Use my link bit.ly/LeejaMillerDCMar22 and check out the first chapter of any DataCamp course for FREE to unlock new career opportunities and become data fluent today!
I actually googled for legal eagle for the rico episode of better call saul but your video came up. Can you explain why the case became "rico" because of the medical equipment company being in Nebraska shipping to the retirement home in New Mexico? Exactly what law was broken? And how? thank you
to be fair, Tuco was going to KILL the two young men, so to be a good Samaritan and downsize that to broken legs is a pretty good deal, and i believe, not criminal conduct.
It's interesting watching different attorneys react to these things. She thought it was bad that Saul called the defendants "knuckleheads", while Legal Eagle thought it was great because Saul is getting ahead of the obvious bad things about the case.
I literally just commented the same- I should have read comments next. Obviously I’m a lay person, so impossible to say who is right. However, legal eagles view made more sense to me when thinking how I would view things if I was a jury member.
@@Outnumberedbykidsandcats Saul was being theatrical, but he was doing his job well - trying to convince the jury to not be too harsh on his clients. I think the key to all this is that the guys were obviously guilty, so there was no crime in calling them 'knuckleheads'.
@@williet.3058 You guys are taking court dramas way too seriously, the point of the knucklehead comment is to depict slippin' Jimmy for who he is, good directors do that for their viewers so they enjoy watching their shit...
There's also the difference that she thought it was an opening statement, while Legal Eagle thought it was a closing statement. Could be that Eagle would agree it's a bad idea for an opening statement, and she would think it's a good idea if she thought it was the closing statement
I was just about to say the exact same thing. Legal Eagle thought it was perfect. Also, I wonder if she had watched the whole episode, because he got paid immediately before leaving the courthouse, and the verdict was mentioned by the clerk, making it clear that it was a closing argument.
A few corrections Breaking Legs - The ethics violation would be invalid. Jimmy was acting as a good Samaritan, carefully negotiating a violent criminal down from skinning two young men alive out in the New Mexico desert. The Kettlemens & Nacho - Jimmy didn't encourage Nacho to try and rob the Kettlemens. He accidently let it slip that they had embezzled money while under duress, but later after Nacho proposed working together to rob them Jimmy declined on moral grounds. Though this left Nacho to rob the Kettlemens on his own, Jimmy in no way encouraged him because it would ruin his chance to represent them. Later the police chased Jimmy down and arrested him because they were following a lead. After the police arrested Nacho a payphone called him repeatedly and left him many ominous voicemails, so they called the payphone back to see if the caller was still there and after confirming such they sent agents to arrest and interrogate him in connection to their suspect, only to then discover that the caller was Nacho's lawyer.
Yeah, she was also wrong about the opening. Those weren’t Jimmy’s opening remarks, it was his closing statement. He also didn’t start the trial by barging in, he asked for a recess to run to the bathroom to practice his lines. Then came back in to deliver his closing remarks. Then the prosecution plays the footage of the teens having sex with the head as it’s closing remarks and let’s the jury go to decision. She definitely was just fed clips to react to with no context. She’s right about the stuff that needs no context tho. So there’s that lol
@@angc214 she called Kim "Liz Wexler" i almost cried, but then she said, "if they don't get it on in this series..." and then i laughed cause she hasn't seen the show.
@@TheEpicSpire Was honestly pretty annoying. Why react to the show without even watching an episode? It didn't even seem like she watched a full scene.
saul negotiated with a drug kingpin from killing 2 people in the middle of a desert down to just breaking a leg each, and you call it an “ethics violation”💀
yessss I loved the show and how it dealt with the mundane parts of being a lawyer! I was always wondering how accurate it really was because it FELT so authentic
Would love to see you react to more series of this. I love Breaking Bad but I honestly think Better Call Saul is a better show. The idea behind BB was to take a 'good' character and have him turn 'bad' but honestly I think BCS does a much better job of that than BB did. Rewatching BB, I feel like Walt always had the nasty qualities that we see in him as Heisenberg, he just grew in confidence and eventually hubris over time. Saul, while not always doing things above board, I feel does have a good heart at the beginning but overtime life beats that out of him. It's a slower burn but I believe it's better crafted and also much more realistic. Also just a lot sadder because we've seen who Jimmy becomes and how his life goes.
So I haven’t watched all of BCS so I don’t have that insight to compare the two, but I’ve always felt like BB wasn’t purely showing good going bad, it’s that we all have a little bad in us but what circumstances make us break. That’s just what I’ve always taken from BB. Without seeing BCS fully I can without a doubt say it’s a great show though!
BCS is so much better at nuance than BB. I love both shows but BCS does a great job of making you think about the nuances in life--how people can be "good" and "bad" at the same time.
@@carstarsarstenstesenn They specifically did a good job of showing someone who does bad things for good reasons (Jimmy) and someone who does good things for bad reasons (Chuck). For all his competence, technical expertise, and professed love for the virtuous application of the law, Chuck maliciously litigated situations that worked to his own benefit and looked over injustices if he thought they were unwinnable. And his tit-for-tat animosity toward his brother built the toxic foundation that eroded the moral attachment that Jimmy had to his own unsavory behavior. Chuck habitually fed, nurtured, and finally released the beast that is Saul Goodman. I personally still love BB more because of the places they took the show (esp. Ozymandias, Confessions, and Dead Freight), and because we wouldn't have BCS without BB. But I agree that BCS is a fantastic show, done well. I'm also glad the writers were able to hone their skills on BB and channel their creativity into BCS without making the latter feel like a retread of the former. Truly an amazing crew of artists.
That’s exactly the vibe I get from better call Saul. Accurate almost painfully so but with a touch of dramatic license. As someone who lives in the uk and who had only seen the Hollywood side of America it was amazing to see the America breaking bad and better call Saul show us.
I never thought about these shows from the perspective of a non-american. Now that you mention it, these shows really do have a lot of great representation of everyday Americans. That mundanity is what I love the most about better call saul especially
Leeja- about the money issue “per defendant”- he’s likely getting paid as a panel attorney. Basically private defense attorneys will take on clients that the public defenders office can’t take for a reason (like being conflicted out) and get paid money from the state per client/defendant they take on. Edit: can’t believe I forgot to add: great work!! Love your content.
Or picked up at jail call. If there is no public defenders office, private attorneys can show up in court and get appointments. I did it when I was fresh out of law school.
@@eightbitsurrenderomi4148 yeah the writers have confirmed that at this point in time, Jimmy is working PD overflow. so from my understanding, Jimmy's not even a public defender, just someone who gets the cases that the actual public defenders can't get to
your reactions really peeve me, no offense, because they lack the substantial context required to get the full picture of the scene. when you said that jimmy was "advising someone to break the law", that criticism is invalid because he saved two people from being gutted and killed by a ruthless man to simply having their legs broken, which is morbid but hey i didn't write the show. again, i dont expect you to watch every episode in a show before making a video on it, but please try watching some snippets to understand further context that turns a scene of a lawyer behaving unlawfully to doing something just.
@@ourcorrectopinions6824 it was never legal advice anyway. His clients were the ones tied up, he was acting as an officer of the court when he went to tuco’s house to save them
7:32 It's worth knowing that in this scene, Jimmy is fully aware that it's trademark infringement, and he was relying on recieving the injunction that demanded he take it down; it was all part of a grand scheme to stage an accident at the scene of the billboard being taken down (a worker falling off the billboard and dangling by a wire) so he could be caught on camera saving the day, giving him more publicity than the billboard ever would have. It shows that Jimmy/Saul has a very good understanding of the law as well as a great ability to plan several steps ahead to get what he wants.
When I was fresh out of law school in the mid-90s, I would go to jail call in the mornings and the court would assign cases to lawyers waiting for appointments. And yeah, they paid shit.
The reason why Chuck is asking Jimmy to change the name of the law firm is because Chuck doesn't want HIS name associated with Jimmy at all. The law firm and Howard had nothing to do with it, but Chuck is trying to use them as a scapegoat to make Jimmy change the name.
I find it very interesting to see that your opinion to his closing argument (that you called opening argument) gave completely different views to those from another lawyer I watched reacting to this who felt the argument was excellent. Even down to the calling clients knuckleheads - Jimmy knew that there was overwhelming evidence against them and rather than trying to make them out to be innocent, he described them as knuckleheads to make them out to be immature and silly, rather than malicious.
I think everyone realized he was being theatrical at that point. Still, a good attempt to mitigate the situation (=we were all young and dumb, so don't be too harsh on them)
You lack enormous amounts of context in all of these clips, it would be helpful if you actually watched the show so the things you say actually make sense. One example, Tuco is a methhead, he is out of control and wanted to murder those two guys that were tied up. Saul did an amazing negotiation and saved their lives. Jimmy was far from advising him to commit a crime, he was saving their lives.
I don't even think you actually watched this show because you are saying that it is bad for them too to live and he talked them down from being murdered. If you didn't do what it was necessary to save a life in that moment then that would be the worst outcome
At 2:20 when he was calling his clients knuckleheads, it was more of an appeal to the jury since they were older, to remind them "hey, we were all young and dumb once. When have any of you not been a knucklehead in your life? Let's try to downplay this event as just some kids being kids." Also... i'm not sure if you actually watched the episodes with your commentary on 5:10... Tuco was about to brutally murder both of them, and Jimmy was able to talk him down out of his rage-induced state to only breaking one leg each. Tuco is part of the Mexican Cartel, so yea.... of course it's an ethics violation. This isn't in a courtroom though, so that isn't applicable as an argument.
Would LOVE a video on the accessibility or inaccessibility of “allegedly” public record documents/a deep dive into FOIA. Relevant to so many fields not just legal but archival, journalistic, etc. love you leeja!
Counsel, you should watch the rest of the “trespassing” case to get the gravamen of the 3 “knuckleheads”’ major offense once that got inside the mortuary. Also, Saul lays, so eloquently, a lis pendens
Had some phone typing challenges in my previous message - any event, the lis pendens threat is priceless (it’s in Breaking Bad), and demonstrates that his clown act is a thin disguise of a very able attorney. Glad to see your postings - pls keep up the good work!
This is so interesting! Another lawyer reacting said everything Jimmy did in the first scene was smart, including appealing to the better nature of the jury. It’s so cool to see an almost opposite reaction and have both be supported with great arguments. And I’m not being sarcastic here, I truly mean it’s really fun to see such opposite opinions argued so well. Glad I found your channel!
FWIW, this video does not support its position with great arguments. She gets a bunch of facts wrong showing she didn't even watch the entirety of the scenes she commented on. She was apparently just given clips to react to without context.
Not a lawyer myself, but imo everyone in the courtroom understood it was just theatrics for theatrics' sake (Legal Eagle even pointed that out as dramatization)
@@williet.3058 the show set up the scene in a way which makes it clear why he was able to do what he did. It's closing argument, and he got a short break before giving his. Everyone was waiting for him to come back and give a speech. Would all judges allow such a theatrical entrance? No. Would some? Maybe. They have every right to if they want.
A couple of years ago, for my paralegal program, I had to look at a website that had class action lawsuits. That homework, led to 4 months later, getting a $1400 check as a participant in a class action lawsuit against a drug company (Provigil was the medication). Most profitable homework I ever did in my life :).
TIMESTAMPS: 0:00 DataCamp 1:08 Criminal Trespass 3:07 Car Crash 3:39 HHM Trademark 4:26 Breaking Legs 5:24 Public Defenders 6:28 The Kettlemens & Nacho 7:32 HHM Trademark Part 2 8:51 Attorney Advertising 10:50 Kettlemens Fire Liz 12:43 University of American Samoa 13:48 SPOLIATION 14:45 Legal Research 101 16:38 Discovery 101 19:06 Good vs. Bad 19:29 You're Not a Real Lawyer 20:06 Fraud 21:32 Outro
This video is awesome! You have such a strong, present, funny personality, and it is so cool to get this knowledge from someone on in inside of the industry. You should definitely watch the rest of the show!
Objection! Her name is Kim Wexler, not Liz Wexler. Fantastic video! It would be amazing if you would consider watching the other seasons. Based on your reactions here, I think you would enjoy them tremendously.
I’m a new fan thanks to your Bailey reviews ❤️🤗loving your content can’t stop watching catching up quickly🤣your gorgeous funny smart and absolutely genuine which is absolutely rare these days💎
The presenter here lacks a lot of context, as she hasn't watched the show. I'm not a lawyer, but what Saul was trying to do is make the jury more compassionate towards the (obviously guilty) young guys to prevent them from going to jail. In my book, he was trying his best as a defender, even if that was pure theatrics.
It's really interesting how completely different your opinion of his closing statement was to legal eagle. He literally said the exact opposite of you and thought his closing statement was very effective. I guess that's why some lawyers do a better job than others
Everyone in the courtroom must have realized it was theatrics and (basically) demagogy. I'm on the legal eagle's side in the way that the guys' guilt was obvious, but Saul did well trying to mitigate the situation (=they are young and dumb, don't give them jail time). That is, until the tape surfaced :P
Omg I’m glad I’m not the only one that was like uhhhh Sauls kinda got a thing right? Like he definitely has something? Right? Anyone? 🤣🤣🤣 I love your channel and I love how you simplify things!
@@LeejaMillerCan't remember where I heard this information, but I remembered it. I also went to check my memory and apparently Nestlé tried to block the trademark but eventually lost. The things you find with Google, how did I research anything when growing up?
Jimmy is not working as a public defender. Rather he is working as a court appointed lawyer. Contrary to what is shown in film and television, most indigent defendants receive court appointed counsel. That is why Jimmy is not on salary and is being paid on a "per defense" basis. It must have been a remarkably short trial though. $700 wasn't much even in 2002.
You need a lot more context on that 1st scene. Jimmy was basically in damage control on the closing argument and hoping for anything less than the absolute maximum sentence. If a jury could find defenders as "Super Guilty" it would have happened in this case. The prosecutor's closing was basically playing the tape that showed what happened.
I hate to spam this comment but I would really love to hear your thoughts on Defending Jacob. It stars Chris Evans as an assistant DA whose son is accused of murder. I found your channel from the first UNhhh reaction and have been hooked since.
I wanted to be a lawyer for a while in college, but then changed my mind. Part of that decision was the elitism of lawyers. Part of it was that it was a lot of work and likely debt with no guarantee of a payoff. I might become a lawyer and then end up making peanuts. Why bother? Another thing was that I largely disagree with the legal system as it currently operates, particularly the criminal justice system. Laws are written by decrepit, out of touch politicians, and often mindlessly enforced by cops and prosecutors, even when to do so is so obviously immoral. Take for example the recent story out of Bryan, Ohio. There's a pastor there who did a very kind thing and opened his church to let the homeless shelter there over the winter. The city got wind of this and he is now facing criminal charges for violating the city's zoning laws. Those laws in themselves are illegitimate to begin with, but enforcing them in this circumstance is extremely wicked. Yet, cops and prosecutors did just that, and the judge has gone along with it. Cops should have refused to cite him. Prosecutors should have refused to prosecute. Judges should have sumarily dismissed the case and dared prosecutors to refile or appeal. And the jury, if all else fails, should acquit in spite of the evidence (jury nullification). But that's not what's happened and the jury will be told not to do the right thing, but rather to blindly enforce the law. I hope they disobey. The pastor did nothing wrong in breaking the (f)law and giving food and shelter to the poor. He will likely be punished for his good deeds by a supposed Justice system. Cases like this make me want to burn the whole thing to the ground. The only law I would ever want to practice is either criminal defense or civil rights law, because in my opinion those are the most honorable legal fields. Most of everything else is at best neutral or is actually a net detriment to society. One more thing: I HATE the word "liability". It is the red tape strangulating all good things in this world. It's the reason I am not allowed to assist a client in opening their medicine, push someone in a wheelchair up a ramp if they need help, etc. If something goes wrong somehow- even if it's not really our fault, and even if we were doing the right thing (helping a disabled person, for example)-, some ambulance chaser might sue the homeless shelter I work at and possibly ruin it. Liability sucks and lawyers have created a minefield of possible lawsuits anytine you do just about anything, but especially something right.
I think the 'shouldn't call them knuckleheads' argument is a bit weird. Yeah, it's all theatrics and demagogy, but what Saul was trying to do is stir some sympathy for the guys that were obviously guilty, to prevent them from getting jail time (=responsible attorney). Plus, the guys were young, so patronizing them felt more or less ok. Lastly, the presenter clearly lacks a lot of context, so I'm siding with the legal eagle just because he actually watched the entire episode more than once.
There are smaller counties that do not have a public defenders office and instead pay private attorneys to take individual cases. This happens on juvenile cases too (involving allegations of abuse). He’s not employed by the PD’s office so I’m guessing that’s his arrangement. I made $30k/year in 2000 when I started my first job with a legal aid program. So this doesn’t sound impossible!
The frame for your glasses is the perfect mix of eloquence, sassy, quirk, professionalism, style, and sharpness. I need a pair like that, but tailored for a masculine man.
This is a really weird video for me to stumble upon because it says a lot of untrue things which make it clear the speaker hasn't actually watched the show. For instance, she starts the video talking about how Saul's "opening statement" was done wrong because she doesn't realize it was actually a closing statement and he basically asked permission to do what he did. She then says it'd be an ethical violation for him to tell his client to break the legs of two people when Tuco was not his client, and the only reason he suggested that was to stop a crazy person from murdering the people instead. I get she was probably just given clips to react to without any context, blatantly misrepresenting things because you lack the knowledge you portray yourself as having is... not what lawyers should be doing.
kinda ironuic "violent crime" and "no bail" when the guy who tried to murder a GOP in public view on stage with a knife got out the same day in new york
LegalEagle's reaction is much more in depth than this, as he actually researches the scenes with context rather than simply react to an out of context clip. Also, he doesn't misname characters.
I think it's funny you tried to make it sound like Jimmy tried to get tuco to break someone's legs, when he was literally trying to save their lives. I'm sure he's morally safe in that situation.
"2002, which is somehow 20 years ago *laughs*". Lol, same... Seems like it was a couple years ago. As you also said, the 80s feel like 20 years ago, so, I feel you
Also she probably picked the worst example for ethics. Jimmy is acting as a Good Samaritan and in favor of his clients (not tuco, but the 2 guys who got their legs broken) also jimmy never told nacho to steal the money, he admitted that they embezzled the money under duress to nacho but never told him to
YES! I'm so glad you're watching this AND loving it lol One of the best shows and characters I've ever seen. Can't wait to see you cover the rest of the seasons.....and at the end I still think you should go into practice with That Surprise Witness TV lol It's the only legal dramedy that could top this show LOL
Would love to hear your take on the finale where Saul negotiates a plea & then takes the full sentence. Please consider doing this. Thanks. I am subscribed.
Aren't they depicting a per-case compensation system? Seems like it's not a salary check and if you get enough of those checks you might have a reasonable salary, even though Saul is displeased at the particular amount. And the negotiation about how many of the skaters' legs to break is not subject to scrutiny for realism, it's just a funny surreal scene about a ruthless gangster and a lawyer's negotiating skills.
6:22 Yes the show is set up in 2002, yes its about 20 years ago, and this is because Breaking Bad aired in 2008. Better Call Saul is about Saul Goodman, and the events in his life, that occurred before he met Walter White (about 5 years before BB). By the way love that outfit and it really works well with your hair!
Another great video! Sorry I don't have more to contribute to the conversation it's been a tough day but I figured I'd still comment to appease the Al Gore Rhythm gods
These reactions videos are always fun. Here's a question, now that Pam and Tommy is running on Hulu, I'm wondering you can talk about the legality of leaked sex tapes??? I've always been curious how people can get away with that.
21:20 bro WHAT? if you made 30k a year where i live, you're literally living under a bridge and feeding on the roaches and worms that live there... literally worse than poverty. what kind of lawyers make 30k a year?????
Love this show, thanks for your take! Could you do something about the movie Double Jeopardy? It came out in the 90s with Ur-Girl Boss Ashley Judd in it (no shade, I love her) and Tommy Lee Jones as a parole officer and it's got a pretty rad premise, but I'd be interested to see what you think about the whole thing.
Please explain why an Attorney has to be a member of the bar. Physicians have to pass the state test to practice Medicine. They don't to be a member of the American Medical Association . Please explain the difference.
I'm actually surprised that 4 Justices voted against Bates in Bates vs State Bar of Arizona. I would've guessed 1 or 2 Justices at most. Now I want to read that dissenting opinion ;-)
Use my link bit.ly/LeejaMillerDCMar22 and check out the first chapter of any DataCamp course for FREE to unlock new career opportunities and become data fluent today!
I actually googled for legal eagle for the rico episode of better call saul but your video came up. Can you explain why the case became "rico" because of the medical equipment company being in Nebraska shipping to the retirement home in New Mexico? Exactly what law was broken? And how? thank you
i'll pass thanks
You liked BCS so much you only reviewed it once
to be fair, Tuco was going to KILL the two young men, so to be a good Samaritan and downsize that to broken legs is a pretty good deal, and i believe, not criminal conduct.
It's interesting watching different attorneys react to these things. She thought it was bad that Saul called the defendants "knuckleheads", while Legal Eagle thought it was great because Saul is getting ahead of the obvious bad things about the case.
I literally just commented the same- I should have read comments next. Obviously I’m a lay person, so impossible to say who is right. However, legal eagles view made more sense to me when thinking how I would view things if I was a jury member.
@@Outnumberedbykidsandcats Saul was being theatrical, but he was doing his job well - trying to convince the jury to not be too harsh on his clients. I think the key to all this is that the guys were obviously guilty, so there was no crime in calling them 'knuckleheads'.
@@williet.3058 You guys are taking court dramas way too seriously, the point of the knucklehead comment is to depict slippin' Jimmy for who he is, good directors do that for their viewers so they enjoy watching their shit...
There's also the difference that she thought it was an opening statement, while Legal Eagle thought it was a closing statement. Could be that Eagle would agree it's a bad idea for an opening statement, and she would think it's a good idea if she thought it was the closing statement
I was just about to say the exact same thing. Legal Eagle thought it was perfect. Also, I wonder if she had watched the whole episode, because he got paid immediately before leaving the courthouse, and the verdict was mentioned by the clerk, making it clear that it was a closing argument.
A few corrections
Breaking Legs - The ethics violation would be invalid. Jimmy was acting as a good Samaritan, carefully negotiating a violent criminal down from skinning two young men alive out in the New Mexico desert.
The Kettlemens & Nacho - Jimmy didn't encourage Nacho to try and rob the Kettlemens. He accidently let it slip that they had embezzled money while under duress, but later after Nacho proposed working together to rob them Jimmy declined on moral grounds. Though this left Nacho to rob the Kettlemens on his own, Jimmy in no way encouraged him because it would ruin his chance to represent them.
Later the police chased Jimmy down and arrested him because they were following a lead. After the police arrested Nacho a payphone called him repeatedly and left him many ominous voicemails, so they called the payphone back to see if the caller was still there and after confirming such they sent agents to arrest and interrogate him in connection to their suspect, only to then discover that the caller was Nacho's lawyer.
Thank you. Yes. She is missing a lot of context in this video.
Yeah, she was also wrong about the opening. Those weren’t Jimmy’s opening remarks, it was his closing statement. He also didn’t start the trial by barging in, he asked for a recess to run to the bathroom to practice his lines. Then came back in to deliver his closing remarks. Then the prosecution plays the footage of the teens having sex with the head as it’s closing remarks and let’s the jury go to decision.
She definitely was just fed clips to react to with no context. She’s right about the stuff that needs no context tho. So there’s that lol
Yeah a lot of inaccuracies
@@angc214 she called Kim "Liz Wexler" i almost cried, but then she said, "if they don't get it on in this series..." and then i laughed cause she hasn't seen the show.
@@TheEpicSpire Was honestly pretty annoying. Why react to the show without even watching an episode? It didn't even seem like she watched a full scene.
saul negotiated with a drug kingpin from killing 2 people in the middle of a desert down to just breaking a leg each, and you call it an “ethics violation”💀
Pretty rough opening clip as the opening court scene is the closing arguments and, quite memorably, not just a criminal trespass case.
Agreed-this video got that point wrong.
Did she really confuse necrophilia for trespassing lol
@@denisesudell2538 she got quite a few points wrong. Also got Kim’s name wrong and called her Liz.
Pretty sure she didnt even watch it
@@janpribyla9817she got her info from those breaking bad/better call Saul sigma edits😭
yessss I loved the show and how it dealt with the mundane parts of being a lawyer! I was always wondering how accurate it really was because it FELT so authentic
hahah yessss listen I loved it I think it was really well done
@@LeejaMiller please do the other seasons
Would love to see you react to more series of this. I love Breaking Bad but I honestly think Better Call Saul is a better show. The idea behind BB was to take a 'good' character and have him turn 'bad' but honestly I think BCS does a much better job of that than BB did. Rewatching BB, I feel like Walt always had the nasty qualities that we see in him as Heisenberg, he just grew in confidence and eventually hubris over time. Saul, while not always doing things above board, I feel does have a good heart at the beginning but overtime life beats that out of him. It's a slower burn but I believe it's better crafted and also much more realistic. Also just a lot sadder because we've seen who Jimmy becomes and how his life goes.
So I haven’t watched all of BCS so I don’t have that insight to compare the two, but I’ve always felt like BB wasn’t purely showing good going bad, it’s that we all have a little bad in us but what circumstances make us break. That’s just what I’ve always taken from BB. Without seeing BCS fully I can without a doubt say it’s a great show though!
BCS is so much better at nuance than BB. I love both shows but BCS does a great job of making you think about the nuances in life--how people can be "good" and "bad" at the same time.
@@carstarsarstenstesenn They specifically did a good job of showing someone who does bad things for good reasons (Jimmy) and someone who does good things for bad reasons (Chuck). For all his competence, technical expertise, and professed love for the virtuous application of the law, Chuck maliciously litigated situations that worked to his own benefit and looked over injustices if he thought they were unwinnable. And his tit-for-tat animosity toward his brother built the toxic foundation that eroded the moral attachment that Jimmy had to his own unsavory behavior. Chuck habitually fed, nurtured, and finally released the beast that is Saul Goodman.
I personally still love BB more because of the places they took the show (esp. Ozymandias, Confessions, and Dead Freight), and because we wouldn't have BCS without BB. But I agree that BCS is a fantastic show, done well. I'm also glad the writers were able to hone their skills on BB and channel their creativity into BCS without making the latter feel like a retread of the former. Truly an amazing crew of artists.
@@extantsanity Great points. Couldn't have said it better myself.
I wouldn't say it's better overall, but it's certainly better for a lawyer to react to, since it's so much more about the profession.
5:00 to Jimmy's defense, this was a hostage negotiation.
Exactly he just saved both of their lives how is she seeing that as a negative
@@uhuh.2232 Women
That’s exactly the vibe I get from better call Saul. Accurate almost painfully so but with a touch of dramatic license. As someone who lives in the uk and who had only seen the Hollywood side of America it was amazing to see the America breaking bad and better call Saul show us.
I never thought about these shows from the perspective of a non-american. Now that you mention it, these shows really do have a lot of great representation of everyday Americans. That mundanity is what I love the most about better call saul especially
I’m sick as hell today my whole family is I swear you uploading this video really helped me relax 🥺 thank you queen!
Sorry you're sick but I'm glad this helps!! ⭐
Hope you and your family all feel better soon!
Leeja- about the money issue “per defendant”- he’s likely getting paid as a panel attorney. Basically private defense attorneys will take on clients that the public defenders office can’t take for a reason (like being conflicted out) and get paid money from the state per client/defendant they take on.
Edit: can’t believe I forgot to add: great work!! Love your content.
Or picked up at jail call. If there is no public defenders office, private attorneys can show up in court and get appointments. I did it when I was fresh out of law school.
Or they are hired for overflow
@@eightbitsurrenderomi4148 yeah the writers have confirmed that at this point in time, Jimmy is working PD overflow. so from my understanding, Jimmy's not even a public defender, just someone who gets the cases that the actual public defenders can't get to
your reactions really peeve me, no offense, because they lack the substantial context required to get the full picture of the scene. when you said that jimmy was "advising someone to break the law", that criticism is invalid because he saved two people from being gutted and killed by a ruthless man to simply having their legs broken, which is morbid but hey i didn't write the show.
again, i dont expect you to watch every episode in a show before making a video on it, but please try watching some snippets to understand further context that turns a scene of a lawyer behaving unlawfully to doing something just.
@@ourcorrectopinions6824 it was never legal advice anyway. His clients were the ones tied up, he was acting as an officer of the court when he went to tuco’s house to save them
THIS. She did not see the show. Apparent from 11:27 'Liz Wexler'
Liz Wexler... LMFAO. This video is awesome. Thanks, Leeja :)
7:32 It's worth knowing that in this scene, Jimmy is fully aware that it's trademark infringement, and he was relying on recieving the injunction that demanded he take it down; it was all part of a grand scheme to stage an accident at the scene of the billboard being taken down (a worker falling off the billboard and dangling by a wire) so he could be caught on camera saving the day, giving him more publicity than the billboard ever would have.
It shows that Jimmy/Saul has a very good understanding of the law as well as a great ability to plan several steps ahead to get what he wants.
When I was fresh out of law school in the mid-90s, I would go to jail call in the mornings and the court would assign cases to lawyers waiting for appointments. And yeah, they paid shit.
The reason why Chuck is asking Jimmy to change the name of the law firm is because Chuck doesn't want HIS name associated with Jimmy at all. The law firm and Howard had nothing to do with it, but Chuck is trying to use them as a scapegoat to make Jimmy change the name.
I find it very interesting to see that your opinion to his closing argument (that you called opening argument) gave completely different views to those from another lawyer I watched reacting to this who felt the argument was excellent. Even down to the calling clients knuckleheads - Jimmy knew that there was overwhelming evidence against them and rather than trying to make them out to be innocent, he described them as knuckleheads to make them out to be immature and silly, rather than malicious.
I think everyone realized he was being theatrical at that point. Still, a good attempt to mitigate the situation (=we were all young and dumb, so don't be too harsh on them)
You lack enormous amounts of context in all of these clips, it would be helpful if you actually watched the show so the things you say actually make sense.
One example, Tuco is a methhead, he is out of control and wanted to murder those two guys that were tied up. Saul did an amazing negotiation and saved their lives. Jimmy was far from advising him to commit a crime, he was saving their lives.
Kim, not Liz
I don't even think you actually watched this show because you are saying that it is bad for them too to live and he talked them down from being murdered. If you didn't do what it was necessary to save a life in that moment then that would be the worst outcome
At 2:20 when he was calling his clients knuckleheads, it was more of an appeal to the jury since they were older, to remind them "hey, we were all young and dumb once. When have any of you not been a knucklehead in your life? Let's try to downplay this event as just some kids being kids."
Also... i'm not sure if you actually watched the episodes with your commentary on 5:10... Tuco was about to brutally murder both of them, and Jimmy was able to talk him down out of his rage-induced state to only breaking one leg each. Tuco is part of the Mexican Cartel, so yea.... of course it's an ethics violation. This isn't in a courtroom though, so that isn't applicable as an argument.
Would LOVE a video on the accessibility or inaccessibility of “allegedly” public record documents/a deep dive into FOIA. Relevant to so many fields not just legal but archival, journalistic, etc. love you leeja!
Counsel, you should watch the rest of the “trespassing” case to get the gravamen of the 3 “knuckleheads”’ major offense once that got inside the mortuary. Also, Saul lays, so eloquently, a lis pendens
Had some phone typing challenges in my previous message - any event, the lis pendens threat is priceless (it’s in Breaking Bad), and demonstrates that his clown act is a thin disguise of a very able attorney. Glad to see your postings - pls keep up the good work!
Those were closing arguments in the first scene.
I hate that I used to have a crush on Saul WHAT WAS WRONG WITH ME how could I want to sleep with Slippin’ Jimmy
no no I literally currently have a crush on him so I'm glad to hear it's not just me!
@@LeejaMiller I don’t feel crazy anymore thank you 😭
Hahaha come on, he’s charming asf, plus he can become Kevin Costner whenever he wants
😂@@Johnnysmithy24
The way you describe legal mumbo jumbo makes it all so much easier to understand!
yay I'm glad!!
This is so interesting! Another lawyer reacting said everything Jimmy did in the first scene was smart, including appealing to the better nature of the jury. It’s so cool to see an almost opposite reaction and have both be supported with great arguments. And I’m not being sarcastic here, I truly mean it’s really fun to see such opposite opinions argued so well. Glad I found your channel!
FWIW, this video does not support its position with great arguments. She gets a bunch of facts wrong showing she didn't even watch the entirety of the scenes she commented on. She was apparently just given clips to react to without context.
Not a lawyer myself, but imo everyone in the courtroom understood it was just theatrics for theatrics' sake (Legal Eagle even pointed that out as dramatization)
@@williet.3058 the show set up the scene in a way which makes it clear why he was able to do what he did. It's closing argument, and he got a short break before giving his. Everyone was waiting for him to come back and give a speech.
Would all judges allow such a theatrical entrance? No. Would some? Maybe. They have every right to if they want.
A couple of years ago, for my paralegal program, I had to look at a website that had class action lawsuits. That homework, led to 4 months later, getting a $1400 check as a participant in a class action lawsuit against a drug company (Provigil was the medication). Most profitable homework I ever did in my life :).
TIMESTAMPS:
0:00 DataCamp
1:08 Criminal Trespass
3:07 Car Crash
3:39 HHM Trademark
4:26 Breaking Legs
5:24 Public Defenders
6:28 The Kettlemens & Nacho
7:32 HHM Trademark Part 2
8:51 Attorney Advertising
10:50 Kettlemens Fire Liz
12:43 University of American Samoa
13:48 SPOLIATION
14:45 Legal Research 101
16:38 Discovery 101
19:06 Good vs. Bad
19:29 You're Not a Real Lawyer
20:06 Fraud
21:32 Outro
This one of my all time favorite shows and I would love more of this content!
This video is awesome! You have such a strong, present, funny personality, and it is so cool to get this knowledge from someone on in inside of the industry. You should definitely watch the rest of the show!
Objection! Her name is Kim Wexler, not Liz Wexler.
Fantastic video! It would be amazing if you would consider watching the other seasons. Based on your reactions here, I think you would enjoy them tremendously.
hahahahahahah not me being on season 4 and getting her dam name wrong, thank you!
I love Kim. She is such a complex character and so brilliantly acted. Can't wait to see where this last season goes.
I'm pretty sure the scene at the beginning was a closing statement not an opening statement
I’m a new fan thanks to your Bailey reviews ❤️🤗loving your content can’t stop watching catching up quickly🤣your gorgeous funny smart and absolutely genuine which is absolutely rare these days💎
aw thank you so much!!
I'd love to see you react to this whole series!
Yessss! I’ve been desperate to see you react now I’ve finally caught up watching. Hope you’re holding up okay with The News.
Interesting, the Legal Eagle actually loved the opening argument.
Well, because it wasn’t an opening argument, it was a closing one
It’s a closing argument
The presenter here lacks a lot of context, as she hasn't watched the show. I'm not a lawyer, but what Saul was trying to do is make the jury more compassionate towards the (obviously guilty) young guys to prevent them from going to jail. In my book, he was trying his best as a defender, even if that was pure theatrics.
getting the feels over jimmy is real
I fuckin love a class action Lawyer! mwah!
It's really interesting how completely different your opinion of his closing statement was to legal eagle. He literally said the exact opposite of you and thought his closing statement was very effective. I guess that's why some lawyers do a better job than others
Everyone in the courtroom must have realized it was theatrics and (basically) demagogy. I'm on the legal eagle's side in the way that the guys' guilt was obvious, but Saul did well trying to mitigate the situation (=they are young and dumb, don't give them jail time). That is, until the tape surfaced :P
It was either broken leg, or skinned alive
I just came across this video please do a reaction for each season. We need this now more than ever 🤣
Lawyers advertising DID hurt the practice in the long run.
You’re such an intelligent woman. I could listen to you talk all day. Thanks for the review.
Omg I’m glad I’m not the only one that was like uhhhh Sauls kinda got a thing right? Like he definitely has something? Right? Anyone? 🤣🤣🤣
I love your channel and I love how you simplify things!
I’d say talking Tuco down from killing them both to just causing bodily harm shouldn’t count as breaking the law at all lol
I believe Cadbury has trademarked the shade of purple they use (not that anyone asked, just another example ☺️)
ooo fascinating
@@LeejaMillerCan't remember where I heard this information, but I remembered it. I also went to check my memory and apparently Nestlé tried to block the trademark but eventually lost. The things you find with Google, how did I research anything when growing up?
Woo! So early. Honor to be here 😂 met Bob Odenkirk twice, he really likes key lime pie, but who doesn’t?
WHAT THAT"S SO COOL ok I kind of have a crush on him after watching this which is really unexpected
@@LeejaMiller 🤣 totally understandable!! He’s a hunk! I’ll have to tell you both stories sometime lmao one’s dope, one is *cringe*
@@LeejaMiller may i suggest the movie “nobody” where he trained like an action star 👀
Jimmy is not working as a public defender. Rather he is working as a court appointed lawyer. Contrary to what is shown in film and television, most indigent defendants receive court appointed counsel. That is why Jimmy is not on salary and is being paid on a "per defense" basis. It must have been a remarkably short trial though. $700 wasn't much even in 2002.
Is that what lawyers wear when they watch movies or tv shows? A suit jacket?
You need a lot more context on that 1st scene. Jimmy was basically in damage control on the closing argument and hoping for anything less than the absolute maximum sentence. If a jury could find defenders as "Super Guilty" it would have happened in this case. The prosecutor's closing was basically playing the tape that showed what happened.
I hope you talk more about this show! Just saw this video and your channel and would love to see more!
I hate to spam this comment but I would really love to hear your thoughts on Defending Jacob. It stars Chris Evans as an assistant DA whose son is accused of murder. I found your channel from the first UNhhh reaction and have been hooked since.
I wanted to be a lawyer for a while in college, but then changed my mind. Part of that decision was the elitism of lawyers. Part of it was that it was a lot of work and likely debt with no guarantee of a payoff. I might become a lawyer and then end up making peanuts. Why bother? Another thing was that I largely disagree with the legal system as it currently operates, particularly the criminal justice system. Laws are written by decrepit, out of touch politicians, and often mindlessly enforced by cops and prosecutors, even when to do so is so obviously immoral.
Take for example the recent story out of Bryan, Ohio. There's a pastor there who did a very kind thing and opened his church to let the homeless shelter there over the winter. The city got wind of this and he is now facing criminal charges for violating the city's zoning laws. Those laws in themselves are illegitimate to begin with, but enforcing them in this circumstance is extremely wicked. Yet, cops and prosecutors did just that, and the judge has gone along with it. Cops should have refused to cite him. Prosecutors should have refused to prosecute. Judges should have sumarily dismissed the case and dared prosecutors to refile or appeal. And the jury, if all else fails, should acquit in spite of the evidence (jury nullification). But that's not what's happened and the jury will be told not to do the right thing, but rather to blindly enforce the law. I hope they disobey. The pastor did nothing wrong in breaking the (f)law and giving food and shelter to the poor. He will likely be punished for his good deeds by a supposed Justice system. Cases like this make me want to burn the whole thing to the ground.
The only law I would ever want to practice is either criminal defense or civil rights law, because in my opinion those are the most honorable legal fields. Most of everything else is at best neutral or is actually a net detriment to society.
One more thing: I HATE the word "liability". It is the red tape strangulating all good things in this world. It's the reason I am not allowed to assist a client in opening their medicine, push someone in a wheelchair up a ramp if they need help, etc. If something goes wrong somehow- even if it's not really our fault, and even if we were doing the right thing (helping a disabled person, for example)-, some ambulance chaser might sue the homeless shelter I work at and possibly ruin it. Liability sucks and lawyers have created a minefield of possible lawsuits anytine you do just about anything, but especially something right.
Its funny how you said pretty much the exact opposite to what legal eagle said in the hearing
I think the 'shouldn't call them knuckleheads' argument is a bit weird. Yeah, it's all theatrics and demagogy, but what Saul was trying to do is stir some sympathy for the guys that were obviously guilty, to prevent them from getting jail time (=responsible attorney). Plus, the guys were young, so patronizing them felt more or less ok. Lastly, the presenter clearly lacks a lot of context, so I'm siding with the legal eagle just because he actually watched the entire episode more than once.
Omg I've been waiting for this since the day I discovered your channel 😭❤️
8:32 I like how tiffany's blue is green, well maybe teal/turquoise if you want to be precise.
I love your commentary on one of my favorite shows :3 thank you, nevertheless. Subscribed. PS i like your univ of american samoa sweatshirt :3
Please react to the rest of the show it's super interesting hearing about some of the aspects my brain just glossed over
There are smaller counties that do not have a public defenders office and instead pay private attorneys to take individual cases. This happens on juvenile cases too (involving allegations of abuse). He’s not employed by the PD’s office so I’m guessing that’s his arrangement.
I made $30k/year in 2000 when I started my first job with a legal aid program. So this doesn’t sound impossible!
I was going to make a similar comment: not every lawyer who does public defender work has a salaried job doing so.
The frame for your glasses is the perfect mix of eloquence, sassy, quirk, professionalism, style, and sharpness. I need a pair like that, but tailored for a masculine man.
Also as I'm early, would love to see you react to Crazy Ex Girlfriend's don't be a Lawyer.
I LOVE this show!
I really enjoyed your take on it. I'd be down for more of your commentary on it!
I would love if Leeja and Legal Eagle debated that first scene since their opinions on it are night and day
If this shit is 100% real I’m gonna be pissed. Better call Saul is the reason I even think I can be a lawyer lol
not Liz Wexler, but Kim Wexler
This is a really weird video for me to stumble upon because it says a lot of untrue things which make it clear the speaker hasn't actually watched the show. For instance, she starts the video talking about how Saul's "opening statement" was done wrong because she doesn't realize it was actually a closing statement and he basically asked permission to do what he did. She then says it'd be an ethical violation for him to tell his client to break the legs of two people when Tuco was not his client, and the only reason he suggested that was to stop a crazy person from murdering the people instead.
I get she was probably just given clips to react to without any context, blatantly misrepresenting things because you lack the knowledge you portray yourself as having is... not what lawyers should be doing.
kinda ironuic "violent crime" and "no bail" when the guy who tried to murder a GOP in public view on stage with a knife got out the same day in new york
react to all the seasons please!!!!! this was really entretaining and educational ^^
Stumbled upon this channel by accident. Awesome take on one of my favorite shows ever.
LegalEagle's reaction is much more in depth than this, as he actually researches the scenes with context rather than simply react to an out of context clip. Also, he doesn't misname characters.
i don't know why, but i always get a kick out of the way you say goodbye
hhahaha thank you
I think it's funny you tried to make it sound like Jimmy tried to get tuco to break someone's legs, when he was literally trying to save their lives. I'm sure he's morally safe in that situation.
"2002, which is somehow 20 years ago *laughs*". Lol, same... Seems like it was a couple years ago. As you also said, the 80s feel like 20 years ago, so, I feel you
A video on how to find a good lawyer would be nice
I need to go back and binge this show. This got me pumped!! I hope you react to more!
I'm just gonna say(watching the part about the legs) if you thinks ethics are important to Saul at all you've got a revelation coming 😂
Also she probably picked the worst example for ethics. Jimmy is acting as a Good Samaritan and in favor of his clients (not tuco, but the 2 guys who got their legs broken) also jimmy never told nacho to steal the money, he admitted that they embezzled the money under duress to nacho but never told him to
American Samoa, go land crabs
Instant sub from me, I'm so glad you reacted to the whole season instead of just one ep!
YES! I'm so glad you're watching this AND loving it lol One of the best shows and characters I've ever seen. Can't wait to see you cover the rest of the seasons.....and at the end I still think you should go into practice with That Surprise Witness TV lol It's the only legal dramedy that could top this show LOL
Could the billboard not be argued as a parody? Or is that not something that could be argued?
Please do more of these!
"When the going gets tough, you don't want a criminal lawyer - you want a CRI-MIN--AL lawyer.".
- Jesse Pinkman BB s01
"20 years ago" WHAT
Uhhhh that first case was about a little more than just trespassing
Would love to hear your take on the finale where Saul negotiates a plea & then takes the full sentence. Please consider doing this. Thanks. I am subscribed.
Aren't they depicting a per-case compensation system? Seems like it's not a salary check and if you get enough of those checks you might have a reasonable salary, even though Saul is displeased at the particular amount. And the negotiation about how many of the skaters' legs to break is not subject to scrutiny for realism, it's just a funny surreal scene about a ruthless gangster and a lawyer's negotiating skills.
I AM SO EXCITED FOR THIS. Better Call Saul is a favorite of mine ❤❤❤
YESSSS I was hoping you’d react to this show!!!
6:22 Yes the show is set up in 2002, yes its about 20 years ago, and this is because Breaking Bad aired in 2008. Better Call Saul is about Saul Goodman, and the events in his life, that occurred before he met Walter White (about 5 years before BB). By the way love that outfit and it really works well with your hair!
Another great video! Sorry I don't have more to contribute to the conversation it's been a tough day but I figured I'd still comment to appease the Al Gore Rhythm gods
Thank you!!
My all-time favorite tv show.
These reactions videos are always fun. Here's a question, now that Pam and Tommy is running on Hulu, I'm wondering you can talk about the legality of leaked sex tapes??? I've always been curious how people can get away with that.
21:20 bro WHAT? if you made 30k a year where i live, you're literally living under a bridge and feeding on the roaches and worms that live there... literally worse than poverty. what kind of lawyers make 30k a year?????
Love this show, thanks for your take! Could you do something about the movie Double Jeopardy? It came out in the 90s with Ur-Girl Boss Ashley Judd in it (no shade, I love her) and Tommy Lee Jones as a parole officer and it's got a pretty rad premise, but I'd be interested to see what you think about the whole thing.
Please explain why an Attorney has to be a member of the bar. Physicians have to pass the state test to practice Medicine. They don't to be a member of the American Medical Association . Please explain the difference.
Going on a limb 🦵 was that a lawyer joke!? 🤣🤣👍
Love the Westlaw and Shepardizing reference
yess!
I'm actually surprised that 4 Justices voted against Bates in Bates vs State Bar of Arizona. I would've guessed 1 or 2 Justices at most. Now I want to read that dissenting opinion ;-)
Westlaw sounds like the property shark for lawers. Reg rational
person here and fan of BCS
I hope you take on reacting to "Better Call Saul", It's in it's final and sixth season currently.