S02.E21: Reckless

[MyAimIsTrue]

Quote

Bull’s team worries that they’re in over their heads when they take on the seemingly unwinnable case of Elliott Miles, a mute man facing the death penalty if he’s found guilty of murder and arson. Also, Bull is stunned to learn that his ex-wife is remarrying.

[Dowel Jones]

So, is there a part 2 to this story?  Somehow, I feel that once again the PD investigators have failed miserably at their job and there is more evidence around.

Again with the legal blunders.  The Prosecution goes to a consultant with a plea deal, and doesn't even notify the defense attorney?

I was rather hoping that Bull's case would go to trial, and his ex-wife would be seated on the jury.

Benny finally decided to declare a bit of independence from Bull, Inc., and in the process discovered that he really is an attorney.  Nice moves in the courtroom, there, Benny.

[EtheltoTillie]

So in order to have a death penalty case in New York they had to concoct a nonsensical federal connection. It was never explained but for the initial mention of the victim's being a federal employee. I think it was a huge stretch. 

Edited May 2, 2018 by GussieK

[Netfoot]

7 hours ago, Dowel Jones said:

So, is there a part 2 to this story?

Yes.

[Bobbin]

So, the only physical evidence is that the accused was driving the victims' vehicle? Doesn't the prosecution have to prove he was lying about how he acquired it, not him having to prove he was telling the truth? The whole rest of the case against him rests on "he coulda...." Benny should have moved to dismiss all charges except maybe being in posession of a stolen vehicle.

I notice that on TV, all cases go immediately to trial without a preliminary hearing, whereas Perry Mason always solved cases during the hearing and never went to trial.

The client is likable. That doesn't necessarily mean innocent, of course. Besides being mute, he's strangely uncommunicative, not really helping in his defense. I wonder what critical information he's holding back.

[brgjoe]

And I would think in a death penalty case where apparently there is a lot of media attention, they would ask for a change of venue.  Especially since apparently the "eyewitness" might have given tainted testimony because of the media circus around it.

It sure seemed like the evidence was sketchy at best.  Especially for them calling for the death penalty.   Any physical evidence (hair, fiber, DNA?) linking the person to the crime scene?  Any sort of proof that the defendant had any contact with the victim(s) at all?  That working on the roof and seeing the house thing was again kinda out there as well.  I imagine one could see a lot of houses from a rooftop.   Doesn't mean he knew the victim(s) at all.

The biggest proof is the vehicle.  And like a previous poster said, they don't have proof that the guy is lying about how he got it.  Unless more info will be released in part 2 of this episode.

And I don't know why Benny was going for a mistrial?  All it means is they can bring the case to court again.  Though maybe Benny wanted to try it in front of a different jury, perhaps.

[Netfoot]

10 hours ago, brgjoe said:

The biggest proof is the vehicle.  And like a previous poster said, they don't have proof that the guy is lying about how he got it.

It does proof that the guy is a dumb-ass.  Someone drives up to you at a bus-stop, offers you a newish SUV for $800, and you think that the deal is legitimate?

[sinkwriter]

Wow, bravo to Benny and Marissa for telling Bull off. He really needed to hear what they had to say. It blows my mind how tone deaf Bull is about his own behavior, but I guess that's life... we're too close to our own stuff, sometimes, to see it clearly (or to even want to see it clearly).