Lawyer Fact Checks Court Scenes, from 'Better Call Saul' to 'The Good Wife'

this is Scott rice a criminal defense attorney who's practiced law for the past 25 years I have represented many individuals in high-profile cases today Scott is going to break down what Hollywood gets right and wrong on television court scenes I'm currently here in my office I'm the only one here we're trying to keep everybody safe with this quarantine first up better call Saul okay is that correct the one thing this scene does very well is the fact that it shows that the defense attorney is questioning the basis for the reliability of the identification the identification is essential in any criminal case because they want to make sure that they get the right person sounds like it happened pretty fast but you say you got a good look at him correct yes you must drink stronger coffee than I do because after 11 hours on the job I can barely see straight and it was dark out and so here the attorney is questioning how tired they were what the lighting was correct how quickly events happen distracted by other events he all Ben says are you sure it's my guy I mean he is really the only guy sitting over here at the defense table is you know there's a little defendant on the tag on the table there are you sure that's the person there's no doubt in your mind take your time I don't need time that's him at this moment this clip takes a huge turn now would you be surprised to learn mr. Harkness that the person you've just pointed to is not the defendant why my client is in the back of the courtroom mr. shakey would you please stand up and then he has his real client stand up that would never take place in a real courtroom he is a very good alibi for the night you didn't recognize immediately right an attorney cannot deceive the court like that by having the defendant sit out there and having somebody else sit at the defense table unrealistic would never happen you'd probably get sanctioned by the judge next up The Good Wife in this scene we have an attorney asking a witness a question the witness then asserts her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination did you and mr. Kimball stay together in Washington DC I refuse to answer on the grounds that it may incriminate me at this point the judge would more than likely have a recess send the jury out immediately and then inquire whether the witness has a basis a good-faith basis or reason to assert the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and then at that point the judge would more than likely if the person or the witness did not have their own attorney would appoint them an attorney to advise them of their Fifth Amendment rights and whether they in fact apply yes I want to make sure I understand what you're saying your honor because you were involved in mr. Kimball's murder or because it is not your place to ask my witness yes it is mrs. Florrick now the attorney that was asking the questions really shouldn't be advocating for this client in any way other than saying your honor she's asserting her right she should have independent counsel now you are taking the fifth Your Honor if you compel my witness to answer this question I am moving for an immediate mistrial denied it's somewhat admirable that the attorney would try to protect the witness to the point of even facing contempt but that's really not her place as it relates to that particular witness your piercing the Fifth Amendment this is Forex shut up no sir excuse me so as this scene develops the courts admonishes the attorney and tells her to shut up and if she doesn't she would in fact be held in contempt as long as you are attempting to circumvent her Fifth Amendment right I will not shut up you will shut up or be held in contempt that's realistic because to be held in direct contempt the court kind has to give you notice of what you're doing wrong and if you do it again there's gonna be punishment and hold me in contempt and I will refer this to the Judicial Conduct committee for immediate action but for an attorney to threaten the judge with a grievance is completely inappropriate I've never seen it done I just don't think it's very realistic at all next up law and order by the sole count of the indictment murder in the second degree how does the jury find this clip almost works for me when a jury comes back normally the judge will be the one that actually reads the verdict I've never been in a courtroom where the foreperson reads the verdict we find the defendant not guilty now before the verdict is read the court will also usually have security in the courtroom and particularly in a large courtroom where there's a lot of emotion going on the court would admonish everyone in the courtroom that there will be no outburst there will be no cheering or booing or any emotion whatsoever and if you do so you will be removed immediately by the sheriff now in this particular case people were reacting hugging each other for television purposes but that would not happen in most courtrooms the judge wouldn't allow it this is unrealistic in just about any jurisdiction I could possibly imagine most jurisdictions have courts security personnel that you have to go through before you can enter the courthouse so you're not going to be able to bring guns and knives or anything of that nature into the courtroom next up American crime story Your Honor at this time the people would ask that mr. Simpson step forward and try on the gloves recovered from Bundy and Rockingham we have no objection your honor this clip is based on the real-life trial of OJ Simpson he was ultimately acquitted this is a good teaching point for what they teach you almost immediately in law school don't ask a question unless you know what the answer will be every trial there's always that moment where something takes place and you just don't expect it and sometimes it goes really well for you and sometimes not so well you can tell from the scene that nobody anticipated this the defense didn't know it was coming even mr. Darden's co-counsel didn't know was coming look at the apprehension on her face trying to figure out what the hell is going on mr. Simpson please approach the jury when mr. Simpson walked over to the area in front of the jury his legal team followed him they were permitted to do that so that they could actually view what was taking place so that they could be able to cross-examine on those issues when it was their turn to cross-examine these clubs they're too small this clip reminds me of a principle that you need to remember whenever you're trying a case keep it simple and don't get cute mr. Darden got a little too cute up next the good fight unfortunately I have misplaced my prescription glasses so I will try to make do with these prescription sunglasses if you don't mind me looking a little bit like a movie star so the first thing that I see here is a very informal judge this is not that uncommon but most of the time the judges like to be the standard bearer for the standard of decorum and the lack of formality really sets the tone for the courtroom Mike could you angle that screen some more these sunglasses are polarized the judge forgets his glasses and moves about the courtroom and takes a closer look at the exhibit to help prove the witness wrong continue please typically the court would not leave the bench to move around the courtroom to look at a particular piece of evidence so in this scene it's almost a conversation that's taking place between the judge the witness the defense attorney and the plaintiff's attorney very unusual even if it was just a trial to the court the court would still for purposes of making a record allow one party to conduct their examination the other party wouldn't be able to jump in and ask a question and then have it answered and then have the judge clarifies then why didn't the company fire him Your Honor I think it's a little odd that BMI is being censured for doing the humanitarian thing oh I don't think plaintiff is censoring them I think she just finds it odd that they kept the thief on staff as do i and most the time the judge is not going to allow a question to be answered simply because he'd like to hear the answer to it there has to be a legal basis for that objection asked and answered well actually no I'd like to hear the answer the judge actually points out for the attorney what the answer would be from the document is how many hours did you question my client I don't know I didn't keep track well it says seven hours here that simply would not happen in a courtroom the case should be tried by the attorneys and not the judge next up Castle this is the most unrealistic courtroom scene that I have ever seen first of all you have a witness on the stand castle who's up there testifying as to whom he thinks the murderer is to Castle yesterday you testified that my client was guilty of killing mrs. Beakman do you still believe that's true no I mean is it witnesses don't get to testify to that they get to testify as to what they saw what they heard what what somebody said if it was an admissible statement they don't get to speculate let alone change their mind on the witness stand based upon the attorney saying is there anything else you would like to tell this jury mr. crown was there anything else you'd like to show the court yes good people of the jury that wouldn't happen that's what they call a narrative a narrative is when a question is asked of the witness and the witness just goes off and gives a lengthy answer that really just amounts to a big run-on sentence the bathroom downstairs was occupied and they're really not answering the question that was asked anymore they're just really talking about what they want to talk about that's prohibited it has to be question answer question answer so for him to go off and then point out the real killer in the courtroom it was her husband Lloyd people I have never seen anyone tried to point out and say that's the real killer sitting over there in the courtroom and then the daughter jumps up and asked dad questions like maybe you did do it no I remember because I was trying to find you guys alright that's enough I want order and then the detective gets up and starts interrogating this man now accused of murder in the courthouse in the courtroom in front of the jury so you headed out to the yard you moved the basketball hoop over so you could climb up it and get a better look but Sadie caught you spying in the window didn't she so you came inside and accused her of having an affair with Roger dad what did you do what did I do your mother was having an affair with her it would never happen it just would never happen the only thing that this scene was missing was for the Scooby Doo clan to pull the masks off somebody's head and the person say I would have got away with it if it wasn't for those pesky kids mr. Beakman you're under arrest for murder this was cartoonish and amateurish at best and whoever wrote it and allowed it to go on screen should be fired and never be allowed to write again too much it's true that's terrible next up the Big Bang Theory one before we get to the courthouse I'd like to call on your skills as an actress so in this scene Sheldon has to go to court for a traffic ticket and he scripted the testimony of penny to appear in court and testify on his behalf scripting your appearance on the witness stand because let's face it you're somewhat of a loose cannon now now this is a very light-hearted scene but one thing is very realistic when you go to court you want your witnesses to be prepared but you cannot script the testimony and give that script to the witness to prepare in preparation for their testimony if the court will excuse my homespun corn-fed Nebraskan turn a phrase excellent go on anytime you call a witness you want to make sure that you have prepared them so they know what subjects that are going to cover and sometimes you may have practiced it but you don't want to practice it so much and rehearse it so much that it appears to be rehearsed one of the most heroic acts I've ever seen in like if you were to draft a Question and Answer of the answers that you were in fact looking forward to be given in court and the other side asked was there anything that you did to prepare for this hearing and you said yes I read the script that my attorney gave me of his questions those questions would have to be turned over so that the other side could review them for cross-examination so you would never ever give a witness the questions to be read beforehand because if the question was ever asked and most attorneys never asked that particular question but if they did they'd have to be produced it could be very embarrassing for everyone involved only a suggestion catching your threat would work just as well but it is a fact it's a privilege to know you totally sometimes you want to present your witness in a particular way or a particular light that may not exactly be as who they are in everyday life however juries are very smart people they can see when you are trying to be as them and if you try to change the way somebody comes across on the witness stand they will be able to see it our next clip is from the practice in this scene Eugene is at the appellate courts to receive a decision based upon an appeal of a murder case we unanimously find the confession to be admissible the conviction therefore stands this scene is very unrealistic rarely does an appellate court ever issue a oral decision they're always in writing and appellate courts is a court that reviews a lower court's decision to make sure that no legal heirs were made that resulted in an unfair trial again the permission to address the court permission to address this court when the case is over and the matter is in recess the case is over for an attorney to ask to address the court to explain their decision wouldn't happen in any way ten years I've been putting them back out there criminals sometimes rapists sometimes murders ten years all the time telling myself there's a reason you're ten seconds from a contempt or do it and the rant that Eugene goes off towards these judges and as ultimately held in contempt for would never ever happen and you would be held in contempt take him and put him in lockup I'll rot in that cell if giving you respect as a condition for my getting out one can be held in contempt for not following the rules of the court and the contempt proceeding is really to cleanse the dignity of the court that's the realistic part about it next up law and order doctor is it not a fact that you had six Bourbons on the rocks at chances pub not 45 minutes ago and this scene the prosecutor asks the witness the defendant to take a sobriety test to prove that he has a drinking problem which would ultimately lead to his culpability the prosecutor had his investigator police officer follow the good doctor to see what he did over the noon hour and the officer investigator saw that the doctor had had several drinks over that knew now the attorney had a good-faith basis to inquire about whether the doctor had had anything to drink prior to taking the witness stand again going on mr. stone there's not toss to look drunk to Ewing out what the hell is that normally a judge would not allow the prosecution to have somebody to get up and do a roadside sobriety test to see if they are intoxicated raise your arm to the level of your shoulder close your eyes and point your nose with your index finger in this particular case the prosecutor got lucky because the doctor basically put his finger in his eye however had he been able to touch his nose accurately it would have sucked the prosecution's case going back to the simple thing don't get cute and don't ask questions you don't know the answer to he knew the answer of whether he had drinks he didn't know if he would properly touch his finger to the nose during the test in the next clip Harry Mason I remember as a kid watching reruns of Perry Mason and if you went to law school you certainly watched a few Perry Mason episodes the killer accidentally overheard Thompson's phone call to vivian ames a phone call setting up a perfect alibi for him the first thing that i noticed is how close the attorney is to the witness stand that rarely ever happens you always have to stay at the podium and have to ask permission to get that close and then he killed Ned Thompson no no I didn't do those things I didn't kill Ned Thompson and you didn't plant felons no no no I have never seen such high drama in the courtroom and I've never seen a witness be cross-examined so intensely that apparently the attorney then figures out who the real killer is and points him out in the courtroom you didn't kill Thompson but you did mr. wells [Music] and not only does he stand up and say yes I did it he collapses in tears while he's doing it and yet everybody remains completely calm and silent in front of the jury unrealistic Night Court unfortunately word got out that anyone not arraigned before midnight was set free oh we were so close what jumped out at me in this scene at first was I'm not aware of any particular situation where if the charges were not advised by a particular time that the case would be dismissed in this scene here the prosecutor actually grabs the charges and reads them in a speed-reading format so that the defendant is aware of them about pressure studies inform police want such information normally it's the court that advises a defendant of the charges against him and the rights that come with him when in fact becomes a defender this is the very fun scene adds a little bit of levity to the situation which is oftentimes a very serious time for a defendant in a particular case but it's just not very realistic [Applause] as you can see Hollywood gets lots of things correct and lots of things wrong Court is not as always dramatic as they make it out to be in the movies or on TV but there are always something monumental going on there for the participants that are involved [Music]

Channel: Vanity Fair

Views: 328,302

Rating: 4.8639741 out of 5

Keywords: true crime, scott reisch, scott reisch crime talk, scott reisch crime, scott reisch true crime, scott reisch vanity fair, vanity fair true crime, true crime vanity fair, lawyer fact checks, court scene fact check, vanity fair fact check, lawyer scott reisch, lawyer scott reisch fact checks, lawyer scott reisch fact checks court scenes, scott reisch fact checks, scott reisch fact checks court scenes, court scenes, court scenes vanity fair, true crime court, vanity fair

Id: 0EEYEW1B3To

Length: 21min 24sec (1284 seconds)

Published: Tue Apr 28 2020

Reddit Comments

[u/Owl-with-Diabetes]

I like how angry he got with the clip from "Castle".