|
You'd think the subpoenas and Louis' GF would be the end for the firm.
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 16:35 |
|
|
I like that they revealed it in the middle of the episode like a minor revelation. I was expecting it to be a big thing but instead it was just another part of the case. This also makes Sheila the hero the show both needed and deserved.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
To be fair we still have no idea if she actually came forward. Could be someone else figured it out and sent an email pretending to be her, could be some weird bluff, etc. Kind of depends on whether a judge would give them those subpoenas without her admitting she wrote the letter in person, but the show's had much goofier situations work out just fine before. Then again the show loves to poo poo on Louis so it probably was her and only because he went to go see her.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:24
|
|
|
PaganGoatPants posted:You'd think the subpoenas and Louis' GF would be the end for the firm. Sheila is the only one they can actually get around since she doesn't actually have direct knowledge that Mike didn't go to Harvard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
Holyshoot posted:Wouldn't a lawyer possibly being a fake be a big deal though? An then if he's found out to be fake all his cases are tainted and can be thrown out or over turned no? Ummm, No. If Mike were a criminal prosecutor then maybe, but civil cases, nah. More than that, I think they settled every case he worked on. What, is the other side going to try taking backing out of the settlement because they negotiated with a non-lawyer that they thought was a lawyer? No way, a negotiated settlement is a negotiated settlement. Also, look at it from the perspective of someone wanting to overturn a case that they lost. Are they going to say it wasn't fair because they lost to a non-lawyer?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
patentmagus posted:Also, look at it from the perspective of someone wanting to overturn a case that they lost. Are they going to say it wasn't fair because they lost to a non-lawyer? Ha, now that would be interesting. I do think that it'd make sense that you could ask for another trial, civil or criminal, if a lawyer on one of those sides was in fact not a lawyer, hadn't passed the bar, etc., but then again I suppose double jeopardy would attach if you won a criminal defense. I guess it's one of those things that you'd think the law would have rules on, but it basically never happens so it's all just a toss up. I also agree that Sheila is the hero in this story, every other character has subverted the law in some way just by not turning in Mike, and most of them have made all sorts of crazy threats and strongarm tactics, Mike included. I don't expect it to work out this way, but an interesting last season could have an alliance of all the people they've screwed over coming after them, ending with Jessica finally taking responsibility for the fact that she's actually a pretty awful person and Harvey/Louis resolving to not do evil quasi-legal stuff to win cases going forward.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 22:18
|
|
|
Even if Mike gets a "not guilty" verdict, wouldn't he still be open to persecution if he continues to work as a lawyer, given that he would commit a new fraud every time he acts as a lawyer? I'm sure the show will play it off as "double jeopardy" and the issue being resolved, but is that really how it works?
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
He could pretty much do exactly the same thing he does now, just not have his name on any paperwork or actually argue anything in court. Also my understanding is that double jeopardy would only apply if they actually go to court and get anything other than a mistrial.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:He could pretty much do exactly the same thing he does now, just not have his name on any paperwork or actually argue anything in court. Also my understanding is that double jeopardy would only apply if they actually go to court and get anything other than a mistrial. That sounds about right. I would love if this is the one Suits case that goes to an actual trial and verdict, but given the past I'd be shocked if that happened. I expect Mike to come out of it mostly unscathed, aside from like half his relationships being strained or broken, and hopefully he gets a nice job as "not a lawyer."
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:He could pretty much do exactly the same thing he does now, just not have his name on any paperwork or actually argue anything in court. Also my understanding is that double jeopardy would only apply if they actually go to court and get anything other than a mistrial. Wasn't he already given this directive by Jessica? I think it happened 1 or 2 seasons ago, but it seemed pretty well established already.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 02:57
|
|
|
Mike needs a new haircut that doesn't make him look like a douchebag. Also, laughing at this Colony commercial. Hope you watched last week's episode because here's the shocking ending.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
Jessica clearly operating out of the Machiavelli playbook.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 04:15
|
|
|
I know we all know this will be solved soon however they do a drat good job of making the drama lead up to the resolve good. This US Attorney lady is crazy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 07:45
|
|
|
I'm still failing to see the US Attorney's motive, and Trevor's as well (although it hasn't been established he's actually said anything - only that the US Attorney is aware he exists). Has she demonstrated a motive for going after Harvey? Did he kick her dog, burn down her house, or what? She's going after every skeleton in every closet that she can to pressure someone into giving up Harvey. The rest of the grudges on this show got some sort of explanation, she's going hard in the paint and I have no idea why.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 11:05
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:I'm still failing to see the US Attorney's motive, and Trevor's as well (although it hasn't been established he's actually said anything - only that the US Attorney is aware he exists). Because he's Harvey. In all seriousness we will probably find out why soon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 12:04
|
|
|
Holyshoot posted:In all seriousness we will probably find out why soon. I'm anticipating it'll be really dumb. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 14:05
|
|
|
Holyshoot posted:Because he's Harvey. I wouldn't be surprised if they write it as Harvey having screwed over someone close to her, but it could just be as simple as a competitive US Attorney wanting the pelt of Mr. Big Shot in her trophy case.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 18:20
|
|
|
Wouldn't it be really easy to proof that Mike did not go to Harvard? Simply check Harvard's financial records whether he paid tuition or if he was granted a stipendium => done.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 18:37
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:Wouldn't it be really easy to proof that Mike did not go to Harvard? Girl With the Dragon Tattoo could probably hack those too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 19:46
|
|
Lasagna Pilot posted:Girl With the Dragon Tattoo could probably hack those too. Are they still in contact with her?
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:Wouldn't it be really easy to proof that Mike did not go to Harvard? I think they're going off of the idea that on paper there's no way to tell that Mike didn't go to Harvard. That's why the prosecutor is trying so hard to flip somebody.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 23:21
|
|
|
They seem to be going all-out to make the government lawyers utter bastards. I suppose that's the easiest way for people to be supportive of a fraud and the people covering for him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 02:32
|
|
|
Wow Mike is a spectacular idiot in this episode.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 05:32
|
|
|
Plucky Brit posted:They seem to be going all-out to make the government lawyers utter bastards. I suppose that's the easiest way for people to be supportive of a fraud and the people covering for him. To be fair pretty much everyone on the show has been a complete and utter rear end in a top hat the last couple of episodes. Like even accounting for the understandable stress everyone's under the tension and constant blowing up at each other feels really forced.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 07:10
|
|
|
Plucky Brit posted:They seem to be going all-out to make the government lawyers utter bastards. I suppose that's the easiest way for people to be supportive of a fraud and the people covering for him. Pretty much. Lasagna Pilot posted:I wouldn't be surprised if they write it as Harvey having screwed over someone close to her, but it could just be as simple as a competitive US Attorney wanting the pelt of Mr. Big Shot in her trophy case. Billions TV show on starz is kind of doing this. Except instead of big shot corporate lawyer its billionaire vc dude. He's also not being a piece of poo poo to the guy. At least not yet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 10:44
|
|
|
They're doing a better job than usual showing the firm in peril, who knew all it took to bring down a firm was allegations that one lawyer is a fraud and a scathing editorial. I also don't think I'll ever get tired of seeing Louis, Jessica, Harvey or Mike manipulate someone's emotions to get what they want while making it seem like they're the good guy (or girl). They've each done at least 3 really sleazy things by this point, it's pretty great.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 15:20
|
|
|
I'd be less annoyed with this story arc if the prosecutor wasn't such a nutbag. Her being overzealous and breaking the rules doesn't make Mike any less guilty of the crime they're actually charging him with. I guess that would be less DRAMA if they weren't doing it that way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
Harvey probably slept with her and completely forgot, and now she's out for blood.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 18:13
|
|
|
I would care more about Mike's fraud if the whole thing wasn't retarded anyway. He could pass the bar with a perfect score. Who cares if he didn't graduate law school, it seems like a waste of time for him to go anyway, he's learned more on the job then he would in school. Best resolution is they find him guilty (or no contest), but no punishment, and they allow him to be a lawyer with no degree (it's happened before IRL, although I think it took 10 years of interning or something). Then the whole premise could be having to prove himself while constantly getting poo poo on for not being a "real" lawyer. The show is the best when he is the perpetual underdog owning people. Who cares if it's realistic, it's USA.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 18:13
|
|
|
I care about poor Scottie 
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
As with all USA shows, my deepest desire is for Monk to stroll in for a cameo somehow. Think of the hijinx when Louis invites Monk mudding! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
NowonSA posted:As with all USA shows, my deepest desire is for Monk to stroll in for a cameo somehow. He's too busy with The Blacklist. It could be pretty good though. I found the last episode just kind of boring. If you asked me to summarize the episode, the only things I can remember is everyone got emotional, the bad guy brought in witnesses whose testimony will probably get dismissed next episode, and more "the prosecutor is bad" stuff. There's no way this doesn't end with the prosecutor getting disbarred and/or arrested. Clearly Mike is in no real danger, and anyone who thinks he is hasn't watched the previous 4 seasons. He and Harvey are invincible and without them the show wouldn't exist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
Murphy Brownback posted:He's too busy with The Blacklist. It could be pretty good though. Yea if you're watching this for game of thrones type character drama you are on the wrong network.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 07:17
|
|
|
LorneReams posted:I would care more about Mike's fraud if the whole thing wasn't retarded anyway. He could pass the bar with a perfect score. Who cares if he didn't graduate law school, it seems like a waste of time for him to go anyway, he's learned more on the job then he would in school. Can't you just take the bar exam without going to law school? Like it's probably impossible, but Mike could probably do it just by reading enough law school textbooks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 06:21
|
|
|
red19fire posted:Can't you just take the bar exam without going to law school? Like it's probably impossible, but Mike could probably do it just by reading enough law school textbooks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Admission_to_the_bar_in_the_United_States#Admission_without_law_school posted:In California, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming[12] an applicant who has not attended law school may take the bar exam after study under a judge or practicing attorney for an extended period of time.[13][14] This method is known as "reading law" or "reading the law".
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 06:58
|
|
|
Harold, go ahead and perjure yourself.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 04:13
|
|
|
That was dirty and you know it Harvey.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 04:37
|
|
|
Such good drama.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 06:45
|
|
|
Setting Louis up to possibly gently caress everything up is getting old. I hope he actually comes through for a change. Someone is going to have to, because things aren't looking so great for Mike right now. I don't know why he was so confident after that testimony. If the immunity deal convinced the jury that Trevor was lying, surely they'd also buy the argument+financial motive reason to assume their witness is lying.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 11:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 16:35 |
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBuHUfWw6vU
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 14:34
|
|