He didn’t lie under oath, though. The physical cassette tape costing $2.98 was destroyed and the cost added to the list of damages that Jimmy had to pay.
Yes, but it wasn’t actually destroyed, which was what Chuck testified to. Either it was destroyed or it wasn’t. He also testified something to the effect that it was the only copy, if I remember correctly. Public record now. That $2.98 is going to cost him his career.
I liked the parallel of her telling Jimmy to give her money so that she would be his money and his doing the same thing with Jesse and Walt when they were trying to intimidate him.
Can anybody remember who Jimmy was terrified they were coming from in that episode? I’m sure it’s on the interwebs but I was wondering if it’s anybody we’ve met so far.
I thought there was something particularly touching in Lyle’s loyalty to Gus- almost a father-son thing. Especially when Gus tells him “Please do what I tell you”- firm, but also very touched at his not wanting to go.
I would totally keep working for Gus at Pollos Hermanos even once I learned he was a meth lord. He’s just a great boss, and I’ll bet he gives outstanding Christmas bonuses.
Am I the only one who starts craving for a bucket of fried chicken after watching scenes taking place at Pollos Hermanos? Or the firemen eating at the fire station?
If KFC or Popeyes were smart, they’d advertise on BCS
Just replayed the portion - he did not say that it was the only copy. Asked for “destroyed cassette tape” as wording, “why be vague?” and agreed to “destroyed item of personal property.”
Completely accurate, a cassette tape of his was completely destroyed, and he asked for the value of a blank tape only.
No the value there is as part of the hustle, encouraging Howard and Chuck to perceive them as afraid of having the tape introduced, encouraging overconfidence.
If they were not overconfident they might stop and realize that the complete tape in context of Chuck’s known mental illness and longstanding antipathy and pathological offense to Jimmy’s status as a member of the bar is more believably damning of Chuck than it is of Jimmy. Slippin’ Jimmy knows how to play the victim, in this case a justifiably very concerned and loyal brother whose concern is being taken advantage of in service of his bother’s pathologic offense at Jimmy also being a lawyer and need to see Jimmy’s law career ended, and to let people hang themselves.
I can imagine things going down a bit like A Few Good Men, with Jimmy taunting Chuck into admitting under oath that he was actively trying to destroy Jimmy’s legal career.
I just rewatched the scene. Chuck insists that “a cassette tape” was destroyed, and makes it clear that it was a cassette tape and not some other property. He doesn’t say anything about a recording, or that it’s the only copy. Howard does say that the damage is ‘irrevocable’, but that’s clearly talking about using ‘damaged’ versus ‘destroyed’ in the context. They agree that the language in the plea will be ‘destroyed personal property’. The cassette tape was destroyed, we saw it destroyed on film with Jimmy, Chuck, Howard, and the PI present, so what he testified to is completely true. He didn’t say that it was the only copy. Also, other than the ‘destroyed personal property’ and the $2.98 cost of the tape, none of what he said is in any kind of record, as the language didn’t go into Jimmy’s plea deal and there wasn’t a court reporter present. And he wasn’t under oath at the time.
So I’m going to say that no, there is absolutely nothing remotely like prejury or false testimony in the complaint to the bar or plea deal, and the $2.98 is not going to cost Chuck his career. This ‘but there’s a backup tape so Chuck lied under oath/in the plea/in the public record’ idea is completely at odds with the show.
On a side note, I’d find it really hilarious if Mike and Gus eventually had to meet with Jimmy at a Cracker Barrel for some reason. Just picture Gus in ‘cheery manager face’ while Mike gets more and more annoyed and Jimmy keeps handing out cards to the seniors while they’re there.
If there’s a backup tape that was recorded, who’s to say it wasn’t doctored at the same time? The veracity of the tape is now in question.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
