S03.E18: Don't Say a Word

[thewhiteowl]

Diane risks her career to have Bull come to Texas to assist a couple fighting for custody against her former client.

[MerBearHou]

Thanks for the heads-up.  I will be skipping this one that focuses on Diane and her fake Texas accent.  I wish the show would let her go for good.  I hate how she acts in general and especially with Bull.

[Ellee]

Was this even on last night?

[Netfoot]

I got a repeat of S02E16 about bitemark evidence.

[j5cochran]

6 hours ago, Ellee said:

Was this even on last night?

In my neck of the woods, we got a CBS News special on the Barr letter about the Mueller report.  I assume that this episode will be on next week.

[thewhiteowl]

Sorry for the confusion, this will apparently air 4\1.

[DrScottie]

Now I'm no lawyer, but even though he was found not guilty of murder, the man is still responsible for his children no longer having a mother. He killed her at home with the kids present. I don't understand how this could even be a question. How is it possibly in the best interests of the children to be in the same house with the man who abused and killed their mother? 

[nittany cougar]

As someone who has lived in Houston, the episode was factually inaccurate as to the area.  Katy is in Harris County.  Harris County family courts are in downtown Houston, which is not the quaint small town environment portrayed in the episode.  I realize it served the narrative of the show, but it was so, so wrong.

The accent of the Diana character was absolutely not accurate for the suburban Houston metro.  I'll be happy if we never hear Diana and her "Well, I declare!" Scarlett O'Hara inflections again.  

Edited April 2, 2019 by nittanycougar
spelling

[hookedontv]

I actually liked the case but I hope to never see or hear Diana again. Bad acting, bad accent, and there’s not an ounce of chemistry between she and Bull. 

[Moxie Cat]

19 hours ago, DrScottie said:

Now I'm no lawyer, but even though he was found not guilty of murder, the man is still responsible for his children no longer having a mother. He killed her at home with the kids present. I don't understand how this could even be a question. How is it possibly in the best interests of the children to be in the same house with the man who abused and killed their mother? 

Because of double jeopardy, he cannot be tried again for the same crime, even if new evidence arose. A jury already found that he was not guilty of the murder - that it was essentially a mistake, similar to how he would have likely been found not guilty had the person actually been an intruder. Let's say he was telling the truth - that he really did shoot someone he believed to be an intruder. Would we still think he was an unfit father because of that?  That was what the jury believed happened. And there was no reason for anyone, except the viewer (and the daughter) to think he wasn't telling the truth. 

The abuse was not admissible (and not part of the original trial) and was buried in the mistrial because of the snafu with Diana. We don't know how that would have played out otherwise. Who knows, maybe the jury would have bought it. That seems more relevant to me than a long-ago affair.

The whole "I had a child at 19 but the mother didn't want me to be part of his life" thing seems super-ridiculous to me as a valid reason why the 65-year-old granddad wasn't a fit guardian. The jury didn't even hear his side of the story!

7 hours ago, nittanycougar said:

the episode was factually inaccurate

Factually inaccurate? Illogical even? Bull? Say it's not so!

[DrScottie]

29 minutes ago, Moxie Cat said:

Because of double jeopardy, he cannot be tried again for the same crime, even if new evidence arose. A jury already found that he was not guilty of the murder - that it was essentially a mistake, similar to how he would have likely been found not guilty had the person actually been an intruder. Let's say he was telling the truth - that he really did shoot someone he believed to be an intruder. Would we still think he was an unfit father because of that?  That was what the jury believed happened. And there was no reason for anyone, except the viewer (and the daughter) to think he wasn't telling the truth. 

Thanks for that clarification. It makes a lot of sense to me. I had a rough day yesterday so I wasn't watching too closely. 

[JessDVD]

1) Diana couldn't find a single person to ask Bull to come on her behalf so that if asked who got him there, he could be honest and not implicate her?

2) Of course Bull gets the girl to open up when nobody else could.

3) Grandpa's dalliances were completely irrelevant and it should have taken three seconds of continued witness testimony for the jury to get that. And really, he never thought to mention it to his wife? That's like basic level we're talking marriage material.

4) It should have been base level investigating to see that dead lady had a phone call from the daughter 15 minutes before death. Assuming she had her own phone and didn't take her dad's, anyway, which seems more logical. And if not-Cable could easily pull up security footage and lip-read, one of the good people at the Katy police department should have been able to also.

5) The moral of the story is, if you need to remove your daughters from your douchecanoe ex, do it without turning your back on him, and maybe just not in front of him at all.

6) We've been watching The Bush Years on CNN and tonight we watched the most recent one (W's election and 9/11, mostly) and I didn't realize we'd finished the episode and Mr. DVD put this on, so when I glanced up after the commercial, I saw the Texas license plate on dead lady's car and assumed we were still watching Bush years and then it's the two of them arguing. I believe my exact words were, what the hell is this?!

[Sarah 103]

16 hours ago, JessDVD said:

4) It should have been base level investigating to see that dead lady had a phone call from the daughter 15 minutes before death. Assuming she had her own phone and didn't take her dad's, anyway, which seems more logical. And if not-Cable could easily pull up security footage and lip-read, one of the good people at the Katy police department should have been able to also.

My guess/theory is that the call came from a landline and not a cellphone, which is why everyone thought the call came from the husband, because it showed up as his number, and no one thought the daughter had made the call. He had said they spoke, which explained his number in her list of recent calls and I guess they didn't look into whether or not the call on the mother's phone was incoming or outgoing.  

[judyri]

It says something about the quality of the writing of this show if it takes 5 people to explain what we just lost an hour of our time watching.

[rhys]

Since the ex husband said about 3 times how the house was dark when he shot Amanda, I thought Bull & crew would somehow circle back around to all the lights being on at the house. I don't know how or why I thought they could have come up with some video, but I really thought that's where the show was heading.

[mythoughtis]

I didn’t understand the ‘vow of loyalty’ Diana supposedly owed her client. Confidentiality, yes, but the case was over. He was acquitted. She didn’t owe him the time of day once the verdict was read. She didn’t break her vow of confidentiality by hiring Bull to work the custody case. 

Now she probably owed her firm the loyalty to not work against them.,which she was doing but she didn’t owe the client. 

[lh25]

On 4/2/2019 at 8:12 PM, JessDVD said:

3) Grandpa's dalliances were completely irrelevant and it should have taken three seconds of continued witness testimony for the jury to get that. And really, he never thought to mention it to his wife? That's like basic level we're talking marriage material.

Exactly!  All he had to do was say that he was 19, and the woman didn't want him in the child's life.  It wasn't like he was 35 and married at the time.  And yes, his wife would know.  My hubby had a child before we got together with an ex, they gave him up for adoption, and I knew shortly into the relationship.