S01.E06: Dester

[chitowngirl]

Erica and Kevin keep a secret from Ted that could hinder his murder trial; with the case slipping away, Ted turns to an unlikely source for help; Stuart deals with blowback after making a move to strengthen his firm by weakening Black & Associates.
 

Airdate March 30, 2025 on NBC, next day Peacock

[AnimeMania]

Dominic Hoffman as Judge Mosely

[Dowel Jones]

I know it's standard in TV lawyer shows, but, having never attended an actual trial, I am curious as to some of the courtroom behavior.  Do attorneys really try to drop in bombshell evidence with the excuse of "It just came to light yesterday, your honor"?  I thought the defense always had time to review the evidence or testimony.  And I'm pretty sure they don't get to rant and accuse without an objection from the other side, too.  Is that correct?

[NJRadioGuy]

I've been on three criminal juries. One pled out and two went to verdict. Nothing even close to that kind of thing ever happened when I was in the jury box. The prosecution lays out their evidence piece by piece, defense crosses, sometimes each side re-directs two or three times until the questions are answered. In my two cases that went all the way, the defense didn't even call witnesses of their own. If anything were to come out like that it would be without the jury present and likely in chambers.

There certainly wasn't a lot of TV-style lawyering being practiced. Just the assistant state attorney layout out the facts and calling witnesses and defense attorneys' crosses. Always very formal, very structured. And in my cases, slam-dunks for the State.

The prosecutors didn't look or sound like Hollywood actors. I think if anybody had pulled a stunt like that the judge would have cleared the court, ordered the jury sequestered and ripped the offending attorney a new butthole. Maybe that's done elsewhere, but where I live the formality of the proceedings is quite solemn. No theatrics, no showmanship. The only thing close to that would be defense attorneys dressing in extremely expensive suits and jewelry. Mind you, the courthouse in my county is in a city with an extremely violent reputation. No murdering TV producers or movie stars here. I'm just lucky I live in the very good part of my county.

[chessiegal]

My husband spent his entire career of 26 years as a federal prosecutor. He laughs and rolls his eyes at the antics that go on in tv shows that have court scenes. I worked in forensic labs for 23 years and testified as an expert witness over 30 times. I will say on one occasion I was being badgered by the defense attorney with no objection from the prosecutor. We had a break during my testimony, and I asked the prosecutor why he wasn't objecting to the badgering. His response - you're doing just fine, he's not rattling you, he's just making himself look like an ass to the jury.

[NJRadioGuy]

As for this episode itself, IMHO it's backsliding into "IDGAF" territory once again. No interesting B plot, no lighthearted moments or anything to hold my interest.

And for the record, if I'd been on that jury I probably would have voted to convict Lester.

The whole two-firms schtick is also annoying and they should have never gone there.

[Dowel Jones]

10 hours ago, NJRadioGuy said:

Always very formal, very structured. And in my cases, slam-dunks for the State.

That's always been my opinion too.  The prosecution doesn't go to trial without enough evidence to convict, because it's just too expensive to run a trial, especially a high profile one (OJ, among others, excepted).  The prosecutor knows the defendant is guilty, the defense attorney knows it, the judge knows it, but the process has to be observed.  That's why plea bargains are so common.  The only wild card is the evidence that either gets admitted or doesn't.

[NJRadioGuy]

2 hours ago, Dowel Jones said:

That's always been my opinion too.  The prosecution doesn't go to trial without enough evidence to convict, because it's just too expensive to run a trial, especially a high profile one (OJ, among others, excepted).  The prosecutor knows the defendant is guilty, the defense attorney knows it, the judge knows it, but the process has to be observed.  That's why plea bargains are so common.  The only wild card is the evidence that either gets admitted or doesn't.

In the homicide trial I sat for we spent more time being sequestered in the jury box while the lawyers were arguing over what was admissible and what wasn't, but we never got to see any of it, and what we did see was as described.

I ended up being an alternate in that trial and never deliberated, but the guy (rightfully) was convicted and got 60 years from the toughest, nastiest judge in the county. He treated us like gold, though.