swimmyfish January 13, 2014 Share January 13, 2014 (edited) Having seen the episode, I'd say the case of the week was the weakest part of the episode, while the follow-up on the ballot-stuffing video was extremely interesting. However, since everything I know about law comes from tv, I don't fully understand why Alicia was so upset that Zach might have to testify in front of a grand jury? Does that put him in some kind of danger? Edited May 1, 2014 by maraleia put the episode description in a separate post Link to comment
TravisNelson76 January 14, 2014 Share January 14, 2014 Well, I think it's that (a) no one wants their kid to have to testify in front of a grand jury and (b) who knows if some sort of weird perjury (or whatever) charge could emerge. And I agree that the case-o'-the-week strained credulity. There was just too much chaos and nonsense with the double jury for it to be remotely believable. Link to comment
Rhondinella January 18, 2014 Share January 18, 2014 Love this show, but totally agree about the case of the week seriously testing my suspension of disbelief. Not that it wasn't humorous for them to shuffle the juries in and out, the first time or two, but after that it became tedious and only served for me to yell at the TV that no judge would ever do something like that "in the interest of judicial efficiency." Seems it made things less efficient rather than more. Link to comment
maraleia May 1, 2014 Share May 1, 2014 Alicia and Will each represent one half of a couple accused of smuggling drugs, but the courtroom becomes mired in confusion and legal technicalities when they insist on separate jury pools. Meanwhile, Cary attempts to woo a Lockhart/Gardner client, Kalinda tries to repair a damaged relationship and Marilyn begins her investigation into possible voter fraud during the gubernatorial election. Link to comment
Recommended Posts