S03.E05: Chicanery

[ShadowFacts]

1 hour ago, Bryce Lynch said:

One thing I keep forgetting is that the defense has not begun to present its case yet.  Once that happens, things could get a lot better for Jimmy and a lot worse for Chuck.  If they bring the police who tasered Chuck, the ER doctor who proved his condition was psychcosomatic, etc. to the stand, the board could really think Chuck is a lunatic and Jimmy is a hero.  

I'd be happy if we didn't see any more of this drama.  I think they ended it perfectly with the shot of the Exit sign and Chuck.  It would be fine to see the aftermath, after a decision has been made.  I don't think all of the other stuff would be allowed, the examiner said he'd allow some but that this wasn't about Chuck.  Jimmy said he had nothing further.  They got the picture.  Anything more would be unnecessary. 

[TudorQueen]

Can we just give Michael McKean an Emmy nomination now?

[Tikichick]

20 minutes ago, ShadowFacts said:

I'd be happy if we didn't see any more of this drama.  I think they ended it perfectly with the shot of the Exit sign and Chuck.  It would be fine to see the aftermath, after a decision has been made.  I don't think all of the other stuff would be allowed, the examiner said he'd allow some but that this wasn't about Chuck.  Jimmy said he had nothing further.  They got the picture.  Anything more would be unnecessary. 

Somehow or another we're going to have to see the committee's decision and the effect it and what transpired have on the key players.  I agree it would be tough to pick up in that room immediately in the aftermath of that hideous tension and all that spilled out there.  It's not only the brothers and those involved with them who understood that, the horrified and stunned looks on the board members' faces made that clear.

I now want to see more of Chuck's story, particularly what happened to cause him to lodge his head so firmly up his own backside that he feels entitled to treat others the way he does, all the while still expecting everyone to cater to his needs.  Guaranteed there's a story there.

[axlmadonna]

I want spinoffs / BCS-style origin stories for Mike, Gus, Hector, Chuck and Kim. Each and every one of them are unique, interesting, and compelling characters who I think could hold their own as leads as easily as they have as part of this amazing ensemble.

Edited May 10, 2017 by axlmadonna
Edited to include Chuck, since this episode is what brought me to this conclusion.

[qtpye]

5 hours ago, Lurky McLurkerson said:

I'd never thought about that parallel, but this is a great observation.  Vince Gilligan said about Walt that he was turning Mr. Chips into Scarface, and I have always felt like it was more of a revelation than a transformation.  Scarface was there all along with a mask of powerlessness over him.  Jimmy is basically Saul with a very thin veneer of trying to do the right thing, and less for himself but to make Chuck and Kim happy.  I think the role of the women in their lives is interesting, too.  Skylar was pilloried for being an overbearing shrew, but I don't get the sense that Kim is seen in the same way - she's trying to help Jimmy channel his powers for good rather than falling back into his scams (maybe she's seen as more fallible because she sometimes plays along with Jimmy?).

I have actually talked in the Skylar thread how impressed I am with the character of Kim, who I think is one of the best written characters on television.  We know Kim is cool because the writers have actually "shown us" instead of "tell us".  I love Kim and hope she is able to salvage a good life for herself.  Gilligan made a mistake, that in order for us to make us root for Walt (at least in the beginning), he made Skylar too unlikable, even though she was the spouse who was wronged.  Here, Kim is standing by her man and believes the best about Jimmy, without trying to change who he is (the fact that she knew it would not be a good idea to be his partner proves that she truly understands Jimmy).  At the same time, I can understand why Jim would never tolerate Saul and it is perfectly understandable.  I also love how the center of Kim's life is not her romantic relationships, like most female characters.  She is just a very solid character and it is her arc that I am most curios about, since I already know what will happen to Jimmy, Mike, and Gus.

4 hours ago, axlmadonna said:

Much has been said on these threads with regard to Chuck's decision not to hire Jimmy as a lawyer in his firm. And, while I agree that it was cowardly of him to make Howard the Mean Mommy in denying Jimmy a place in HHM, I do believe that Chuck had every right... knowing what he knew about his brother's morals and judgment... to make that choice. Despite their being brothers, Chuck did not owe Jimmy a job at the company that he [Chuck] had spent his entire professional life creating and maintaining. It is a prestigious firm, built on a strong reputation, and hiring Jimmy as a lawyer there had the potential of destroying what Chuck had so carefully built.

If Chuck had not been so craven and bitter, he would have explained to Jimmy that he was pleasantly surprised and proud of Jimmy's acheivement in obtaining a law license, and flattered that Jimmy chose to follow in his footsteps, but that his history gave Chuck pause with regard to hiring him on directly as an attorney at HHM. Rather, he [Chuck] would be happy to give him advice and possibly pull a few strings to help him get started with another (less prestigious) firm, so that Jimmy could learn the ropes, prove that he could be an ethical lawyer, and earn his own reputation in the legal community. Alas, that was not the path that Chuck chose to take.

I would like to point out, though, that at the beginning of Season One, Chuck actually was giving Jimmy professional advice for getting going in the law profession. He didn't become psychotic about it until after Jimmy started pulling stunts like copying the HHM look and logo on his billboard, and "saving" the guy from falling off the billboard and then hiding it from Chuck by stealing his newspaper. Rather than assuaging Chuck's concerns about his morals and judgment, Jimmy only exacerbated them and proved Chuck right in his decision not to bring that kind of liability to HHM. That was when Chuck really started trying to sabotage Jimmy's law career.

God, if this was not classic "what if" that is so tantalizing.  It's like what came first the chicken or the egg.  The brother's had a toxic relationship from the start and sometimes (unknowingly) brought out the worst in each other.  The great irony is all Jimmy wanted was Chuck's respect and love.  However, I should point out Jimmy did get his shot at a respectable legal career at Davis and Main.  Ed Begly Jr. was more then willing to be the older brother/mentor figure that Jimmy craved.  It was a hilarious episode, but "Inflatable" from last season show cases Jimmy being a total ass to people who had been nothing but good to him (he even got to keep the Copa bola desk). 

Edited May 10, 2017 by qtpye

[Clanstarling]

5 hours ago, axlmadonna said:

I was thinking it was a separation, since Chuck was debating whether he should have his wedding ring on or off during the dinner with her. Surely it would have long been off if they were divorced?

I wondered about that as well, but the dialog seemed to indicate, pretty clearly to me anyway, that they were divorced.

4 hours ago, Bryce Lynch said:

I read the scripts of the 2 episodes where the Chicago Sunroof situation was discussed and I couldn't find any indication of what sort of deal was cut and whether or not Jimmy admitted that he "Defecated through a sunroof!" in court or in any sort of written confession.  

So, hypothetically,  suppose OJ Simpson gives an interview to Barbara Walters or Oprah or whoever and gives a detailed confession about how he murdered Ron and Nicole.  If later on, one of his "Dream Team" attorneys said, "OJ murdered 2 people." (and assuming OJ had told the lawyer he did it) would that still be violating attorney-client privilege?

My memory has faded...but didn't OJ actually write a book where he hypothetically said how he killed them? Or am I just conflating this with some fiction?

4 hours ago, Tikichick said:

I wonder if Jimmy has also planned for Rebecca to be there for Chuck when Jimmy can't and the situation with Howard and HHM runs off the rails?  A piece of his plan may in fact be Jimmy putting a measure of protection in place for Chuck before he departs to take up a life of Saul.

I wondered about that too, though I'm not sure I really believe that at this point.

3 hours ago, Bryce Lynch said:

I think that might also have been Chuck not wanting Jimmy to get into too much trouble.  He doesn't want him to go to prison, just lose his law license. Saying he wasn't in fear probably made the idea of the PPD easier to sell to the DA.

If he pressed charges for an assault, wouldn't it have gone to court? (not a legal mind here). That's the last thing Chuck wanted (and certainly Howard didn't). It wasn't Jimmy going to prison that worried him, but the blowback a court case would have on him and HHM. The bar thing was more insular, and probably more accommodating, than a trial would have been.

3 hours ago, Dobian said:

When Chuck was in the hospital, the doctor left some piece of equipment turned on by Chuck's bed without his knowledge and he never reacted, and the doctor called that out.  Wasn't Jimmy there to hear that?  I figured that would have been the impetus for his battery trick.  I agree that in a real hearing, Jimmy's stunt wouldn't have gone over well with that board.  I also think they would have taken a dim view of Chuck admittedly exaggerating his illness to coax a confession out of Jimmy, which by itself would have cast reasonable doubt on the confession.  They could have thrown the whole thing out before Jimmy ever questioned Chuck, given Jimmy a slap on the wrist for the breaking and entering, and called it a day.

I don't think she called it out to Chuck. Jimmy noticed the trick, and her pointed glance toward him. I do believe they also discussed it in the hallway when she wanted him to have Chuck committed.

[Tikichick]

3 minutes ago, Clanstarling said:

If he pressed charges for an assault, wouldn't it have gone to court? (not a legal mind here). That's the last thing Chuck wanted (and certainly Howard didn't). It wasn't Jimmy going to prison that worried him, but the blowback a court case would have on him and HHM. The bar thing was more insular, and probably more accommodating, than a trial would have been.

 

There are plea deals on assault cases every day.  Chuck knew Jimmy would never plead to assault because it was guaranteed felony, guaranteed disbarment and therefore it would go to trial.  Chuck could not manipulate the criminal proceedings anywhere near the level he could manipulate cronies at the bar association.  Chuck maneuvered carefully to insure there was an outside prosecutor on the crim and pressed for the PPD to insure it wouldn't be on Jimmy's turf, Chuck could run the table and there would be court supervision on Jimmy for a year.  I'm sure if Jimmy stepped toe across the chalk line during that year Chuck would be just sick about it, but what can he do except put the best measures in place to protect his brother and everyone else.  

[ghoulina]

4 hours ago, axlmadonna said:

I would like to point out, though, that at the beginning of Season One, Chuck actually was giving Jimmy professional advice for getting going in the law profession. He didn't become psychotic about it until after Jimmy started pulling stunts like copying the HHM look and logo on his billboard, and "saving" the guy from falling off the billboard and then hiding it from Chuck by stealing his newspaper. Rather than assuaging Chuck's concerns about his morals and judgment, Jimmy only exacerbated them and proved Chuck right in his decision not to bring that kind of liability to HHM. That was when Chuck really started trying to sabotage Jimmy's law career.

True. But I think a lot of those actions came out because of Jimmy's vendetta against Howard. Because of his perceived notion that Howard was out to block him at every term. A notion fostered by Chuck's refusal to be upfront with his brother. I wonder how differently Jimmy's entrance into law would have gone if Chuck had just been honest with him. I also wonder if Howard really WOULD have given Jimmy a chance, if Chuck hadn't shot that idea down. 

 

4 hours ago, Tikichick said:

I wonder if Jimmy has also planned for Rebecca to be there for Chuck when Jimmy can't and the situation with Howard and HHM runs off the rails?  A piece of his plan may in fact be Jimmy putting a measure of protection in place for Chuck before he departs to take up a life of Saul.

It wouldn't surprise me. I don't think Jimmy will ever stop caring about Chuck's well being. When they had their big falling out at the end of season one, he made sure to go to Howard with a list of what needs to be done. He could have just kicked rocks without saying a word. I doubt Chuck's pride would have allowed him to ask for help. 

 

4 hours ago, axlmadonna said:

My point was that Chuck didn't actually (as far as we know) think that Jimmy was unfit to be a lawyer, per se. Jimmy hadn't done any "Slippin' Jimmy" stuff since the chicago sunroof fiasco, and had been working at HHM in the mail room for some time when the events of BCS began, presumably without incident. Jimmy had been trying to prove that he had changed, and apparently was doing so well enough to remain employed at HHM for years.

Exactly. Are people not allowed second chances in life? Who knows? It's quite possible that if Chuck had supported Jimmy as a new lawyer at HHM, he might never have gone back to his Slipping Jimmy ways. Sometimes we become the people that others insist we are. 

[axlmadonna]

7 minutes ago, Clanstarling said:

My memory has faded...but didn't OJ actually write a book where he hypothetically said how he killed them? Or am I just conflating this with some fiction?

.........

I don't think she called it out to Chuck. Jimmy noticed the trick, and her pointed glance toward him. I do believe they also discussed it in the hallway when she wanted him to have Chuck committed.

Nope, that really happened. But it was never released.

.....................

The whole purpose in Dr. Cruz implementing the experiment was for Jimmy's benefit. Up until then, Jimmy had been genuinely arguing that Chuck's illness was real and had physical manifestations. Dr. Cruz knew that her only chance in persuading Jimmy to agree to committing Chuck and getting him some real mental health treatment was by proving incontrovertibly that Chuck's illness was entirely psychosomatic.

[Tikichick]

1 minute ago, ghoulina said:

Exactly. Are people not allowed second chances in life? Who knows? It's quite possible that if Chuck had supported Jimmy as a new lawyer at HHM, he might never have gone back to his Slipping Jimmy ways. Sometimes we become the people that others insist we are. 

I think if you asked Chuck about giving second chances he would be quick to affirm how much he wants to give people second chances, right before he gave you his very reasoned thinking why this or that circumstance behooves the chance not be bestowed, for the greater good. 

As far as becoming the person others think we are, isn't Saul precisely Chuck's direst predictions, on steroids?!

[Bryce Lynch]

41 minutes ago, TudorQueen said:

Can we just give Michael McKean an Emmy nomination now?

FIFY :)

[Auntie Anxiety]

8 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

I think if you asked Chuck about giving second chances he would be quick to affirm how much he wants to give people second chances, right before he gave you his very reasoned thinking why this or that circumstance behooves the chance not be bestowed, for the greater good. 

You nailed it, Tikichick. Chuck thinks of himself as an outstanding, caring humanitarian but really his is a snobbish, elitist hypocrite. He uses his rigid binary thinking to support his views.

[Tikichick]

5 hours ago, axlmadonna said:

Much has been said on these threads with regard to Chuck's decision not to hire Jimmy as a lawyer in his firm. And, while I agree that it was cowardly of him to make Howard the Mean Mommy in denying Jimmy a place in HHM, I do believe that Chuck had every right... knowing what he knew about his brother's morals and judgment... to make that choice. Despite their being brothers, Chuck did not owe Jimmy a job at the company that he [Chuck] had spent his entire professional life creating and maintaining. It is a prestigious firm, built on a strong reputation, and hiring Jimmy as a lawyer there had the potential of destroying what Chuck had so carefully built.

If Chuck had not been so craven and bitter, he would have explained to Jimmy that he was pleasantly surprised and proud of Jimmy's acheivement in obtaining a law license, and flattered that Jimmy chose to follow in his footsteps, but that his history gave Chuck pause with regard to hiring him on directly as an attorney at HHM. Rather, he [Chuck] would be happy to give him advice and possibly pull a few strings to help him get started with another (less prestigious) firm, so that Jimmy could learn the ropes, prove that he could be an ethical lawyer, and earn his own reputation in the legal community. Alas, that was not the path that Chuck chose to take.

I would like to point out, though, that at the beginning of Season One, Chuck actually was giving Jimmy professional advice for getting going in the law profession. He didn't become psychotic about it until after Jimmy started pulling stunts like copying the HHM look and logo on his billboard, and "saving" the guy from falling off the billboard and then hiding it from Chuck by stealing his newspaper. Rather than assuaging Chuck's concerns about his morals and judgment, Jimmy only exacerbated them and proved Chuck right in his decision not to bring that kind of liability to HHM. That was when Chuck really started trying to sabotage Jimmy's law career.

Chuck's been keeping the books on Jimmy since he was nine.  I'm leaving room that Chuck's professional advice to Jimmy was part of the long game he was playing while he bided his time.

He certainly didn't owe Jimmy a job at his firm.  It is curious that Howard confirmed in his testimony that Howard wasn't outright opposed to taking on Jimmy as an associate.  If Chuck genuinely wanted to launch Jimmy's career he could have taken him into the firm and seen to it he was adequately supervised and incentivized to stay the course, or he could have thrown some support his way to help Jimmy launch independently.  Chuck knows Jimmy's strengths, weaknesses and his love for Kim.  He had everything necessary to keep newly minted James McGill, Esq. in line if that was truly his concern and desire.

[halgia]

I removed a bunch of the argument about real-world disability accommodations; it was basically off-topic and veering into politics territory. Let's stick to the show.

[smartymarty]

Quote

Fear isn't required to pursue an assault charge and I'm surprised the show gave that impression unless it was to show that the attorney wasn't vindictive.

Assault is the threat or use of force on another that causes the other person to have a reasonable apprehension of imminent or harmful contact. So yes, fear is a component of assault. If Chuck didn't think Jimmy would actually hit him, no assault.

Quote

Jimmy hadn't done any "Slippin' Jimmy" stuff since the chicago sunroof fiasco, and had been working at HHM in the mail room for some time when the events of BCS began, presumably without incident.

Not only that, but Jimmy worked so hard that, according to Howard, they called him Charlie Hustle. (It was Charlie, right? Because now I'm thinking that's funny considering Chuck's given name is probably Charlie.)

[axlmadonna]

7 minutes ago, smartymarty said:

Not only that, but Jimmy worked so hard that, according to Howard, they called him Charlie Hustle. (It was Charlie, right? Because now I'm thinking that's funny considering Chuck's given name is probably Charlie.)

I always wondered if it was Chuck who originally came up with the nickname Charlie Hustle for Jimmy... since it could also be a play on the other definition of "hustle" (i.e. of the Slippin' Jimmy variety). Chuck seems like the type to enjoy a good double entendre.

[scenario]

2 minutes ago, axlmadonna said:

I always wondered if it was Chuck who originally came up with the nickname Charlie Hustle for Jimmy... since it could also be a play on the other definition of "hustle" (i.e. of the Slippin' Jimmy variety). Chuck seems like the type to enjoy a good double entendre.

Charlie Hustle is also the nickname of Pete Rose, a professional baseball player, who was banned from the sport for life.  Chuck and Charlie are nicknames for Charles.

[Tikichick]

1 minute ago, scenario said:

Charlie Hustle is also the nickname of Pete Rose, a professional baseball player, who was banned from the sport for life.  Chuck and Charlie are nicknames for Charles.

That right there shows how loaded two words can be.  Talk about baggage.

[nachomama]

If Chuck had let Jimmy come to work for the firm and he and Howard being the "lesser" once they moved up they coulda been HHMM and they could sing it to the Rhihanna song, in a commercial...by Jimmy of course.

[Bryce Lynch]

15 minutes ago, scenario said:

Charlie Hustle is also the nickname of Pete Rose, a professional baseball player, who was banned from the sport for life.  Chuck and Charlie are nicknames for Charles.

The interesting thing about that is that Whitey Ford of the Yankees originally called Rose, "Charlie Hustle" derisively.  Apparently, during spring training Rose did a lot of "fake hustle", like sprinting to first base on a walk and running to the outfield wall and leaping to "try to catch" a homerun ball that obviously way out of reach.

Eventually it became of positive nickname for Rose, though it took on sort of a double meaning (i.e. Charlie Hustler) when he was banned from baseball for betting on games he managed. 

I recall hearing somewhere (probably on the Insider Podcast), that Jimmy didn't like the nickname, though Howard does not realize this and meant it as a compliment.  I think he gave Howard sort of a dirty look, when Howard handed him the check for his Sandpiper work and said, "I always liked you,Jimmy. Remember? I used to call you Charlie Hustle."

It never occurred to me before that Chuck is also a "Charley".  I wonder if Howard and the other partners have a nickname for Chuck? Charile Fussle? :)

Speaking of Howard, I found it interesting how honest he was in his testimony.  He clearly didn't want to help Jimmy (he tried to bring up Davis & Main).  But, when Kim asked him what he thought of Jimmy when he first met him, he said that he thought he had a lot of get up and go and mentioned how he called him Charlie Hustle.  That question was a perfect opportunity for Chuck to put Jimmy down as there would be no way to prove he was lying about what he thought.  He could have said something like, "He seemed like a nice guy, but sort of sketchy.", but he answered honestly, which I think speaks well for Howard.

36 minutes ago, axlmadonna said:

I always wondered if it was Chuck who originally came up with the nickname Charlie Hustle for Jimmy... since it could also be a play on the other definition of "hustle" (i.e. of the Slippin' Jimmy variety). Chuck seems like the type to enjoy a good double entendre.

I could see Chuck liking the double entendre, but I can't imagine him knowing anything about something as "lowbrow" as baseball.  

[Milburn Stone]

2 hours ago, Tikichick said:

Somehow or another we're going to have to see the committee's decision and the effect it and what transpired have on the key players.

I'm not sure we do have to see that in order to know the decision. For instance, if next week's episode begins with Jimmy seeing new clients and brimming with life, and Chuck, oh I don't know, jumps off a bridge or something, we'll be able to infer what the committee's decision was.

Edited May 10, 2017 by Milburn Stone

[Jextella]

2 hours ago, qtpye said:

I have actually talked in the Skylar thread how impressed I am with the character of Kim, who I think is one of the best written characters on television.  We know Kim is cool because the writers have actually "shown us" instead of "tell us".  I love Kim and hope she is able to salvage a good life for herself.  Gilligan made a mistake, that in order for us to make us root for Walt (at least in the beginning), he made Skylar too unlikable, even though she was the spouse who was wronged.  Here, Kim is standing by her man and believes the best about Jimmy, without trying to change who he is (the fact that she knew it would not be a good idea to be his partner proves that she truly understands Jimmy).  At the same time, I can understand why Jim would never tolerate Saul and it is perfectly understandable.  I also love how the center of Kim's life is not her romantic relationships, like most female characters.  She is just a very solid character and it is her arc that I am most curios about, since I already know what will happen to Jimmy, Mike, and Gus.

God, if this was not classic "what if" that is so tantalizing.  It's like what came first the chicken or the egg.  The brother's had a toxic relationship from the start and sometimes (unknowingly) brought out the worst in each other.  The great irony is all Jimmy wanted was Chuck's respect and love.  However, I should point out Jimmy did get his shot at a respectable legal career at Davis and Main.  Ed Begly Jr. was more then willing to be the older brother/mentor figure that Jimmy craved.  It was a hilarious episode, but "Inflatable" from last season show cases Jimmy being a total ass to people who had been nothing but good to him (he even got to keep the Copa bola desk). 

The chicken vs. egg analogy is spot on where Chuck and Jimmy are concerned.   I'd apply it to Walter and Skylar too, though.  I never read Skylar as unlikable until Walt started acting weird.   

I am also a big fan of "Kim".  She is interesting and the actress who plays here was perfect casting (casting is so important and Gilligan and Gould nailed it on both shows).  

Edited May 10, 2017 by Jextella

[Macbeth]

9 hours ago, RealReality said:

The issue with the bar hearing isn't that you didn't get a lot of time, it's that you committed any crime and a felony to boot.  It become a especially bad where the crime involved fraud and deceit.  Attorneys are given a lot of trust, and so it's hard to keep one around who isn't trustworthy.

The world just isn't like this.  It would be nice if it was, but attorneys are judging other attorneys - it's hard to throw one under the bus when they can relate to them.  It's a big old boys club.  Even if it can be proved you embezzled money you might only get suspended not disbarred. 

[acid burn]

15 hours ago, DrSpaceman73 said:

I think we are seeing the same thing with Saul/Jimmy.  His true inner personality is more Saul than Jimmy.  Its more a transformation back to his true nature than morphing into someone new. 

And I've said from the beginning I would much rather see Saul than Jimmy and I don't necessarily need to see the whole process like we did on Breaking Bad just because they are such similar stories.

Somewhat agreed (I mean, Jimmy's always been Slippin' Jimmy) but I loved watching the evolution of Walter White into Heisenberg so much that I'm truly invested in watching Jimmy become Saul. This show is like crack. Super well written, delicious crack.

[J----av]

On 2017-05-08 at 11:25 PM, Ottis said:

It was well done, but pedestrian. Turned out to be another "you can't handle the truth" moment, subsidized by a simple set up with the battery. I was hoping for something more clever and surprising, that would have shown Jimmy was actually Chuck's equal... or better... at law. Oh well. 

 

 Well that would be incredibly inconsistent and poor writing. Everything we have seen and know about Chuck and Jimmy has shown that Chuck is better at law. Jimmy being his equal or better in law this episode would make no sense. With what we know about who Jimmy is and how he turns out, anything but Jimmy coming out on top with some dirty tactics would be disappointing 

[J----av]

On 2017-05-09 at 2:03 AM, shapeshifter said:

I guess we'll never know if Rebecca remembers it.

I wish in the previouslies that they could have reminded the viewers of Chuck believing Jimmy robbed so much from their father's store that he went out of business, when in reality their father was mainly bankrupt by his own generosity towards con artist customers. It was the foundation of Chuck's attitude towards Jimmy that brought them to that day in court, right?

 Well we don't know how much Jimmy was taking. It could have been more then their dad was giving away. We do know that even though Chuck is an ass, much of what he says about Jimmy is true

[Ottis]

8 hours ago, J----av said:

Well that would be incredibly inconsistent and poor writing. Everything we have seen and know about Chuck and Jimmy has shown that Chuck is better at law. Jimmy being his equal or better in law this episode would make no sense. With what we know about who Jimmy is and how he turns out, anything but Jimmy coming out on top with some dirty tactics would be disappointing 

This comment was made earlier in this thread, and I responded to it twice. You might take a look at those exchanges.

[qtpye]

One of the things that is noticeable this season is the lack of Jimmy smiling.  No matter what he is into, the character has always been kind of a happy jovial fellow, until he went into hiding as Gene.  Understandably, Jimmy has been miserable and as others have pointed out, takes no pleasure in his brother's downfall.  He no longer has family and it saddens him.  It is to Gilligan's credit that a guy who purposefully tampers with documents so sympathetic.  Of course this was small potatoes when compared to making a meth dealer an antihero, until the final season.

[ShadowFacts]

With all the talk of assault and the fear element of that crime, it's interesting to me that Jimmy doesn't operate on that level, at all.  He doesn't employ fear or physicality (he only attacked a door, a drawer and a tape), his weapons are his wit and his words.  As opposed to Mike's world where fear, intimidation and violence are the currency of the realm. 

[axlmadonna]

17 hours ago, Bryce Lynch said:

I could see Chuck liking the double entendre, but I can't imagine him knowing anything about something as "lowbrow" as baseball.  

Nor can I... I was referring to the double entendre of Jimmy getting a lot done, as well as being a con artist. Chuck could appreciate those without ever having known that the term originated in a baseball context.

16 hours ago, Jextella said:

I never read Skylar as unlikable until Walt started acting weird.   

The difference between Skylar and Kim is that Kim has always known who Jimmy is, while Skylar was reacting to her husband's sudden and inexplicable changes in behavior. Imagine being married to someone for decades, and believing that you know them so well, and then they start to deceive you and disrespect you in ways that they never had before... ways that are totally out of character for them. Imagine seeing this, sensing that something major has changed, knowing there are things they aren't telling you, but having no way to prove it. Imagine the frustration, fear, and anxiety it would cause, especially to a woman who is pregnant and dealing with crazy hormones anyway.

I believe that most women, including Kim, would have reacted exactly the way Skylar did (though Kim would probably have walked, possibly run, away from the situation long before Skylar did). But, as I said, Kim is not in that situation at all. She sees and understands Jimmy's nature and chooses to be part of his world, as is.

[ShadowFacts]

I don't think knowledge of fine points of law is necessary to see what happened with the tape.  Jimmy took what was Chuck's weapon and used it, along with Rebecca's appearance and the phone battery, to cause Chuck to fall apart in front of his peers who respected him.  In doing that Jimmy and Kim made it more believable that Jimmy was trying to keep his sick brother from spiraling even further downward.  There was no other proof of Jimmy's misconduct with documents and it wasn't charged by the prosecutor.  Only viewers who never saw BB are in suspense about the outcome.  The rest of us know that Jimmy did not lose his license permanently, and possibly not even temporarily.  Jimmy successfully used Chuck's weapon and blew up his carefully laid trap. 

[Tikichick]

17 hours ago, Milburn Stone said:

I'm not sure we do have to see that in order to know the decision. For instance, if next week's episode begins with Jimmy seeing new clients and brimming with life, and Chuck, oh I don't know, jumps off a bridge or something, we'll be able to infer what the committee's decision was.

I agree, and I should have more clearly said somehow they're going to have to convey to the audience what the committee's decision is -- and how the ramifications ripple out to all of the key players, without taking us back to the hearing itself.

I do dislike your ideas for Chuck however.  While I find his behavior awful I am hopeful for his ultimate redemption, including my personal wish about the ultimate conclusion of the series overall -- not that I'm in any hurry to get there anytime soon.

[Milburn Stone]

55 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

I do dislike your ideas for Chuck however.  While I find his behavior awful I am hopeful for his ultimate redemption, including my personal wish about the ultimate conclusion of the series overall -- not that I'm in any hurry to get there anytime soon.

For the record (and I realize this may not be what you meant), my blue-skying that development for Chuck does not represent my wish for Chuck. Like you, I'd prefer a redemption for him. But basically will follow Vince Gilligan anywhere. :)

[Hanahope]

I don't think the tape was "officially" being admitted to prove Jimmy did what he did.  Its being admitted to prove why Jimmy was upset and why Jimmy broke the door and the tape, and assaulted Chuck, i.e. Jimmy was upset because Chuck recorded something about him admitting to the document change.  Even if Jimmy didn't do that, and Jimmy did just 'make up' the confession, Jimmy would have been upset over Chuck's taping it because it still could have been played to Mesa Verde and hurt Kim's work with them (even if it wasn't true, Mesa Verde might not want to take the chance that Kim was working with someone who would commit illegal acts)

But obviously Chuck intended for the panel to believe what was on the tape, and use that belief to not just suspend Jimmy's license for the acts in the PPD, the breaking the door, the tape destruction, the assault on Chuck, but to actually disbar him because of the felony breaking and entering.  Without the tape, if the panel just heard of the PPD crimes, they might have thought it was just a he said/he said argument and simply suspend Jimmy's license for a short time (3 months or so), but hearing the underlying reason was to convince them to make a stronger penalty.

 

I too kept expecting Jimmy to have planted a working cell phone on Chuck.  The battery was a surprise and obviously Chuck wasn't expecting it at all, especially after Rebecca and Jimmy's empty phone.  Jimmy got Chuck comfortable, then worked up at bit, then let loose and Chuck fell for it completely.

I agree that HHM could have given Jimmy a good start as an attorney.  It sounds like Jimmy kept his nose pretty clean when he was in New Mexico, at least at first, when he began working at HHM and put himself through law school.  Jimmy could have kept clean, with good management.  Jimmy probably would have been good in helping HHM build up a personal injury practice, or elder law, as Jimmy ended up.  Chuck is just one of those snobby attorneys who thinks anything not banking, corporate or financial related is "low class".  At worst, Chuck could have shoved Jimmy into the document review basement, where Jimmy probably would have quit himself and then done his own thing.  But Chuck wouldn't even give Jimmy a chance.

[Tikichick]

20 minutes ago, Eulipian 5k said:

Is the first rule of adherence to the law that you can't be punished for something you weren't convicted of? Even a confession can be thrown out during a trial, cheeze even videotape of a savage police beating can be ignored at trial. So the Bar can't hold anything or infer anything that you aren't convicted of.

Which is precisely why Jimmy's confession was parsed so precisely down to, what was it, $2.98 as the final quibble?

[seasquared]

Um, Administrator...could you create a separate topic called "Legally Speaking" so that Tikichick and RealReality can go and hold a moot court on legal definitions????

On a different note, Chuck asked Jimmy if he should have the dinner with Rebecca with the wedding ring on or off. Jimmy says "off." I've only watched once, but am I correct in stating that Chuck ended up wearing the ring? Further illustrating Chuck's need to be superior over Jimmy and knowing what's best.

[PeterPirate]

Iirc, the tape was not being used to provide evidence about the Mesa Verde case in particular, but only to show that Jimmy was motivated by the desire to destroy evidence related to a legal matter.  Seems reasonable to me.

I myself have watched LA Law, The Practice, and The West Wing.  That makes me an expert in Law As Presented On TV.

Edited May 11, 2017 by PeterPirate

[RealReality]

8 minutes ago, PeterPirate said:

Iirc, the tape was not being used to provide evidence about the Mesa Verde case in particular, but only to show that Jimmy was motivated by the desire to destroy evidence related to a legal matter.  

I myself have watched LA Law, The Practice, and The West Wing.  That makes me an expert in the Law As Presented On TV.

 

I can't accept your bona fides as a TV Law Expert until you've watched all L&O seasons with Lennie Briscoe.  ;)

[ghoulina]

2 hours ago, seasquared said:

On a different note, Chuck asked Jimmy if he should have the dinner with Rebecca with the wedding ring on or off. Jimmy says "off." I've only watched once, but am I correct in stating that Chuck ended up wearing the ring? Further illustrating Chuck's need to be superior over Jimmy and knowing what's best.

Oooooh, interesting. I didn't notice. Now I want to go back and check. 

[ShadowFacts]

12 minutes ago, RealReality said:

Not at all, anyone who "works in the legal field" should be familiar with the term.  However, sua sponte  doesn't refer to an opinion but to an issue.  OK, so what you're contending is based more on what you think is right than any rule.  First off, any decision the hearing board made on Chuck would be ripe for appeal and abuse of discretion.  Just because someone has a mental disorder doesn't mean that they cannot ethically practice law.  Just because they taped a conversation and elicited an admission doesn't mean that they cannot ethically practice law.  Protecting clients paperwork, maybe, but I couldn't really see that being the basis for trying to admonish Chuck because whether he kept the files secure is open to interpretation.....his house was locked (secured) and Jimmy only got to them because he had access to the house, its not like Chuck left the files scattered on the street.  The bar rules are clear that you have to keep client files secure, but not really how you have to accomplish that.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but how secure are client confidential files in a house, even a locked one, where there is no electricity and probably no occupancy permit, if proper inspections happened.  Kerosene lamp was seen in one of Mike's pictures, right?  No smoke detectors, because they have batteries.  No phone to call 911.   I'm not saying he should be disciplined but there might be some basis for the panel to see that he is possibly impaired and could put clients' interests in jeopardy. 

[RealReality]

6 minutes ago, Eulipian 5k said:

I'm still con(te) fused(te). Chuck did not bring this before the Bar because of what was admitted to on the tape; or else he wouldn't have needed the B & E scenario; he could have just brought the tape to the Board. I also thought Howard spoke to him about that when he said he didn't see the usefulness of the tape and then Chuck cooked up the whole, hire a PE, and wait for the break in chicanery.

 

The tape itself couldn't have been used to get the criminal system involved.  He needed the B&E for that.  The B&E also bolsters Chucks case because it shows how much Jimmy needed to cover up what he had admitted to.

[Tikichick]

Was baiting the B&E and not bringing the taped confession to the bar in the first place the actions of a prudent and responsible attorney?

[Eulipian 5k]

Actually, if Chuck's as dastardly as we all feel he is, all of this could have been to get Kimmy's admission to Mesa Verde which may now make Kimmy's friend at MV seek out the tape. But that would only destroy Kimmy and leave Jimmy with his license. And we know from Chuck's statements that he wants Jimmy harmed most of all.

[RealReality]

1 minute ago, Tikichick said:

Was baiting the B&E and not bringing the taped confession to the bar in the first place the actions of a prudent and responsible attorney?

LOL, that has nothing to do with his representation of MV.  Getting one attorney to confess to fraud and deceit is arguably very responsible because it allows the bar to get rid of an attorney that would likely defraud and deceive clients.  As for "baiting the B&E," Chuck isn't responsible for Jimmy breaking in, Jimmy did that of his own accord, after Kim told him not to.  Generally, one party isn't held liable for the intentional acts of another.

[Bryce Lynch]

14 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

Actually sua sponte frequently refers to situations where a court makes a ruling in the course of a proceeding, absent petition to do so, that is why I referenced opinion.

Of course a mental disorder doesn't preclude the ability to practice law, nor did I suggest it.  I do think it likely they take a look at Chuck's actions in the MV case, simply because there is some cause to believe he was rather more focused on his feud with his brother than he was with making sure the client was his priority and the focus of his efforts.

At what point do you believe Chuck might have been more focused on Jimmy than making the client the priority, and what specifically did he do to harm the client, as a result of this focus on the feud?

[Tikichick]

2 minutes ago, RealReality said:

LOL, that has nothing to do with his representation of MV.  Getting one attorney to confess to fraud and deceit is arguably very responsible because it allows the bar to get rid of an attorney that would likely defraud and deceive clients.  As for "baiting the B&E," Chuck isn't responsible for Jimmy breaking in, Jimmy did that of his own accord, after Kim told him not to.  Generally, one party isn't held liable for the intentional acts of another.

Jimmy did what he did of his own accord, absolutely.

As an officer of the court Chuck knowingly set a chain of events in motion with the express purpose of eliciting a felonious act from someone else for his own purposes.  He already had the tape to provide to the bar committee with a complaint about the unethical behavior of Jimmy already -- surely they would have accepted the tape as valid evidence?    

[Bryce Lynch]

1 minute ago, Tikichick said:

Jimmy did what he did of his own accord, absolutely.

As an officer of the court Chuck knowingly set a chain of events in motion with the express purpose of eliciting a felonious act from someone else for his own purposes.  He already had the tape to provide to the bar committee with a complaint about the unethical behavior of Jimmy already -- surely they would have accepted the tape as valid evidence?    

I can't recall, does the ethics panel have any knowledge of the fact that Chuck set a trap for Jimmy to break in to steal/damage/destroy the tape, or as far as they know, did he simply fear that Jimmy would break in, and therefore took the precautions of making a copy, locking up the original and having the PI at his house?  I know he admitted that the space blankets on the walls were a ruse to lure Jimmy into a confession.  But did he admit the other part?

[peeayebee]

I'm not a lawyer, but I object!

 

4 hours ago, seasquared said:

Um, Administrator...could you create a separate topic called "Legally Speaking" so that Tikichick and RealReality can go and hold a moot court on legal definitions????

Here here!

[Bryce Lynch]

1 hour ago, Tikichick said:

Attorneys are referred to as officers of the court.

I know.  But, it is sort of a running gag that the McGills like to make people believe that it means they are some sort of cops.

I believe Jimmy introduced himself as an "officer of the court" when he knocked on Abuelita Salamanca's door.  Chuck tried to intimidate the copy shop guy by saying he was an officer of the court ..as Jimmy warned him Chuck would do 

[ShadowFacts]

1 hour ago, RealReality said:

Why would MV even care?  Like seriously "my brother stole the documents, took them to kinkos and changed the numbers, I didn't make a mistake!" sounds just as nuts as whatever he was saying in the MV hearing.  And would make no difference, the client already had their hearing pushed back, and by the time Chuck got proof Kim already had MV so their files were secure.  Nothing Chuck did made the sabotage any worse.

The tape is open to interpretation, especially since Chuck knows how good slippin' Jimmy is at explaining things.  But you add the fact that he broke into the house, enraged, and pried open the desk drawer with a fire poker and destroyed the tape -- it makes the case even more clear that Jimmy had something to hide.  And it doesn't allow for as much wiggle room, and even if Chuck can't get Jimmy on the tape, he can at least get him on the B&E.

If "my brother stole the documents, took them to kinkos and changed the numbers, I didn't make a mistake!" would sound nutty to MV, can't it sound equally nutty to outside arbiters?  Yes, Jimmy broke in, but I don't think it is clear that Jimmy did it to hide the kinko story, which is nutty.  He confessed to it to calm Chuck down, every detail that Chuck accused him of, because Jimmy takes care of his very weird and needy and demanding brother, and when he finds out his brother has recorded it and intends to use it against him, he gets angry and overreactive.  That doesn't erase the crime, which he has admitted to, but it mitigates it a bit.