Or if could be an ongoing fetish activity (not illegal), and the existence of a new video would establish continuity, the the matter come up again.
Some observations on the observations here:
- I seriously doubt that if you call cops to your house to investigate a robbery you can claim they did a warrantless search. You invited them in to investigate!
- Jimmy wasn’t lawyering so much as conning the cops into dropping their suspicions. So yeah he could have stonewalled, but he wanted them to give up and stonewalling wouldn’t have done that.
Good episode.
That’s why I sort of backed up and said that if they went down that road, the scene would have to had to be written differently to make it work. For example, maybe they conclude their investigation, Pryce walks them to the door, goes outside and while outside Pryce signs the report and they say their goodbyes and shake hands. Then, somehow, Pryce gets distracted and they re-enter the house, move the couch, remove the baseboard and search inside the wall.
But this is just an example, maybe it’s full of holes as well. I’m sure the writers could do a better job if they wanted to go that way, but they aren’t, at least not now and I doubt they’re going to circle back to it since Jimmy embraced the fact that they found it and he ran with it.
The guy called for them to investigate, but not to search his house. If he had been in the room with them when they started to move the couch, he would have been very unhappy. I’m not a cop or lawyer, but I think there still are limits what a cop can do when they are in your house on your invitation. If he had left bags of drugs sitting out they could arrest him, but they couldn’t start digging through his underwear drawer to see if he has drugs hidden there just because he invited them in. But regardless, they didn’t find anything, other than a reason to be suspicious.
But Jimmy’s honest hard work did get him somewhere. He’s now hugely successful with a company car on partner track.
That’s true. But he had been wanting the respect of his brother, and he realized he’ll never get that. And he had said something to Mike in last season’s finale that was something about being honest never getting him anywhere and he’s learned from that. If this was a standalone show, we would be watching and hoping that Jimmy will stay honest, and prove his brother wrong, and become a big success, but since it’s the prequel to Breaking Bad we know that something will make him stray from that path.
I think that all the years that Jimmy was working hard to become a lawyer and succeed legitimately, he never really considered two things: one, how much the scams and other shady stuff were in his blood; and two, the fact that such stuff wasn’t compatible with being a a respectable lawyer (until Kim spelled it out for him).
Is “faking evidence” of a non-crime (pie sitting) actually unethical?
Hence the “lead us not into temptation” flicking of the switch at the end of the previous episode. You can take the boy off the streets, but you can’t take the streets out of the boy.
Awesome! Thanks for this.
As a lawyer myself, the part of the show I found odd was that Kim was upset only about Jimmy fabricating evidence - but thought nothing about Jimmy knowingly lying to the cops on behalf of his client (indeed, thought that was hilarious).
Struck me as odd that she’d draw the line there.
You’re right; it wasn’t strictly necessary, but it was needed to sell the story. It was needed to get the cops to back off. It was also needed to reinforce the working relationship between Jimmy and Mike. In other words, it was needed for narrative reasons.
Yes.
The New Mexico Rules of Professional Conduct:
In summary, Jimmy cooking up a bullshit story (and propping it up with faked evidence) is unethical - both because it’s a lie, and because he’s doing it to shield a criminal (and so further that criminal’s acts).
Pies are involved, so I’m guessing clown. OTOH, a mess is involved, so imagine Pryce in a maid’s outfit…
When Jimmy was sitting with the two cops and they were asking him to explain what was going on with his client, I didn’t understand why he didn’t just clam up and say that he would not answer any further questions without his lawyer present.
I thought the man with the Hummer should have just told the police that he would only answer questions if his lawyer was present and then instructed Jimmy to not allow him to answer any questions.
Why would either of them have talked to the police? I had always thought the best strategy was just to be polite to the police but not to answer any questions unless your lawyer is present.
In other words, why didn’t the man with the Hummer just “lawyer up” with a good criminal lawyer? Why go through that charade in the first place?
I would guess he could have been in a lot more trouble for maybe obstructing justice or fabricating evidence than simply “lawyering up”.
Because Jimmy was the lawyer. And the reason they didn’t just refuse to answer questions is that the cops would have continued to investigate Pryce. Pryce and especially Mike wanted the police to drop the investigation.
Love this show, and kind of wondering if it could extend to examining other characters from the BB/ABQ universe. My wife suggests a show based on Saul Goodman’s bodyguard and says it should be titled “Huell Miss Me”.
Jimmy is a lawyer. Why else would he have been there?
I still think Jimmy’s brother is a mean prick. That last closeup of Chuck’s face at the piano … those cold blue eyes … pure evil.
Chuck seems to want to destroy Jimmy, so much that he’s made himself sick, or mentally unbalanced with the electricity-allergy thing. And he knows the power he holds over Jimmy, or he wouldn’t have dropped in at that meeting to upset him … delivering the sucker punch - “To bear witness.!” He hopes to goad Jimmy into doing something wrong, or shady, so they’ll fire him … so Chuck can berate and revile him … and ‘be right’ about him.
But I did enjoy seeing Jimmy use a little Saul to spin that bizzare, minutely detailed yarn about squat cobbler … loved his straight face saying, “Like I would make this up?” (Some of Odenkirk’s best comedic work on the show yet.) Jimmy will never give up this sort of fun to practice only dry lawyering. He’ll just not tell Kim.
Sort of hated to see the Suzuki Esteem go … will miss its knocking after he turned it off … made me nostalgic for my first car.
And I agree with everyone about the symbolism of the cup not fitting.
It was nice seeing Saul’s LWYRUP Caddy again.
It was also nice to see Kim wearing my University of American Samoa Law School T-shirt as she ate pie and scolded Jimmy.
Go Land Crabs!
Huell’s still sitting in that motel room.