Attention, TV/Hollywood writers: Lawyers are not allowed to "ambulance-chase"

[BrainGlutton]

@antonio107

Next you’re gonna tell me Lionel Hutz isn’t the sterling example of a lawyer Matt Groening made him out to be?

:mad: Lionel Hutz?! Don’t talk to me about Lionel Hutz! Smug motherfucking Boy Scout cannot-tell-a-lie do-gooder . . .

[BrainGlutton]

TVTropes page [url=]Hollywood Law:

Hollywood Law refers to a fictitious legal situation which in no way resembles the actual legal system in the place portrayed, but rather is played up for dramatic purposes.

But the legal system is a favorite source of drama, and hence Hollywood Law tends to serve the plot over any realism. Unfortunately, however, many viewers believe that dramatic media present a realistic portrayal of the legal system; and due to the media’s persuasive influence in often being the average person’s only experience with the legal system, this often affects their votes when voting in elections, or sitting on juries—often with disastrous results. For this reason, **Hollywood Law is perhaps the trope with the most real-life potential for harm. **

Note that, in many of these examples, the fictitious part isn’t so much that one side will attempt something improper, but that the opposing counsel will sit back and allow it. Real attorneys routinely object to things even when they know their objection will fail; one would never allow a real breach of court rules to go un-objected. If both prosecution and defense agree to some unusual arrangement (surprise witnesses, last-minute evidence, even calling the prosecution as a witness), however, a judge may allow it. This is more likely to occur to the defense’s benefit, where the possibility of an appeal due to inadequate defense representation isn’t a factor.

When this trope is used as a ‘we should just use a simpler and common sense-based legal system so criminals don’t go free due to a ponderous bureaucracy!’ aesop (e.g. the Dirty Harry franchise) it becomes a grievous source of Anti Intellectualism; aside from oversimplifying the issue to the point of being totally incorrect, it becomes a form of Demonization in which the writers are complaining about something they don’t understand. Next to The CSI Effect this trope is one of the worst impetuses for real life harm.

But see Artistic License - Law.

Strong Bad: This is a sub-poe-eena! I summons Exhibit 4-B to my chambers!
Homestar Runner: Sustained! (hits self in face with gavel)
—Homestar Runner

This is a listing of liberties taken with how law is presented.

Frequently an Acceptable Break From Reality in that real litigation takes months, not minutes, and almost none of it happens in court. But watching lawyers read mountains of documents and write briefs isn’t something anyone really wants to do. Lawyers don’t, because if you’re going to watch someone do legal work you may as well do it yourself (and get paid), and laymen audiences don’t because it’s boring as hell. So while most depictions of legal procedures outside of literature have very little to do with the way law is actually practiced, most people are okay with this, because real legal procedures tend to be No Fun At All.

Note that as with all Acceptable Breaks From Reality, this can get out of hand, particularly when it’s the substance of the law, not the procedure, that the the creators are screwing up.

[TriPolar]

BrainGlutton, wanna know a secret?

Racer X is really Speed’s brother Rex

Now don’t tell anybody!

[BrainGlutton]

@RealityChuck

Actually, I’ve never seen it actually shown except in The Verdict. It’s a very rare occurred on TV, just like it’s a rare occurrence in real life.

TVTropes has a whole page on The Ambulance Chaser.

With far fewer entries, however, than the Amoral Attorney page.

[ryan]

I’d have to say that letting a fictional portrayal of your profession bother you seems pretty silly to me. If the public wants to watch real lawyers they can tune in to Court TV. I, for one, don’t expect an accurate portrayal of the legal profession, I expect (hope?) to be entertained. I wouldn’t watch CSI or Bones for the science nor House for the medical knowledge. I’m also pretty sure that how the do things on Justified/Detroit 187/Numbers/Blue Bloods/Castle/Law & Order/etc…isn’t how real police work is done.

[Snooooopy]

@BrainGlutton

I do try to remember: With some exceptions, most writers are not lawyers, they’re writers; they’re not doctors, they’re writers; etc. Even those who care enough to do the research will make countless technical mistakes when they set stories in a profession not their own.

But I think this – and Suits – is more a case of They Just Didn’t Care.

I think I would, at some point, like to see Suits provide some kind of in-universe explanation for how Genius Boy will get away with practicing law without a license. It could be as simple as mentioning that New York decided to relax its standards or as showy as Genius Boy doing a favor for the right people. But we’re not even as far as the second episode, so I’m inclined to give the show a little time to get around to it.

[BrainGlutton]

@ryan

I’d have to say that letting a fictional portrayal of your profession bother you seems pretty silly to me. If the public wants to watch real lawyers they can tune in to Court TV. I, for one, don’t expect an accurate portrayal of the legal profession, I expect (hope?) to be entertained. I wouldn’t watch CSI or Bones for the science nor House for the medical knowledge. I’m also pretty sure that how the do things on Justified/Detroit 187/Numbers/Blue Bloods/Castle/Law & Order/etc…isn’t how real police work is done.

See post #5.

[Darth_Sensitive]

I know that I often yell at referees in television shows an movies.

I mean seriously, in Remember the Titans, the wing official throws a flag for a (implied to be bogus because they’re racist cheats) holding penalty and blows his whistle at the same time. Holding is a live ball foul, and the whistle would kill the play - which then continues on for several more yards. Stupid movie refs.

[shiftless]

TV has taught us that all doctors and lawyers are unusually attractive and they spend most of their time working to save lives and right wrongs, often without compensation. They are just such great people, all they care about is helping others. Did I mention how they are all great looking? So every now and then TV gets a little detail wrong. It’s inevitable, even in such a universally wonderful set of people.

[Unauthorized_Cinnamon]

I have felt your pain. But in the course of that thread, I was convinced that it’s a lost cause. (Stuff like this still annoys me though.)

[BrainGlutton]

@Snooooopy

I think I would, at some point, like to see Suits provide some kind of in-universe explanation for how Genius Boy will get away with practicing law without a license. It could be as simple as mentioning that New York decided to relax its standards or as showy as Genius Boy doing a favor for the right people. But we’re not even as far as the second episode, so I’m inclined to give the show a little time to get around to it.

It’s possible, I suppose. But, believe me, if an applicant with no J.D., no bachelor’s, and a next-thing-to-criminal record were admitted to the Bar of any state, it would be the talk of the legal community and the firm would have heard of him and it would be impossible to pass him off as a Harvard grad.

[ralph124c]

So disregard “The Firm”.
Totally false and untrue…lawyres don’t launder money, run corrupt rackets, kill people, etc.!:smack:

[Rushgeekgirl]

They may not chase ambulances but they do scour the Memphis Police Department’s list of recently charged inmates. My SO was arrested about two weeks ago (minor charge) and we’ve received dozens of letters and even a few phone calls from local attorney offices. I don’t know how the hell they got our address because the public listing doesn’t show anything but name and charge. It really pisses me off too, because the couple I read claimed that what my SO did was a serious crime with a potential prison sentence but that THEY could get him off.

[ryan]

@BrainGlutton

See post #5.

I did, in fact, read the thread before posting.

I’m sorry, but it seems to me that you’re pissed because it’s certain fictional members of your profession that is being portrayed in an unflattering light.
When it comes down to it, anyone who forms their opinion of an entire profession based on fictional portrayals is a fool. Shaking your fist at the heavens over the unfairness of being judged by fools is a monumental waste of effort. Also, I’d be far more worried about said fools getting more important facts wrong than believing that a fictional character might behave unethically or even criminally.
Of course, in “real life” attorneys are just as capable of behaving unethically or even criminally as any other segment of the population.

As to your point in post #5, I don’t believe that blatant racism or prejudice portrayed as fact would be even in the same ballpark as your complaint.
Fictional characters believing that their own racist beliefs were factual? OK, different story.