, just starting out Julian do something bad to try to please his dad but, I'm not sure that's where they are going. 

Edited December 7 by Morrigan2575

[shapeshifter]

11 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

there was an implicit threat in reminding his son that he knew about the affair, especially after they butted heads.  Julian telling Olympia removes the power that nugget of information his father has over him. I'd normally agree with you about a confession over something he regrets but if he suspects it might come out anyway, it is better that he do it than Olympia finding out from her father-in-law.

True. 
Maybe Julian should have prefaced it with:
There's something I need to tell you before my father does…

[Percysowner]

I have a different view on confessions about having an affair. I think Julian did the right thing. He and Olympia are about to restart their marriage. She has the right to make that decision based on all the facts, not just the rosy glow of having made up on the issues that set off the divorce. If the affair had happened when they were separated, the way I think happened with Olympia and Elijah, it would be a different thing, because they were apart and no longer owed fidelity to each other. If the affair had happened while they were married, I don't approve of hiding it, but see more reason that it would be cruel to reveal it.

I admit, this is based on the fact that I spent years working on my marriage because he said I was the only thing keeping him sane, he had mental health issues, and that he had no one else. Come to find out that he had been seeing someone else for a couple of years while I ran around getting him therapists, understanding why he couldn't work, going to counseling to try and get the marriage back on track. If I had known that I wasn't his only means of support, I could have gotten out earlier.

Olympia needs to make her decisions based on all the facts. She may be able to reconcile this because of her feelings for Elijah. She may be really angry because she did put her feelings for Elijah on hold until the divorce. I think she deserves the choice.

[preeya]

?

Edited December 8 by preeya

[Percysowner]

On a totally trivial note, I guess sketchy doctor and his former girlfriend need to get a divorce now, right? That could lose one of them some money if one or the other has gotten better salaries, benefits, etc. since they split.

[schnauzergirl]

Really a chock full episode on many levels.  I agree with others who wondered about Maddy's reaction to the bracelet breaking.  It played such a central role and yet when it breaks Maddy does nothing nor does anybody around her.  Even a comment like "Oh, what just happened?" would have been natural.  Stepping on the beads, nope that doesn't work for me.  Maddy listening to the voice mail from Ellie telling her mom she was pregnant and then not gathering those beads seems contradictory and out of character.

Edited December 7 by schnauzergirl

[Nashville]

7 hours ago, Chicago Redshirt said:

Indeed, it seemed like Julian and the Wellbrexa team didn't have any idea about the shadiness doctor was up to.
 

Makes you kinda wonder, though, whether the legal team’s ignorance was accidental or intentional; all the firm’s properly licensed attorneys are sworn officers of the court, after all, and are legally obligated to report any criminal malfeasance to the presiding judge on the case, if such is disclosed to them.  Within that context - and lacking any significant corroborating evidence of legal wrongdoing - the legal team might find it in their best interests not to be too overly inquisitive about matters which might paint their clients (and/or their settlement chances) in a less-than-favorable light.

 

7 hours ago, Chicago Redshirt said:

But it seems clear that there would have to be some sort of paper trail about the people who were reporting symptoms that would make it difficult for Doctor to be like, nuh-uh no one reported any problems here.

You’re not likely to see such, if you have incentive (financial or otherwise) not to look very closely in the first place.

[Percysowner]

5 hours ago, Nashville said:

Makes you kinda wonder, though, whether the legal team’s ignorance was accidental or intentional; all the firm’s properly licensed attorneys are sworn officers of the court, after all, and are legally obligated to report any criminal malfeasance to the presiding judge on the case, if such is disclosed to them.  Within that context - and lacking any significant corroborating evidence of legal wrongdoing - the legal team might find it in their best interests not to be too overly inquisitive about matters which might paint their clients (and/or their settlement chances) in a less-than-favorable light.

 

You’re not likely to see such, if you have incentive (financial or otherwise) not to look very closely in the first place.

I have heard that defense attorneys tell all of their clients to NOT tell them if they are guilty, because they can't ethically put a person on the stand if they know they are going to lie. It could easily be the same here. If they don't know, they can proceed. If they know their clients did certain things wrong, then they can't legally defend them the same way.

[andromeda331]

Poor Billy. Sarah had no choice at that point.  But it still stinks.

I'm happy not to see Alfie. 

It never occurred to Matty that she might have to do what she did? She wanted to get into pharm cases. She got there. What did she think was going to happen? Not have to defend those companies? 

I wasn't surprised that Jason had an affair but I thought Olympia knew that and was part of the reason for the divorce. 

[babyrambo]

On 12/6/2024 at 10:04 PM, Irlandesa said:

The only thing I didn't love about this episode was the revelation of Julian's affair prior to his separation from Olympia. 

I didn’t like that either. I know Senior’s been dropping hints about it all season (I actually thought Shae’s appearance in this episode was going to be because of an affair reveal and was dreading it) but it still seemed forced to me. I’ve really come around to Julian & Olympia as a couple and think that a near divorce reconciliation is a much more interesting angle than a love triangle/jealous office drama between them and Olympia’s ex. 

Who I actually forgot about. He and Olympia look good together, but the character is a snooze & I don’t find that fling at all convincing. Just like the Billy and Claudia relationship, which I never bought into, because despite the show laying it on thick with the soulmate stuff, Claudia was pretty much a non entity. I felt for Billy because I like the character, not because I cared about that relationship. 

I did like Sarah and her date though. The singing storyline was a bit silly but I thought the relationship development for Sarah was sweet & well done. 

I also really liked the client this week, especially the lawyer-roomie. They were a lot, but the characterization felt accurate and fun. Plus I loved their cute braids. I kept thinking Matty would be on their side in the end because she seemed to be really wrestling with what to do but she ended up going for the win, which surprised me. I did wonder how things would’ve gone had they reminded her more of her daughter, though. When clients remind her of her daughter physically/emotionally she almost always has an instant soft spot for them and maybe it might’ve been heavy handed, but I would’ve liked to see her struggle with a more similar case. But that episode is probably coming up down the line.  

Watching this week I realized that while Kathy Bates is why I initially tuned in, I’ve become fond of the dynamic between her, Olympia, & the junior associates and really missed that back and forth. Whatever happens once the jig is up, I wouldn’t mind if those 4 still found a way to work together. To me, their chemistry as a team is what makes the sometimes iffy writing/plotting really gel.

[Chicago Redshirt]

17 hours ago, Morrigan2575 said:

I'm also really confused on when this cover up happened? Would Julian or Olympia even have that much power 10 years or so ago? I could maybe see a young, just starting out Julian do something bad to try to please his dad but, I'm not sure that's where they are going. 

By definition, the coverup has to be more than 10 years ago in order to have prevented opioids from being taken off the market 10 years earlier.

I'm operating under the assumption that both Julian and Olympia are in their early to mid-40s,  because the actors who portray them are 44 and 43 respectively according to IMDB. So Julian and Olympia would be about 30 (give or take) for discussion's sake when the coverup happened. That's about 6 years out of law school (give or take) and right before they would likely be under consideration to become a junior partner. By contrast, I think the show has established that Sarah is 26 through her dating profile, putting her about two years after law school.

Hypothetically, it is not a question of power but a question of positioning. Matty is for all intents and purposes a first-year associate at Jacobson Moore, and yet she has been in a position in a short while to uncover things to win the firm millions of dollars in what is presumably a matter of months.

Since we are (as far as we know) talking about burying documents, any of the Big Three suspects could have done it or known that it was done. Indeed, this episode underscores yet another flaw in Matty's theory of the case: Wellbrexa has an entire in-house counsel team, any of whom could have also concealed the document without any of the Jacobson Moore team even knowing about it.

Indeed, there hypothetically could be yet another group of lawyers responsible for the coverup. In large lawsuits, firms outsource review of documents to contract lawyers. While the firms bill hundreds of dollars an hour per attorney (and the show had Olympia mentions she currently bills at $1200/hour), contract attorneys reviewing documents get paid $25-$30 an hour. They are told the basics of what the lawsuit's about and what to look for. But there easily could be nuances of what the lawsuit is about that they might miss. The contract lawyers look at dozens if not hundreds of documents an hour, clicking a button to say if any individual document is relevant, if it is privileged, etc. I absolutely hate document review. It is mind-numbing work. It would certainly be possible that in this document review process one or more attorneys through inattention/ignorance let documents that should have been turned over not get turned over. It's also possible that a document review attorney maliciously decided to withhold documents that they knew should be turned over.

15 hours ago, Nashville said:

Makes you kinda wonder, though, whether the legal team’s ignorance was accidental or intentional; all the firm’s properly licensed attorneys are sworn officers of the court, after all, and are legally obligated to report any criminal malfeasance to the presiding judge on the case, if such is disclosed to them.  Within that context - and lacking any significant corroborating evidence of legal wrongdoing - the legal team might find it in their best interests not to be too overly inquisitive about matters which might paint their clients (and/or their settlement chances) in a less-than-favorable light.

 

You’re not likely to see such, if you have incentive (financial or otherwise) not to look very closely in the first place.

I think we are supposed to believe until shown otherwise that Julian is a good-hearted, skilled lawyer (albeit with daddy issues). I hear you that there's a certain amount of head-in-the-sand approach that some lawyers might take.

But at the end of the day, you have to know some basic facts in order to defend a case or to know if you have to settle, and if so, how much the case might be worth. Cellist claims she reported her symptoms on such a such a date. Did she? What evidence backs up that story? What evidence refutes that story? It makes a difference if Doctor's story is "absolutely didn't happen because I didn't see her that day" versus "absolutely didn't happen because I did see her and the notes from that visit are perfectly benign." 

So while there is perhaps some incentive to remain ignorant of certain things, that should normally give way to the incentive to not get wrecked by harmful facts that might come out. 

5 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

It never occurred to Matty that she might have to do what she did? She wanted to get into pharm cases. She got there. What did she think was going to happen? Not have to defend those companies? 

The plan to get the info about the coverup is pretty poorly thought out both by Matty and the writers. But giving Matty more credit than she likely deserves, she may have thought a) I could be put on Wellbrexa for relatively benign purposes (Jacobson Moore presumably handles dozens of matters that are relatively trivial, after all, or that don't involve litigation) b) the sort of litigation that I might be put on would not be David vs. Goliath litigation against patients but rather Wellbrexa vs. Other-Big-Pharma-Company for patent infringement, Wellbrexa vs. its employees, Wellbrexa over contract disputes or what not c) I only need to be on Wellbrexa for a long enough period to justify getting access to the 10 year old files that show the coverup and so I will be in and out before I have to actually defend this company that I am saying is complicit in my daughter's death.

It could also be -- and I in fact think it is the case -- that Matty has not thought all that much about the ramifications of this whole thing. Matty has been willing to do shady things in pursuit of the truth. But in this episode (and perhaps in others, not sure) Matty crossed the line into criminal behavior. She (and Alfie) I presume are guilty of an actual crime in feigning Senior's voice and getting Assistant to give up his password to hack into his account.

I hope that there is followup to this point. Because it should at some point become apparent that Senior did not call and ask for his password, and Kira or some other IT person should be able to retrace where the call came from requesting the password information, what "Senior" accessed after that call, and so forth.

[shapeshifter]

Thanks, @Chicago Redshirt, for explaining all of that so that it makes sense to a non-lawyer.

 

9 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

I wasn't surprised that Jason had an affair but I thought Olympia knew that and was part of the reason for the divorce. 

Yeah, maybe the writers hadn't decided where they were going with that either? 
But, speaking from experience, it's not unusual IRL — but I think you just meant it was surprising on the show because we hadn't had a whiff of Julian (Jason Ritter) being a cad.
But I've see that scenario play out too IRL, both my own and others. So I guess the writers springing it on us was actually pretty organic storytelling.

[possibilities]

I cannot in a million years imagine why anyone would rather not know the truth about their partner. I don't like living a delusion. If someone betrays my trust, they owe it to me as part of any possible reconciliation to come clean, take responsibility, explain themselves, make amends, and generally regain my trust.

I think that affairs, or any other betrayal of a commitment, need to be looked at and examined in context-- why did you do it? What does that say about you, and about our relationship, and what do we need to do to have a real and not delusional relationship going forward?

It is definitely work to fix a broken relationship. But secrets, lies, and unresolved trauma kill off anything worth having, in that context, at least in my opinion.

Olympia deserves to know who she is committing to, and Julian owes it to her to face the consequences of facing up to what he did.

[Bastet]

5 hours ago, Chicago Redshirt said:

I think the show has established that Sarah is 26 through her dating profile, putting her about two years after law school.

Sarah referenced being a year out of law school in one episode.  I read both her and Billy as first year associates.

[Chicago Redshirt]

16 hours ago, possibilities said:

I cannot in a million years imagine why anyone would rather not know the truth about their partner. I don't like living a delusion. If someone betrays my trust, they owe it to me as part of any possible reconciliation to come clean, take responsibility, explain themselves, make amends, and generally regain my trust.

I think that affairs, or any other betrayal of a commitment, need to be looked at and examined in context-- why did you do it? What does that say about you, and about our relationship, and what do we need to do to have a real and not delusional relationship going forward?

It is definitely work to fix a broken relationship. But secrets, lies, and unresolved trauma kill off anything worth having, in that context, at least in my opinion.

Olympia deserves to know who she is committing to, and Julian owes it to her to face the consequences of facing up to what he did.

I agree, but I do understand why people might prefer to take the "ignorance is bliss" approach. From the perspective of the cheater, confession of the affair could be seen as a selfish thing to alleviate their guilt and unnecessarily complicate matters. Especially if the cheater can say "that was a unique set of circumstances, I've learned from that mistake and I'm not going to cheat again," the cheater might think a post-affair confession would do more harm than good for the relationship and the cheated-upon. 

For the cheated-upon, I'm sure there's a range of reasons why people would prefer to not actually know. From the aforementioned "ignorance is bliss" to not wanting to upset the apple cart of finances/family/etc. that would come with confirmed cheating to beliefs like the Chris Rock joke-but-not-really-a-joke "Men are as faithful as their opportunities." 

To bring it back to the show, Olympia has slept with Elijah while she and Julian were separated and headed for divorce. For me, this is not cheating. (I suppose some people might think that it is, but then some people might think even looking at another person with lust is cheating too.)

But I wonder if it is something she needs to reveal to Julian. If I were Julian, I absolutely would want to know. 

[preeya]

4 hours ago, Chicago Redshirt said:

To bring it back to the show, Olympia has slept with Elijah while she and Julian were separated and headed for divorce. For me, this is not cheating. (I suppose some people might think that it is, but then some people might think even looking at another person with lust is cheating too.)

But I wonder if it is something she needs to reveal to Julian. If I were Julian, I absolutely would want to know. 

I think he already knows.

[MissLucas]

Late to the party and most things have already been said, so I'm just going to add how much I loved the Christmas Sweaters with Lady Justice in Santa get-up!

[Yeah No]

4 hours ago, Chicago Redshirt said:

I agree, but I do understand why people might prefer to take the "ignorance is bliss" approach. From the perspective of the cheater, confession of the affair could be seen as a selfish thing to alleviate their guilt and unnecessarily complicate matters. Especially if the cheater can say "that was a unique set of circumstances, I've learned from that mistake and I'm not going to cheat again," the cheater might think a post-affair confession would do more harm than good for the relationship and the cheated-upon. 

This is along the lines of what I would have said if I'd had the time the other day, and the cheater might actually be right about it doing more harm than good for the relationship, but in spite of that I think it should be revealed as keeping that secret may not be good for the future of the relationship either in other ways. Holding onto secrets can work on a person and in effect hurt things. Plus it's just not ethical, especially if they're considering reconciling. There are ways to soften the blow of such a revelation, though.

The problem as I see it is when and under what circumstances something like that is best revealed. Certainly doing it under the gun and at a holiday party are not ideal circumstances and those circumstances can contribute to damaging the relationship more than if done at a different time and location. There are ways of softening that blow if presented differently, such as doing it in the presence of a marriage counselor, or when they are alone and relaxed. I understand that he may have wanted to beat Senior to divulging that information but doing it the way he did is has the potential of hurting the relationship even more. 

4 hours ago, Chicago Redshirt said:

To bring it back to the show, Olympia has slept with Elijah while she and Julian were separated and headed for divorce. For me, this is not cheating. (I suppose some people might think that it is, but then some people might think even looking at another person with lust is cheating too.)

But I wonder if it is something she needs to reveal to Julian. If I were Julian, I absolutely would want to know. 

Having a relationship in their circumstances is usually not considered cheating if they had a separation agreement and it's worded in the right way, but some people might still consider it cheating in spite of that. And if there's any question about whether Julian knew what was going on Olympia should tell him about it. I don't know if she's required to under the terms of a separation agreement, but ethically speaking she should.

[shapeshifter]

6 hours ago, Chicago Redshirt said:

Olympia has slept with Elijah while she and Julian were separated and headed for divorce.…
I wonder if it is something she needs to reveal to Julian. If I were Julian, I absolutely would want to know. 

Wasn't there some reason related to the divorce for Olympia and Elijah to keep it on the down low? I can't recall if it was related to the financial settlement or custody arrangements, but it's usually one of those in such situations. 

Anyhoo, kudos to the writers for presenting realistically complex relationship situations. 
However, I'm still probably going to bale on the show because it's too depressing. A lot of good TV and movies are like that for me. 
This is a true example of:
"It's not you [writers, producers, actors, et al.], it's me."