I work at a college that has a lot of pre-law/legal studies/paralegal courses and the most frequently checked out movie in our collection is A Civil Action. The law professors (all of them practicing attorneys themselves) say that it’s one of the most “surprisingly accurate” depictions of civil litigation. They also love the ending, in which the law firm of Travolta, Macy, and Shalhoub
lose not just the trial but their practice/houses/marriages/shirts
as they say it’s a very important lesson that’s rarely addressed in movies.
I remember reading that L.A. Law was extremely popular among lawyers also because of its accuracy in depicting an upscale firm. One particular element a lot of lawyers liked was that it sometimes dealt with matters almost never addressed, mainly money. (One multi-episode plot involved one of the attorneys (don’t remember which) representing a college professor [who is obnoxious but innocent] accused of murdering his wife; after a dramatic court battle the professor’s innocence is proven and he’s acquitted. While most shows would have left it there, an episode in the next season showed the same professor returning, furious and drunk and threatening the attorneys, because his wages have been garnished and liens have been placed on his house and all other property including his kids’ college funds in order to pay the $100,000+ outstanding balance on his attorney’s fees.)
An interview I read with a renowned NYC prosecutor stated that he loathed most courtroom dramas, stating that there’s no way most defense attorneys (even overworked public defenders) or judges would ever allow some of the shenanigans pulled by most TV prosecutors without objecting til they were hoarse. He also said that in a quarter century of prosecuting accused criminals he’d only ever seen one confession on the witness stand, that being in an organized crime related shooting in which it soon turned out the confessor gave a false confession due to a combination of bribery and threats from the defendant.
In a study on TV cops v. real cops, I believe it said that one of the biggest differences is that most real cops never once fire their gun in the line of duty during their entire career. Not sure if this is accurate though.
For Dopers who are lawyers or law enforcement officials or have experience with either, what are your pics for best/worst in terms of accuracy? I’m particularly interested in what real folks think of hit shows like Law & Order, Hill Street Blues, Allie McBeal, NYPD Blue, etc., or of novels by Grisham and Wambaugh and Turow, etc…
Most trial attorneys I’ve spoken with think My Cousin Vinny is one of the more accurate depictions of direct and cross examinations. I can say Vinny does a good job laying the foundation for Marissa Tomay to be recognized as a lay expert under Federal Rule of Evidence #702.
One of the partners at Quin Emanuel (a big name litigation firm) uses Anatomy of a Murder to teach witness examination to new associates. But that isn’t really about accuracy, I suppose, just a lot of teachable moments.
A lot of these have realistic moments within more fanciful plots, so they are hard to evaluate. Michael Clayton is close enough to the mark in parts that my law firm friends cringe a little. The TV series Damages has some semi-realistic portrayals of big city firm life. The legal parts of The Insider are very good.
The criminal law shows tend to be prosecution-oriented. Law & Order is famously, and often amusingly biased toward the prosecution, as you suggested. Defense attorneys are almost always schmucks on the wrong side of justice (since the viewer often has a god’s-eye view of things). The few episodes of *Canterbury’s Law * that I watched were pretty much the inverse of Law & Order. *The Practice * is a little more balanced, but I haven’t watched that much of it.
I don’t think any of the Grisham ones are particularly accurate, to the extent they are even about the law.
As already mentioned, My Cousin Vinny and A Civil Action both have pretty good reputations. Its been a while since I saw Erin Brockovich, but I recall that being more accurate than many.
My friend who is a nurse says Scrubs (medical sitcom) is much more realistic than Grey’s Anatomy or ER (medical dramas), in terms of what the doctors and especially the nurses have to deal with on the job, mentally and physically.
I agree that My Cousin Vinny is quite good for its depictions of laying a foundation, some of the strategy involved, what it’s like to get home-towned, and cross/direct. There are aspects of Law and Order that can be good; in general, it comes closest of the TV shows to reality, but it’s frequently wrong or inaccurate in its portrayal (I’m talking now only about the “mother ship” show, not the spinoffs). About the only thing that Eli Stone gets right is the relationship between the attorney and his secretary.
Grisham is an ass; he knows enough about the law to fit what he writes about into a legal framework (yes, I know he was a lawyer), but he takes such liberties that I find it annoying, particularly when a plot point turns on something that would never ever happen. I also don’t like his writing style; it seems to me to be written at a fifth or sixth grade level, which makes it difficult for me to remain interested.
The Practice had its moments when it was good, but then it would do something utterly assinine (like make Rebecca the secretary a partner in the firm, when every US jurisdiction makes that illegal – a lawyer may not be partnered with a non-lawyer in a business involving the provision of legal advice).
But the truth about legal practice is that it’s very rarely interesting (long periods of tedium punctuated by moments of sheer terror), so (a) a realistic legal show would last approximately an episode and a half before it was cancelled and (b) to make a legal show appealing, one must take some liberties.
Law and Order has often nailed the rules of evidence and procedure. That said, trials rarely happen that quickly. L&O also accurately quotes a number of cases on 4th, 5th and 6th Amendement rights.
I know more than one police officers that say The Shield isn’t incredibly far from the reality, as far as dealing with low-level drug dealers and giving a little “extra” to perpetrators when they won’t come quietly.
I’ve been told the same thing, by nurses and doctors both.
Except that the x-ray in the opening credits is hung backwards. :smack: (Did they ever fix that?)
They made her a partner before she was a lawyer, before they even knew she was going to law school. Thus, the fact that she later became a lawyer is irrelevant. (Can you tell that this steams me? For a usually good show [even one that walks on the crazy side sometimes] to make such a stupid plot point, I was and am disappointed.)
I think in opening for the Season 5 finale, the new surgeon played by Elizabeth Banks walked into frame and turned it around, and said “You don’t know how long that’s been bothering me!”
In the first week of law school, our Litigation Basics professor showed us three movie clips he thought were pretty accurate:[ul][li]From My Cousin Vinnie, where Marissa Tomay is credentialed as an expert witness by demonstrating her automotive knowledge.[]From Erin Brockovich, where the three big-firm lawyers come to the small law office to try to intimidate their way into a settlement and Julia Roberts reams them.[]From Class Action (1991), where the big-firm defense attorney tries to break down a plaintiff during a deposition, and Gene Hackman, the plaintiffs attorney, tries to rescue his client.[/ul]But it must be remembered that this class was about litigation. Three quarters** of people practicing law are not litigators: they’re transactional attorneys. They draft wills, they set up LLCs, they help negotiate sales, they advise people on taxes, they get people green cards and divorces and new titles for their houses. Most lawyers rarely see the inside of a courtroom. A truly accurate depiction of life as an average lawyer would involve a lot of paper-shuffling and boring phone calls.[/li]
Accordingly, my favorite law-themed TV show is Boston Legal, precisely because it totally rejects any attempt at realism and embraces all the wacky legal stuff that would never ever happen. A managing partner showing up for court in a banana costume? A huge class action suit involving thousands of people ends up in front of a jury the day after the case walks in the law firm door? A sexy judge screwing counsel in chambers?
Solid gold, baby!
**Okay, I pulled this number out of my ass, but I think it’s pretty close.
It was a joke. There’s a scene where JD is trying to pick his favorite intern, and he walks by the guy that’s the worst* (but JD won’t admit it), takes the X-ray out of his hands and turns it around.
*Cabbage? Was that JD’s nickname for him?
I am neither a cop not a detective, but New York cops I used to know thought “Barney Miller” was closer to reality than 99% of TV police/detective shows, because it showed how much of a detective’s revolves around drinking bad coffee, cracking bad jokes, and doing mountains of paperwork in a dingy office.
The movie A Civil Action is based on a book (of the same name) that is based on an actual litigation, so it should be realistic. When I was beginning law school, the school made us attend a 2 day “intro to the profession” seminar, wherein we were assigned the book to read and listened to some professors discussing it.
I once had a realtor ask me, in a phone conversation, if my law office was like it was on Boston Legal. He was joking. I hope.
I’m surprised no one has mentioned this yet, but The Wire seems to be regarded as being very accurate in detailing the world of drug-dealing and policing (at least some aspects) in Baltimore. Not sure how well the legal aspects are supposed to hold up.
Do defense attorneys ever sum up first? That seems stupid to me. Why give up the last word?
I’m pretty ignorant of courtroom procedure, but it seems to me that until the prosecution makes a case (j’accuse), there is no need to mount a defense. Isn’t the entirety of defense essentially a rebuttal?
