S03.E05: Chicanery

[ShadowFacts]

1 hour ago, Tikichick said:

Is it likely MV could have been granted an easier, more immediate mulligan from the banking commission if Chuck had thrown himself on the grenade during the hearing when the transposed numbers came up?  If so, Chuck's conduct was not in the client's best interest, nor do I consider it competent to sacrifice an opportunity for the client to choose to stand on his insistence there was no error on his part.

I thought that was problematic.  If there isn't a canon of ethics that covers trying to blame your client, at the least it is very bad form.  That did not reflect well on HHM.  So now two state regulatory agencies know that Chuck is in some way compromised in his heretofore sterling reputation. 

[SnarkyTart]

I've delayed posting about this episode in the hopes that, with the passage of a little time, I might appreciate it more than I did on initial viewing.  Sadly, not the case.  If anything, I'm more underwhelmed and disappointed than I was on Monday night.  For me, there have been two seasons of Chuck vs Jimmy build-up to the apparent "climax" of the bar hearing.  There have been multiple episodes foreshadowing that the incredibly elaborate, but ultimately fragile, defenses Chuck has constructed for the purpose of avoiding the true nature of his sickness were going to collapse in spectacular fashion.  There have been implications that Chuck's implosion would be due to him being outmaneuvered by Slippin' Jimmy, perhaps combined with the bastard-lawyer skills of Jimmy McGill.   For me, all the build-up and foreshadowing has culminated in an anticlimactic conclusion.  I wanted so much more than this.  I wanted thrills, chills, fireworks...and all I got was a little puff of smoke.  Chuck, after less than 2 minutes of tangential, though hardly unhinged, rambling, is able to completely regain his composure and calmly apologize to the board for having "lost my train of thought" and quietly asking Jimmy, "Do you have anything else?" 

I was also disappointed by what seemed to me a fair amount of wasted plot time to set it all up.  All that time we spent following the story of the Handyman Mike con, fun as that was, its only purpose was to show little 3 X 5 photographs in an album that neither we, Chuck, the gallery, nor the board members, could even see when Jimmy held it up to the open page?  All that time we spent watching Jimmy and Kim finagle the word-change from "destroyed" to "damaged" in the pre-prosecution diversion agreement...because?  All the time we spent watching Kim in the hallway with Chuck and Howard, getting Chuck to reveal there was a copy of the tape, resulting in her triumphantly whispered "bingo!" to Jimmy...because?  All that time we spent watching the cold open flashback of dinner at Chez Chuck, so that Rebecca could show up at the hearing and...do what, exactly?    Ultimately, Jimmy required none of this.  All he needed was a battery slipped into Chuck's pocket.   Meh...and huh?

Thank the gods that, for me at least, last week's episode, "Sabrosito", was off the charts awesome.  Otherwise, I'd become a newly-minted skeptic of the ride the show has planned for me going forward. 

[monagatuna]

5 hours ago, Tikichick said:

Attorneys are referred to as officers of the court.

I've thrown this at my friends a few times and it always stuns them. They've only ever heard "officer of the law," and can't differentiate between the two, since "officer of the court" is never used outside of legal circles. I'm a transactional lawyer who, if I'm lucky, will never see the inside of the courtroom in her career, but the expressions on their faces crack me up.

And oh, how these last few pages have reminded me why I don't socialize with other lawyers outside of work. I never thought BCS would get tiresome, but here we are.

At any rate, I loved this episode. Kinda wish the hammer that dropped would've been a little heavier, but as the final scene showed, Chuck is about to make his exit one way or another.

Holy cinematography, batman.

[shapeshifter]

6 hours ago, Eulipian 5k said:

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.

Destroying Kim would hurt Jimmy more than losing his license—is that what you mean, @Eulipian 5k? If so, good point. And if that is Chuck's end game, it does make him a pretty despicable person, for sure.

 

5 hours ago, axlmadonna said:

Excellent points.

It also occurs to me that Chuck was able to "pretend" to function normally in that MV hearing, even with all the lights on, all the cellphones in the room, the court reporter, etc. There were zero accomodations made for him there because he was hiding his so-called illness from his clients. If he's capable of doing that, of not freaking out in that situation, then why can't he do that all the time? It's one thing to be uncomfortable, it's quite another to melt down simply because someone is talking on a cellphone in your general vicinity or because there's a battery in your pocket. In my opinon, his ability to restrain himself (and even appear perfectly unaffected) when he chooses has always been proof that it wasn't a real, physical ailment.

Perhaps it's proof that it's not "a real, physical ailment," but the jury's still out (pun truly unintended) on whether it's a real, psychological ailment, or on whether he's just a dick. Looking at Chuck's lifestyle, it seems that even if he's a dick, he's also a dick with a real psychological ailment.

[halgia]

16 hours ago, seasquared said:

Um, Administrator...could you create a separate topic called "Legally Speaking"

Good idea; done. I moved a bunch of posts in there, but shoot me a PM if I missed a post / sent one too many and something doesn't make sense anymore.

[RealReality]

11 hours ago, ShadowFacts said:

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. 

 

You could say he got angry and overreactive because it was his brother, but the numbers were wrong, Jimmy admitted to it, Jimmy broke in and destroyed the tape in a rage....any one of these things by themselves may not be enough, but together they tell a story of a guy who admitted, realized it was on tape and broke in to destroy the evidence of the wrongdoing.  Add to that Jimmy's prior history as slippin' Jimmy and it seems more likely that he destroyed the tape to save his skin.  

The changing numbers story sounds less nutty when you have someone admitting to it on tape and then breaking in and destroying the tape.

[Bryce Lynch]

20 minutes ago, RealReality said:

You could say he got angry and overreactive because it was his brother, but the numbers were wrong, Jimmy admitted to it, Jimmy broke in and destroyed the tape in a rage....any one of these things by themselves may not be enough, but together they tell a story of a guy who admitted, realized it was on tape and broke in to destroy the evidence of the wrongdoing.  Add to that Jimmy's prior history as slippin' Jimmy and it seems more likely that he destroyed the tape to save his skin.  

The changing numbers story sounds less nutty when you have someone admitting to it on tape and then breaking in and destroying the tape.

The only evidence of the changing numbers story is the tape.  Other than the tape, there is not a shred of corroborating evidence.  

Jimmy's claim that he said what he said to calm down his mentally disturbed brother seems fairly plausible, especially after Chuck's outburst on the stand.

Now let's assume Kim puts Jimmy on the stand and he tells the board about how he took care of and worried about his big brother and how he idolized him and was so grateful to him.

She asks him about the police tasering him after he stole a newspaper wearing a space blanket, about his trip to the ER where the doctor urged Jimmy to have him committed and about the temporary emergency guardianship.

Now we have a picture of a mentally disturbed older brother and a loving, caring younger brother who will do anything to help the older brother 

IMO, the "Jimmy said whatever he needed to say to talk Chuck off the ledge" story seems at least as plausible as intricate document altering story.

The board needs clear and convincing evidence to disbar Jimmy and I don't think they have it.

He confessed to the breaking and entering, so they split the difference and give him a suspension. Even if by some chance he did cut and paste the numbers, he doesn't get off scot free.  Justice is done and the board goes home happy.

[RealReality]

Just now, Bryce Lynch said:

The only evidence of the changing numbers story is the tape.  Other than the tape, there is not a shred of corroborating evidence.  

Jimmy's claim that he said what he said to calm down his mentally disturbed brother seems fairly plausible, especially after Chuck's outburst on the stand.

Now let's assume Kim puts Jimmy on the stand and he tells the board about how he took care of and worried about his big brother and how he idolized him and was so grateful to him.

She asks him about the police tasering him after he stole a newspaper wearing a space blanket, about his trip to the ER where the doctor urged Jimmy to have him committed and about the temporary emergency guardianship.

Now we have a picture of a mentally disturbed older brother and a loving, caring younger brother who will do anything to help the older brother 

IMO, the "Jimmy said whatever he needed to say to talk Chuck off the ledge" story seems at least as plausible as intricate document altering story.

The board needs clear and convincing evidence to disbar Jimmy and I don't think they have it.

He confessed to the breaking and entering, so they split the difference and give him a suspension. Even if by some chance he did cut and paste the numbers, he doesn't get off scot free.  Justice is done and the board goes home happy.

 

But, in Chucks mind, and likely in the mind of the bar hearing officers before the outburst the narrative makes sense.  

[ShadowFacts]

31 minutes ago, RealReality said:

You could say he got angry and overreactive because it was his brother, but the numbers were wrong, Jimmy admitted to it, Jimmy broke in and destroyed the tape in a rage....any one of these things by themselves may not be enough, but together they tell a story of a guy who admitted, realized it was on tape and broke in to destroy the evidence of the wrongdoing.  Add to that Jimmy's prior history as slippin' Jimmy and it seems more likely that he destroyed the tape to save his skin.  

The changing numbers story sounds less nutty when you have someone admitting to it on tape and then breaking in and destroying the tape.

Does the panel know his prior history as slippin' Jimmy?  Just asking.  Would he have gotten admitted to the bar?  Of course the tape is incriminating, that's why Jimmy took it.  No matter what's on it, or how believable it is, he did wrong by breaking in and has admitted to it.  And it will be off his record in a year.  And did not involve a client.  Feuding brothers.  If I were on the panel I wouldn't totally believe either of them.  Reprimand, anger management, maybe brief suspension for Jimmy, and referral to lawyer assistance program for Chuck who may be impaired in his judgment. 

[Bryce Lynch]

7 minutes ago, RealReality said:

But, in Chucks mind, and likely in the mind of the bar hearing officers before the outburst the narrative makes sense.  

Which narrative?  If you mean Chuck's, I would argue that, while it is true, to an impartial observer, Jimmy's narrative would make at least as much sense as Chuck's.

Try to imagine that they never showed the montage of Jimmy in the copy shop.  I think Chuck's accusation would seem wildly paranoid.  Jimmy's confession to an apparently unhinged Chuck would make me wonder if Jimmy really did it, but I would still have a lot of doubt.

Edited May 12, 2017 by Bryce Lynch

[RealReality]

1 minute ago, ShadowFacts said:

Does the panel know his prior history as slippin' Jimmy?  Just asking.  Would he have gotten admitted to the bar?  Of course the tape is incriminating, that's why Jimmy took it.  No matter what's on it, or how believable it is, he did wrong by breaking in and has admitted to it.  And it will be off his record in a year.  And did not involve a client.  Feuding brothers.  If I were on the panel I wouldn't totally believe either of them.  Reprimand, anger management, maybe brief suspension for Jimmy, and referral to lawyer assistance program for Chuck who may be impaired in his judgment. 

 

Most states will ask if you've ever been arrested, even if it didn't result in a conviction and you have to explain what happened.  The bar will make its determination from there.  It can be sticky.  I'm licensed in California and I am probably the most boring person I know.....my background check took nearly 10 months, and I had to explain why there was a slight discrepancy between my law school application and my resume/application for admission to the bar.  And these were honest mistakes...so I would imagine they ask more questions for an arrest, but they should know about it.  

If you believe the tape though, his B&E is viewed in a whole different light.  Not just as a scuffle between brothers, but as a guy trying to cover up his wrongdoing.  

I think if I were on the panel, I'd believe Jimmy too, even though his detailed explanation of doing everything for Kim seems pretty damning that whole "well do you feel better now?" would sway me, in light of Chucks outburst on the stand.  Or I'd at least have enough questions about it that I wouldn't be able to really tip the scales one way or the other.  

As for Chuck, I don't think he has shown any legal impairment of judgment that would rise to the level of needing a referral.  He has given competent counsel, and while he has been an asshole, he has been right.  He isn't a drunk attorney who is being messy, at worst he made one clerical error that any attorney could make and became an asshole about it.

[RealReality]

8 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

Which narrative?

That Jimmy admitted to a forgery he did on tape.  Then to cover up the forgery, he broke into Chucks house to destroy the tape, thereby destroying evidence of his wrongdoing in an ongoing effort to make sure that his forgery never came to light.  That dastardly narrative makes sense before you consider that its possible Jimmy was just saying whatever to get Chuck to calm the hell down.

[PeterPirate]

16 hours 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.  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.

 

16 hours ago, RealReality said:

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

But wasn't Lennie a cop, not a lawyer?

Ha! How about that, Mr. Fung?

[Tatum]

1 hour ago, Bryce Lynch said:

The only evidence of the changing numbers story is the tape.  Other than the tape, there is not a shred of corroborating evidence.  

Jimmy's claim that he said what he said to calm down his mentally disturbed brother seems fairly plausible, especially after Chuck's outburst on the stand.

 

I wonder about this. I think Jimmy and Kim made a clear case that Chuck is mentally ill, and that Jimmy, by his track record of caring for Chuck, likely would say anything, including admitting to a felony, if he thought it would help Chuck. And Chuck certainly did himself no favors on the stand.

 

However, the tape is incriminating. And I don't mean because Jimmy confessed. His ranting about how Kim deserved the MV account, she worked for it, while Howard and Chuck were sipping martinis (or whatever the drink was) and how, most importantly, Jimmy thought Chuck would just assume he made the error, like a normal person, that all strikes me as the kind of thing a guilty person would say while confessing. It did not sound to me like the confession of someone who's just going along with Chuck to placate him. Now, that's very subjective and if Chuck can say he was merely "acting", then Jimmy can as well. But I would still think anyone who listened to that tape would find it likely Jimmy actually did do it. And perhaps that won't be enough, in light of Chuck torching himself on the witness stand. But in conjunction with Jimmy blatantly disregarding the cell phone rules and planting a battery on Chuck- even if it was just to prove a point and no one was physically harmed- I would expect some serious consequences from the bar association.

 

Way off topic, but is Howard's father still alive? Is he still working?

[Bryce Lynch]

9 minutes ago, Tatum said:

I wonder about this. I think Jimmy and Kim made a clear case that Chuck is mentally ill, and that Jimmy, by his track record of caring for Chuck, likely would say anything, including admitting to a felony, if he thought it would help Chuck. And Chuck certainly did himself no favors on the stand.

 

However, the tape is incriminating. And I don't mean because Jimmy confessed. His ranting about how Kim deserved the MV account, she worked for it, while Howard and Chuck were sipping martinis (or whatever the drink was) and how, most importantly, Jimmy thought Chuck would just assume he made the error, like a normal person, that all strikes me as the kind of thing a guilty person would say while confessing. It did not sound to me like the confession of someone who's just going along with Chuck to placate him. Now, that's very subjective and if Chuck can say he was merely "acting", then Jimmy can as well. But I would still think anyone who listened to that tape would find it likely Jimmy actually did do it. And perhaps that won't be enough, in light of Chuck torching himself on the witness stand. But in conjunction with Jimmy blatantly disregarding the cell phone rules and planting a battery on Chuck- even if it was just to prove a point and no one was physically harmed- I would expect some serious consequences from the bar association.

 

Way off topic, but is Howard's father still alive? Is he still working?

Jimmy going on about how he did if for Kim is clearly the biggest obstacle to Jimmy's "I said it to my crazy brother down" defense.  I think his argument would be, that to be be convincing he had to add details like that.  (As Skyler White will tell you, when selling a story, the devil is in the details).   Chuck admitted to similar tactics in exaggerating his condition to lure Jimmy into the confession, so it isn't totally far fetched.  

If I were on the board, I would probably not know what to think, but with that much doubt, I'd vote to just suspend Jimmy for the breaking and entering and so on, rather than risk disbarring and innocent man.  Jimmy's explanation might be a bit far fetched, but so is Chuck's accustion of an elaborate cut and past scheme.  If there was any other evidence of the cut and paste scheme, it would be a different story.  I think Chuck's ranting about "One more than the Magna Carta" only made it worse.  

Edited May 12, 2017 by Bryce Lynch

[Tatum]

28 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

If I were on the board, I would probably not know what to think, but with that much doubt, I'd vote to just suspend Jimmy for the breaking and entering and so on, rather than risk disbarring and innocent man. 

It's a tough call, and I wish Jimmy and Kim had spoken more to the character of Jimmy than kept the focus on Chuck and his Jimmy witch hunt. I think it would have been helpful to point out that Jimmy left a lucrative position at a major firm, where he was being partner-tracked, with a ton of perks, in order to focus on affordable elderly law, in a way he could not at the firm. The clients love Jimmy, and he's done a lot for them. Kim really only briefly alluded to that when she said the law profession needed people like Jimmy. I think that, combined with the years he spent taking care of Chuck, would do the most to convince the association that Jimmy actually does possess a strong moral code and is totally fit to be a lawyer. But it seemed like all they really wanted to do was discredit Chuck. I know why they did, I just don't see why they couldn't have done both.

[Tatum]

On 5/10/2017 at 2:54 PM, ghoulina said:

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. 

 

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. 

 

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 always got the impression that despite his exasperation with him, Howard rather liked Jimmy, and would have allowed him a position in the firm if not for Chuck. If Jimmy got out of line, Howard could always stick him in the dungeon doing doc review like he did whenever he felt snitty with Kim.

 

I wonder if we'll ever get any Kim flashbacks. I wish they would give her more of a backstory. She's one of my favorite supporting characters.

[Bryce Lynch]

25 minutes ago, Tatum said:

It's a tough call, and I wish Jimmy and Kim had spoken more to the character of Jimmy than kept the focus on Chuck and his Jimmy witch hunt. I think it would have been helpful to point out that Jimmy left a lucrative position at a major firm, where he was being partner-tracked, with a ton of perks, in order to focus on affordable elderly law, in a way he could not at the firm. The clients love Jimmy, and he's done a lot for them. Kim really only briefly alluded to that when she said the law profession needed people like Jimmy. I think that, combined with the years he spent taking care of Chuck, would do the most to convince the association that Jimmy actually does possess a strong moral code and is totally fit to be a lawyer. But it seemed like all they really wanted to do was discredit Chuck. I know why they did, I just don't see why they couldn't have done both.

The defense has not even started making its case.  I think bringing up his care for Chuck and his elder law practice, would be helpful, but bringing up him leaving Davis & Main would be very bad for Jimmy, as his time there is not something the defense would want to discuss.  Remember how quickly Kim shut down Howard when he brought up D&M?

[Tatum]

6 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

The defense has not even started making its case.  I think bringing up his care for Chuck and his elder law practice, would be helpful, but bringing up him leaving Davis & Main would be very bad for Jimmy, as his time there is not something the defense would want to discuss.  Remember how quickly Kim shut down Howard when he brought up D&M?

True, but I thought Jimmy could spin it that D&M were more concerned about their reputation amongst their existing clientele rather than reaching out to the thousands of people who had been victimized by the shady retirement home, and that was one of the reasons he had to leave. But you're probably right, that was a can of worms best not opened. I had forgotten that the defense hadn't even started yet.

[Auntie Anxiety]

I think the Board of Bar Overseers will decide this is more of a domestic dispute than anything else and give them both warnings (if that is such a thing). No one in the universe wants to get involved in trying to figure out who is right or wrong in this kind of a family feud. It's just too messy. Of course, Chuck would be outraged if he ended up being warned by the BBO because he is an insufferable twit who really IS right about what Jimmy is capable of but he's also mentally ill; would anyone hire him to represent them if they know he has sewn space blankets into the lining of his suits? Jimmy has less at stake. His elderly clients wouldn't care about anything Jimmy had done because they love him so much. It would be to both brothers' advantage to just keep this whole affair under wraps.

[Jextella]

14 hours ago, SnarkyTart said:

I've delayed posting about this episode in the hopes that, with the passage of a little time, I might appreciate it more than I did on initial viewing.  Sadly, not the case.  If anything, I'm more underwhelmed and disappointed than I was on Monday night.  For me, there have been two seasons of Chuck vs Jimmy build-up to the apparent "climax" of the bar hearing.  There have been multiple episodes foreshadowing that the incredibly elaborate, but ultimately fragile, defenses Chuck has constructed for the purpose of avoiding the true nature of his sickness were going to collapse in spectacular fashion.  There have been implications that Chuck's implosion would be due to him being outmaneuvered by Slippin' Jimmy, perhaps combined with the bastard-lawyer skills of Jimmy McGill.   For me, all the build-up and foreshadowing has culminated in an anticlimactic conclusion.  I wanted so much more than this.  I wanted thrills, chills, fireworks...and all I got was a little puff of smoke.  Chuck, after less than 2 minutes of tangential, though hardly unhinged, rambling, is able to completely regain his composure and calmly apologize to the board for having "lost my train of thought" and quietly asking Jimmy, "Do you have anything else?" 

I was also disappointed by what seemed to me a fair amount of wasted plot time to set it all up.  All that time we spent following the story of the Handyman Mike con, fun as that was, its only purpose was to show little 3 X 5 photographs in an album that neither we, Chuck, the gallery, nor the board members, could even see when Jimmy held it up to the open page?  All that time we spent watching Jimmy and Kim finagle the word-change from "destroyed" to "damaged" in the pre-prosecution diversion agreement...because?  All the time we spent watching Kim in the hallway with Chuck and Howard, getting Chuck to reveal there was a copy of the tape, resulting in her triumphantly whispered "bingo!" to Jimmy...because?  All that time we spent watching the cold open flashback of dinner at Chez Chuck, so that Rebecca could show up at the hearing and...do what, exactly?    Ultimately, Jimmy required none of this.  All he needed was a battery slipped into Chuck's pocket.   Meh...and huh?

Thank the gods that, for me at least, last week's episode, "Sabrosito", was off the charts awesome.  Otherwise, I'd become a newly-minted skeptic of the ride the show has planned for me going forward. 

I have to agree with some of this.   Breaking Bad had a really slow start for me.  BCS did too.  The 3rd season is where things got crazy in the former and I'm not seeing the crazy with the latter.   Although it's creeping in slowly with Huell, the secretary (both of whom I adore and am glad they were asked back!).

I hope things get super dramatic soon.  They must in order to move us from Jimmy to Saul.

The chicken vs. egg question is super interesting to me.  I think what we know now is Jimmy decided to be a wolf (not a sheep) because he did not want to turn out like his father and get taken advantage of.  If you can't fight it, join it, I guess.   That seems to be the FIRST and most important turning point in all of this.  Chuck being cognizant of his brother's behavior and of the fact that his parents favored Jimmy over him (especially given that he was stealing from them) is turning point TWO.   I'm not sure we'll ever know if Chuck refused to give Jimmy a job at HHM because of jealously or fear of Jimmy being an attorney, but he's got grounds on both points so I don't think it matters much.

At this juncture, I'd say Chuck was dealt a shitty hand early on and it's continued into adulthood.   I think at this point, I've sort of been on his side in all this as a result. When he took to harming others (namely Kim) as a means of getting back at Jimmy is where I jumped to the other side.

I think that is maybe one of the biggest differences between the two brothers.  Jimmy doesn't seem like he'd harm a flea.  In his eyes, his misdeeds have negligible consequences and are done in order to make a living and/or help others.  Chuck, on the other hand, wouldn't think twice to bring others down even the nicest of the nice - in order to follow the letter of the law.

In a way, neither is "bad" at the core....just different in how their perceptions of the greater good play out. And both are short-sighted because in the end, the behavior of both is far more detrimental to themselves and others than originally intended.

Edited May 12, 2017 by Jextella

[smartymarty]

My guess is that Jimmy's sanction will be to practice under the supervision of another attorney, and that attorney will be Kim. That happens IRL.

What might happen worse is that the panel will recommend an inquiry into Chuck's fitness to practice law. If he's disbarred, he'd still need to be bought out of his partnership in HHM (unless their contract says "unless disbarred" for some reason), which is something HHM either does not want to do or does not have the funds to do. So both Chuck and HHM could suffer great consequences here.

Also, did Jimmy's "con" in the ethics proceeding depend on Chuck opening the phone to find no battery?

[Jextella]

I thought it was interesting that during the disbarment hearing, Jimmy brought up the fact that he is responsible for Chuck.  I'm curious how that plays out over at HHM if Chuck continues to spiral downward.  We know what happens to Jimmy because of BCS, but I'm really curious to see what happens to Chuck, Kim, and also Howard (who I think is great).

[Tatum]

27 minutes ago, Jextella said:

At this juncture, I'd say Chuck was dealt a shitty hand early on and it's continued into adulthood.   I think at this point, I've sort of been on his side in all this as a result. When he took to harming others (namely Kim) as a means of getting back at Jimmy is where I jumped to the other side.

I think that is maybe one of the biggest differences between the two brothers.  Jimmy doesn't seem like he'd harm a flea.  In his eyes, his misdeeds have negligible consequences and are done in order to make a living and/or help others.  Chuck, on the other hand, wouldn't think twice to bring others down even the nicest of the nice - in order to follow the letter of the law.

In a way, neither is "bad" at the core....just different in how their perceptions of the greater good play out. And both are short-sighted because in the end, the behavior of both is far more detrimental to themselves and others than originally intended.

 

That's a really good point. Chuck can't help it that he's uncharismatic and boring. But if, in his early days, he always did the right thing, including a lot of the work in raising his more popular younger brother, I can see where is resentment would grow.

 

And absolutely agree that while some of the things he's done with Jimmy are understandable (like blocking him from HHM), going after Kim to hurt Jimmy was a line in the sand for me. It's like Chuck thinks anyone who cares about Jimmy deserves what they get.

[PeterPirate]

I see a settlement between the brothers. I can't imagine that the panel will come up with the idea of a name change on their own. 

[monagatuna]

10 minutes ago, PeterPirate said:

I see a settlement between the brothers. I can't imagine that the panel will come up with the idea of a name change on their own. 

I agree. Ever since Chuck suggested Jimmy start a new firm called "Vanguard" or whatever it was obvious that Chuck cares more about protecting his own reputation as it relates to the law. Yes, he sees the law as sacred, but he's shrewd enough to know he's kinda screwed with the bar panel at this point. He'll offer a compromise, Jimmy will be defeated and tired of fighting, and go, "sure, fine, s'all good, man."

Jimmy definitely would not be able to change his name and continue practicing after disbarment--I've seen that theory thrown around a bit. Changing your name leaves an easily found paper trail, unless you're in witness protection. The bar would be on that like flies on poo. A disbarment is not gonna happen.

[Jextella]

40 minutes ago, monagatuna said:

I agree. Ever since Chuck suggested Jimmy start a new firm called "Vanguard" or whatever it was obvious that Chuck cares more about protecting his own reputation as it relates to the law. Yes, he sees the law as sacred, but he's shrewd enough to know he's kinda screwed with the bar panel at this point. He'll offer a compromise, Jimmy will be defeated and tired of fighting, and go, "sure, fine, s'all good, man."

Jimmy definitely would not be able to change his name and continue practicing after disbarment--I've seen that theory thrown around a bit. Changing your name leaves an easily found paper trail, unless you're in witness protection. The bar would be on that like flies on poo. A disbarment is not gonna happen.

Agreed.  A name change means nothing on paper near as I can tell. His only clients are elders, right?  I'm guessing he loses that base of clients and needs a fresh start and changes his name as a simple marketing tool - one done out of necessity.   Me thinks things are gonna get very dark for Jimmy in order to get to Saul.  

Edited May 12, 2017 by Jextella

[ShadowFacts]

39 minutes ago, monagatuna said:

Jimmy definitely would not be able to change his name and continue practicing after disbarment--I've seen that theory thrown around a bit. Changing your name leaves an easily found paper trail, unless you're in witness protection. The bar would be on that like flies on poo. A disbarment is not gonna happen.

I have said that I hope we see no more of the courtroom drama, that they put a good end on it with the closing scene of Chuck and the exit sign.  Plus too much courtroom is not what I'm in for.  In addition to that, though, I think if Jimmy puts on a defense, then all kinds of questioning can happen about how the photos of Chuck's house came into being, what's the deal with hiring Huell to plant a device on Chuck, Jimmy's Chicago background if he didn't reveal it on his bar application, in short, all of his chicanery.  Best to leave it alone and just have a pithy closing statement.

1 hour ago, Auntie Anxiety said:

I think the Board of Bar Overseers will decide this is more of a domestic dispute than anything else and give them both warnings (if that is such a thing). No one in the universe wants to get involved in trying to figure out who is right or wrong in this kind of a family feud. It's just too messy. Of course, Chuck would be outraged if he ended up being warned by the BBO because he is an insufferable twit who really IS right about what Jimmy is capable of but he's also mentally ill; would anyone hire him to represent them if they know he has sewn space blankets into the lining of his suits? Jimmy has less at stake. His elderly clients wouldn't care about anything Jimmy had done because they love him so much. It would be to both brothers' advantage to just keep this whole affair under wraps.

I think so, too.  Chuck should have kept himself out of it, and let the board find out about Jimmy's confession and PPD in the usual way, chips fall where they may.

40 minutes ago, monagatuna said:

Jimmy definitely would not be able to change his name and continue practicing after disbarment--I've seen that theory thrown around a bit. Changing your name leaves an easily found paper trail, unless you're in witness protection. The bar would be on that like flies on poo. A disbarment is not gonna happen.

It also could never happen because he has been high profile -- his commercials, he's well-known at the courthouse by prosecutors and judges, his firm that he worked at in Santa Fe.  A paper trail wouldn't be needed.

[Eulipian 5k]

40 minutes ago, ShadowFacts said:

I think so, too.  Chuck should have kept himself out of it, and let the board find out about Jimmy's confession and PPD in the usual way, chips fall where they may.

Earlier they showed Chuck saying that that may only result in temporary action against Jimmy and that he wanted to assure Jimmy loses his license. Chuck is not a half measures kinda guy, reminds me of a certain door repair person.

[Dobian]

19 hours ago, SnarkyTart said:

I've delayed posting about this episode in the hopes that, with the passage of a little time, I might appreciate it more than I did on initial viewing.  Sadly, not the case.  If anything, I'm more underwhelmed and disappointed than I was on Monday night.... I wanted so much more than this.  I wanted thrills, chills, fireworks...and all I got was a little puff of smoke. 

I don't think of BCS as a fireworks kind of show, and I rather like the mundane way that things often play out.  I get what you're saying that there were a lot of elaborate machinations when in the end it just came down to a simple slip-something-in-the-pocket trick.  I also still don't get what Kim was saying "Bingo" about.  Yes, they made a copy of the tape, which they acknowledged and played themselves at the hearing.  Maybe she thought that making the copy bolstered an entrapment argument?  Or maybe she wanted the confession played so they could argue that Jimmy was just trying to talk Chuck down from a bad place?  Don't know.  I don't think the scene was perfect, but I thought that Chuck's meltdown and Jimmy's reaction captured the truth about their relationship that had been hidden for too long by Chuck's outward mentorship of his younger brother.  The payoff was satisfying for me because I wasn't looking for Chuck's demise, I just wanted him to come clean about how he really feels toward Jimmy, which is more complicated than simple hatred and covers the whole range of anger, resentment, jealousy, disappointment, and blame.

Quote

At this juncture, I'd say Chuck was dealt a shitty hand early on and it's continued into adulthood.   I think at this point, I've sort of been on his side in all this as a result. When he took to harming others (namely Kim) as a means of getting back at Jimmy is where I jumped to the other side.

I get Chuck, I really do.  I can picture him following Jimmy into the living room and his parents beaming at Jimmy, "Hello, Jimmy boy!", then looking at Chuck..."Oh, dinner's ready...Chuck."  Chuck the overachiever, straight A's, student body president, editor of the school paper, but just generally unlikable no matter how hard he tries.  Then you have Jimmy, boyish, charming, everyone loves him at the Christmas party but Chuck's the one who sees him spiking the punch bowl.  Grrrrrrrr.  So yes, I get Chuck.  I don't like him, but I get him.

Edited May 12, 2017 by Dobian

[Clanstarling]

2 hours ago, Dobian said:

 I also still don't get what Kim was saying "Bingo" about.  Yes, they made a copy of the tape, which they acknowledged and played themselves at the hearing.  Maybe she thought that making the copy bolstered an entrapment argument?  Or maybe she wanted the confession played so they could argue that Jimmy was just trying to talk Chuck down from a bad place? 

I didn't either, but after reading here, I think it was because if there was a tape, and it got played, then they lay the groundwork to bring up Chuck's state of mind. Which, since this was a bar hearing concerning Jimmy's actions ("Chuck's not on trial" was said more than once, I believe), the actual tape was their only way into getting testimony on Chuck's contributory behavior.

Am I in the ballpark, legal eagles?

[Auntie Anxiety]

I'm not a legal eagle, but I'm pretty sure that "Bingo!" was about Chuck having the original, which would have meant that he was planning to use it at the hearing and that it would be the ticket into a discussion about Chuck's psychosomatic infirmity. Jimmy, knowing Chuck so well, figured it would be the entrance ramp onto the Provoke Chuck Enough So He Becomes Unhinged Highway, which would muddy the waters for the Overseers.

My guess about Chuck is that he had a persnickety temperament as a child and would be a buzzkill whenever the rest of the family was having a good time. Maybe he would be the backseat driver ("The speed limit is 40 and you're going 45!!!!!") or the kid who wouldn't let his parents lie about his age to get a cheaper movie ticket. He was probably the self-appointed fun police.

[DrSpaceman73]

On ‎5‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 10:04 AM, Bryce Lynch said:

It might be more difficult than it should be for people with legitimate disabilities, but it is way too easy for scammers who know how to game the system.  A few year back it was discovered that over 90% of Long Island Railroad employees were retiring on "disability" on top of their already generous pensions.

The statistics show that a greatly increasing percentage of disability recipients suffer from unprovable/disprovable ailments like "back pain" and "mental illness", as opposed to clear, provable disabilities.  

Most doctors would agree with this, if you ask them honestly.  I certainly agree with it.

It is much easier to gain disability benefits for diagnosis often largely based on subjective, rather than objective, symptoms and findings now than it has been in the past. 

But that does not mean life is easy or easier for those with disabilities.  It just means some people are getting better at scamming the system for money. 

ANd its a huge problem.  It takes away money for people with more objective disabilities and clogs up the system for those in more need of assistance. 

This is why what Chuck is doing is just as wrong and dishonest as anything Jimmy has done so far. 

Certainly though I am not saying its as bad as assisting a meth dealer to kill multiple people and create the biggest meth production system in the southwest, as we know happens in the future for Jimmy.

[smorbie]

On 5/8/2017 at 11:25 PM, ketose said:

So, Chuck started going crazy after the divorce. The divorce apparently happened before Jimmy passed the bar because Rebecca and Chuck had never discussed it. So, was it a combination of the divorce and Jimmy freeing himself from Chuck's control that made him incapable of working? I can't remember if Chuck was normal the day Jimmy said he was a lawyer.

I assume that Jimmy won't lose his license, but the State Bar probably won't let him off too lightly. The big question is when Jimmy becomes Saul.

I have always thought Jimmy's decision to to transform into Saul would be his own, not something Chuck pushed him into doing.  I still think that.  I believe Jimmy will see that as ridding himself of any vestige of the brother he loved so much.

On 5/8/2017 at 11:25 PM, Knuckles said:

Kim, though, in that conversation with the other woman lawyer, I think that was foreshadowing that blowback from the hearing is going to impact her. Badly.

Yeah, I think Kim and Howard are both going to be collateral damage from the war of the McGills.  She's long gone by the time we meet Saul in BB.

[smorbie]

On 5/8/2017 at 11:46 PM, ridethemaverick said:

Still a good episode though. I can see Howard faltering so I think it's only a matter of time before he turns on Chuck

I would love to see that happen because I don't really think Howard has a spine.

On 5/9/2017 at 0:32 AM, acid burn said:

See, I read that (and Jimmy slinking down in his chair) as Jimmy acting, just like he was when he "apologized" to Chuck in the diversion meeting.  

They are probably both true.  But Jimmy was always devoted to Chuck, always.  And I know his heart was broken over what he had to do.

But Chuck was never going to let Jimmy be.  If he got his disbarred, he would still try to do something else.  He's mad at Jimmy because Jimmy was born.

[ketose]

So, we know Saul Goodman is a criminal lawyer, but how successful was he? He operated out of a strip mall and he seemed to have a lot of personal injury cases. However, he seemed to be a genius at working the system to protect criminal enterprises. Was Walter White his only big money client? Was Saul rich? Maybe he was just putting up a front with the low rent legal office, but maybe he wasn't even a success at being a shady lawyer.

[smorbie]

On 5/9/2017 at 1:03 AM, J-Man said:

I guess I'm not clear on how the battery affected Chuck (or was supposed to, anyway)-- didn't he say he was only affected by devices that were drawing power? A battery that's not inside of a device wouldn't be generating any power or electrical energy, would it?

No, it's generating power.  He couldn't open the pack of batteries he bought for his tape player.  He had to have poor, tragic Ernie open and insert them.

On 5/9/2017 at 1:11 AM, Saulter Whiteman said:

I got way too excited when I saw Heull lol having him plant that on Chuck was such a nice callback to Breaking Bad and it made perfect sense given Jimmy's angle. Such awesome writing. The flashback was great too! Seeing Jimmy and Chuck work together as Chuck lies is a bit ironic and I love how they cut on the line about Jimmy not telling her. Left me thinking, "oh yes he will" lol I honestly feel bad for Chuck in a way. When he was talking about how Jimmy misuses the law, he's really not entirely wrong. It's arguably that without Saul, Walter White may have never grown as powerful as he did. I really love this show.

That's part of it. Chuck is right, but Chuck is wrong.  Jimmy is right, but Jimmy is wrong. Well, we know what happens to Jimmy.  He gets his comeuppance big time.  But Chuck doesn't need to get away with it either.

I agree with the reviewer when he said Slippin Jimmy is nothing compared to Slippery Chuck.

[smorbie]

On 5/9/2017 at 1:22 AM, Quilt Fairy said:

I am continuing to find it unbelievable that everyone treats Chuck like his shit don't stink. Is it likely that the Bar Association would make accommodations like that for someone with a self-diagnosed disability?

I do, however, like Jimmy's logic to the board: "Chuck lied to me about how bad he was feeling and I lied to him to make him feel better. So who are you going to believe?"

 

I don't think it's a façade.  One thing that's been clear through all of this is that Jimmy really does love Chuck and more than anything wants his approbation.

It's heartbreaking, isn't it?

On 5/9/2017 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?

It was a factor and it certainly became a big thing.  But I think Chuck's problem with Jimmy likely started the day mom and dad brought home the new baby.

[smorbie]

On 5/9/2017 at 4:29 AM, Pannekoeker said:

So why did Jimmy bring Rebecca into this at all ?

Why was she needed to expose Chuck, couldn't it have been without here ? I don't really see the point , can anyone explain ?

There are probably a lot of deeper reasons, but the easiest one is that it rattled Chuck to have her there.  It exposed his mental illness to the person he tried to hide it from the most, and the one he still loves. 

[Auntie Anxiety]

4 minutes ago, ketose said:

 

So, we know Saul Goodman is a criminal lawyer, but how successful was he? He operated out of a strip mall and he seemed to have a lot of personal injury cases. However, he seemed to be a genius at working the system to protect criminal enterprises. Was Walter White his only big money client? Was Saul rich? Maybe he was just putting up a front with the low rent legal office, but maybe he wasn't even a success at being a shady lawyer.

 

Because Saul handled cases brought to him by shady characters, he could charge them a lot of money or ask for high retainer fees. He also handled personal injury cases in which he would get a percentage of the settlement. His talent was his ability to find loopholes and use them to exert pressure on the "offending" party. His reputation as a clown show made him that much more successful because his opponents would discount him. He was never going to attract white collar businessmen or upstanding corporations to be his clientele. He would probably find that kind of work very restricting and not a good match for his skill set anyway.

[smorbie]

On 5/9/2017 at 7:53 AM, Bryce Lynch said:

I loved how Chuck compared his condition to AIDS during the hearing and Jimmy to the Unabomber during his rehearsal. Hyperbole much, Chuck? :)

I loved the Unabomber reference, too.  But I love my brother....

[ketose]

I have some knowledge on electronics and electromagnetism and the rules of Chuck's illness are largely invented by Chuck. A space blanket would do nothing for EM, for example. You would need a Faraday cage. You can build one with wire mesh, but it would have to be completely unbroken, with no openings for doors or windows. It seems more like Chuck has an aversion to modern technology. Perhaps his encyclopedic knowledge of law was being replaced by computer searches and it made him view technology as an enemy.

[smorbie]

On 5/9/2017 at 8:54 AM, ghoulina said:

I feel the same way. I can see little Jimmy knicking a few dollars here and there, but I cannot see him taking enough from his own father to cause a bankruptcy. Jimmy is shady, to be certain, but this show has shown us just how loyal Jimmy is to family. No matter how shitty Chuck was to Jimmy, he still came running when Chuck needed him. I just cannot reconcile that Jimmy with a guy who would financially ruin his own father. 

The first season highlighted Jimmy's love and loyalty to Chuck.  Remember the killer days, begging for clients at the courthouse sunup to sundown, a little comedy relief arguing with Mike about stickers, and then shopping and caring for Chuck, sometimes all night?  That man really loves his brother.  And I'm sure it really hurt him having to expose Chuck's illness and evil.

[PeterPirate]

1 minute ago, smorbie said:

The first season highlighted Jimmy's love and loyalty to Chuck.  Remember the killer days, begging for clients at the courthouse sunup to sundown, a little comedy relief arguing with Mike about stickers, and then shopping and caring for Chuck, sometimes all night?  That man really loves his brother.  And I'm sure it really hurt him having to expose Chuck's illness and evil.

Yeah, but it didn't stop him from doing so in order to cover up his own criminality.

Edited May 13, 2017 by PeterPirate

[ketose]

2 minutes ago, PeterPirate said:

Yeah, but it didn't stop him from doing so in order to cover up his own criminality.

Maybe, but I think he was also trying to stop any damage to Kim's relationship to MV.

[smorbie]

On 5/9/2017 at 10:38 AM, Eulipian 5k said:

I liked how Kim set up the entire framework of the case,

• Yes Jimmy did all these things he said in the PPD (nothing confessed to about Mesa Verde)
• But, the Bar should see this as a family argument between brothers that is being used to disbar a lawyer
• The motive to disbar is to spite, not out of respect for the law
• Chuck hates Jimmy  - that was her conclusion, and it was proven by the outburst
• And she got the leeway that was essential to Jimmy's whole line of questioning

Chuck had conceded that the Bar might slap a temporary disbarment but wanted permanent disbarment. The Bar has to realize that this chicanery by Chuck is really a matter that should have remained out of court and certainly not an issue for the bar. They simply can't sanction this level of vindictiveness as a pre-text for weeding out Jimmy and keeping an A-hole like Chuck as a paramount of the Law profession.

Like other posters though I don't think they tied up the "Bingo" from last week.

The "bingo" was because Jimmy and Kim had to know for sure a duplicate tape existed so it could be played in court.  

[smorbie]

On 5/9/2017 at 11:19 AM, Ottis said:

. But even so, if Chuck is as good a lawyer as he thinks he is, I don't believe he would have lost it that way over what we saw. That's another reason why I thought, if the situations were reversed, Jimmy would have handled it better. Of course, Chuck's mental illness around being in control of those around him may have been the trigger. Still pondering that.

Chuck also lost it at the Mesa Verde hearing when the error was discovered.  He is mentally ill and a jerk.  Which one is driving the bus now doesn't really matter.  They are both on display.

[smorbie]

On 5/9/2017 at 2:00 PM, DrSpaceman73 said:

I was going to say the same thing about the cause of all this.  HHM really didn't NEED the mesa verde account.  In fact they would have had no idea about it without Kim in the first place, she just kind of handed it to them when she worked at the firm.  They could have lost it easily and the firm would have been fine. 

Yes, but then Jimmy would have had it, and Chuck couldn't allow that.

Edited May 13, 2017 by smorbie

[Auntie Anxiety]

7 minutes ago, smorbie said:

Yes, but the Jimmy would have had it, and Chuck couldn't allow that.

And Chuck would have lied to himself about why Jimmy couldn't have had it, saying it was because Jimmy wasn't a good lawyer and that he played hard and fast with the rules, never admitting to himself that it was all really a case of too much pride and his inability to stop playing the zero-sum game with Jimmy.

[Clanstarling]

1 hour ago, smorbie said:

Yeah, I think Kim and Howard are both going to be collateral damage from the war of the McGills.  She's long gone by the time we meet Saul in BB.

Though I think you're absolutely right about the collateral damage, I think there's wiggle room for Kim to be around even into the BB era. Saul wasn't really a POV character, we didn't see any of his personal life. While it's highly likely they've since cut ties, if the show runners wanted to, they could make a case for her being around in some way.

Anyway, I hope she's around long enough to find out about her early life, and the hints they've given that she may have had the tendency to break a little bad herself.