A common theme in the show involves portraying lawyers as individuals who abuse their authority in order to further their own interests. This theme emphasizes the role of the lawyer as someone above ‘normal’ or ordinary people. As the quote in the title suggests, the lawyers in Suits are depicted as a different kind of people who are entitled to act in certain ways. For example, in the first few episodes I analyzed (from seasons one and two) the main character, Mike Ross, was initially taken advantage of by the other lawyers. While watching the later episodes (season 3-5), I can clearly see the progression of Mike as he changes from a relatively ‘normal’ person to a lawyer that takes an active role in abusing his position at the firm. This …show more content…
As such, it is possible that the portrayal of the main character in the show as a fake lawyer, may prompt other individuals in society to believe that it is perfectly reasonable to pretend to be someone they are not qualified to be (Morris, 2013, p.613).
In another episode, Mike Ross and his prospective client, Tom Keller, talk about his decision in choosing Louis Litt as his lawyer and the following discussion ensues:
The fact that characters in Suits have explicitly stated that being nice is not a sufficient quality in lawyers and that deviousness is a more beneficial trait sends a strong message to the public regarding the ‘best’ kind of lawyer (Korsh, 30 June, 2011). This point is crucial in that it may change the viewer’s perception of what a good lawyer is and possibly lead them askew if they look for the qualities mentioned in Suits when choosing lawyers for their own personal issues.
“The way I see it, its justice”: Lawyers portrayed as being above the
…show more content…
2016). This concept that justice is beyond the constraints of law is a central focus of the show and provides for dramatic tension throughout the series. While the lawyers all remain as officers of the court, they are frequently portrayed as acting outside the scope of their role as a lawyer and sometimes in direct opposition of it to achieve justice. However, these actions are often shown as being justified or necessary in the situation despite breaching the law (Korsh, 03 Feb. 2016). The following is dialogue between Harvey Specter and the district attorney, Clifford Wolf, regarding the illegal but morally just method in which Harvey got his innocent client released from
There are certain standards that the courts use to determine competency. In order to find the accused competent, a court should find out by a preponderance of evidence that the defendant has remarkable ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational indulgence. The def...
Hariman, R. “Performing the Laws: Popular Trials and Social Knowledge” from Popular Trials: Rhetoric, Mass Media, and the Law, Robert Hariman, ed(s)., University of Alabama Press, 1990. 17-30.
Wasserstrom considers a few options with in his discussion concerning a multitude of aspects faced by lawyers. "The lawyer's situation is different from that of other professionals. The lawyer is vulnerable to some moral criticism that does not as readily or as easily attach to any other professional." Thi...
The novel Theodore Boone: Kid Lawyer has a very in-depth conflict that is showcased all throughout the novel. In Theo's community, there is a high-profile murder trial about to begin. Mr. Pete Duffy, a wealthy business man, is accused of murdering his wife Myra Duffy. The prosecutors have the idea that Mr. Duffy did it for the one million dollar insurance policy he took out on his wife earlier, however they have no proof to support this accusation (Grisham 53). The defendants do however have the proof that no one saw the murder, for all everyone knew, Mr. Duffy was playing his daily round of golf at the golf course right by his house. As the trial moved on, the jury was starting to lean towards letting Mr. Duffy walk a free man. To this point, there has been no proof to support the prosecutors statements that Mr. Duffy killed h...
In one of Law & Order’s “ripped from the headlines” episodes titled “House Counsel,” a juror in a mob trial is found dead. Law enforcement investigates and learns that the mobster tampered with the juror in order to avoid a conviction and then killed him to keep him quiet. The lawyer defending the mobster is a good friend of Assistant District Attorney Jack McCoy. Later in the investigation, McCoy discovers that his friend may have played a role in the jury tampering. When he suspects his friend is involved, McCoy sees an opportunity to get the mobster and prosecutes the attorney for the murder to leverage information about the mobster. In the end, the lawyer is convicted and the attorney-client privilege between the lawyer and the mobster is dissolved.
The defense succeeded at instilling reasonable doubt in the jurors’ minds. A major difference between the defense and prosecution, as stated by Dershowitz, was that the defense relied on factual evidence and scientific experts while the prosecution utilized witnesses that casted a shadow of doubt upon the whole jury (Dershowitz 97). Dershowitz claimed the prosecution knew they had falsities in their case, but kept them in order to win the case (Dershowitz 96). In all, though many people viewed Simpson as a guilty man, the allegations of police perjury and investigative errors allowed the defense to exploit and capitalize on the faults carried out by the prosecution and ultimately implant reasonable doubts in the minds of the jurors.
An attorney is like any other profession, such as a doctor, mechanic, accountant, or engineer, there are good ones, and there are bad ones. With lawyers, it is extra tough for the average person to tell the difference. Also, in a civil courthouse you do not get to pick your lawyer, you take what they give you. One attorney states that "50 percent of all people engaged in litigation will end up hating, at least, two lawyers," (Case). There are the lawyers who graduated from law school, passed the Bar Exam, and are licensed to practice law in the state, but seem to have no idea how to defend a client in a criminal case at trial due to lack of experience. Some lawyers lose sight of maintaining post-conviction alternative routes for their customers. Another source agrees quotes "The reality is that prosecutorial misconduct is at least as serious a problem at the local level, where prosecutors are less well-trained" (Lindorff). Finding an experienced lawyer who is all for the client is not as easy as it seems, but they do
Originally when he is mentioned in this story he is shown to be "the ultimate top-dollar ambulance chaser" trying to make a living off others pain. It's assumed that he is amoral and cold-hearted. Yet, as the story progresses it gets more and more difficult to see him in this manner. He actually turns out to be a deeply compassionate presence in this novel and in the lives of those dealing with loss in the town of Sam Dent. It turns out that he comes to the town just as the other lawyers (having heard about the accident) looking for clients, but eventually starts to grow fond of the sleepy town and its people. The town slowly alters his involvement in the case as he befriends those he is representing. He even volunteers his legal advice to people, such as Risa Walker on divorce proceedings, after the case falls through. He also helps support the Walker's hotel by keeping a room there even when he is not in Sam Dent. His style of dress also changes fro...
Weiss, M. S. (2005). A Study of Public Defender Motivations. In Public Defenders: Pragmatic and Political Motivations to Represent the Indigent (pp. 1-10). [Ebscohost]. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/
Lastly, the book could frustrate the average reader who may already feel that the lawyers could complicate the process of "right versus wrong." The plot does place "common folk" against a corporate giant and allows the archrival the ability to go on the offensive against the victims. However, one must under stand that this is a harsh reality in American legal profession, especially when millions of dollars are at stake.
With law enforcement lying, it makes it hard for citizens to depend on law enforcement. In the article, “All the Court’s a stage, and All the Lawyers Players: Leading and Misleading the Jury” Richard Zitrin and Carol Langford explain what really happens in the courts. They state, “Abraham Dennison is the most successful trial lawyers in Port City. He is smoother than silk outside of the courtroom, but in court he takes on a bumbling, aw-shucks persona.” They explain how Dennison changes the clothes he wear, and his clients to look like they are not privileged. He even dumbs down he’s speeches when talking. I might have to say it is a very smart tactic to win over the jurors. The main goal in court is to sell your client to the jury so they will feel bad for him/her. According to this article, “Dennison tells his young associates to ‘select a biased jury, it wins the case.’” By picking the right jury you can sell your clients innocence. It is sad you have to bend the truth in order to win a case. The fact one has to pick the right jury who would feel sorry for one, and act like one is uneducated in order to win a case is sad. This is bending the truth to people thinking something totally different. One should win a case by the facts, not how you hold yourself. An example of lawyers actually lying to win a case of a guilty man is the ‘affluenza’ case. In the article “Before
'Lawyers are all right, I guess - but it doesn't appeal to me,' I said. 'I mean they're all right if they go around saving innocent guys' lives all the time, and like that, but you don't do that kind of stuff if you're a lawyer. All you do is make a lot of dough and play golf and play bridge and buy cars and drink Martinis and look like a hot-shot. How would you know you weren't being a phony? The trouble is, you wouldn't' (Salinger 172).
“No matter where you run into it, prejudice obscures the trues” (page 66). Prejudice can be a dangerous thing, especially when it comes to adjusting somebody’s life. At that time in America a jury consists of twelve men can determine the life or death of one person by giving a unanimous verdict. A typical reflection of this reality is an influential drama “Twelve Anger Men”. Reginald Rose wrote this drama inspired by his experience of being a juror on a manslaughter case to reveal a common social phenomenon of prejudice. To stress the main idea that, Rose presents the key points that biased individuals are less rational or blinding themselves with an unfair judgement about one’s guilt. Moreover, she conveys the facts that stereotype produces an effect on one’s statement. Furthermore, prejudice constantly affect other jurors’ opinion, intentionally or unintentionally. With Rose’s vivid description and clear contrast between each juror, he emphasizes the existence of prejudice and further to spread an idea that prejudice influence the outcome of the trial.
Although the legal profession is a single discourse community, it is made up of many smaller discourse communities. This is so because while all lawyers share the same broad goals of the legal profession and have a general knowledge and expertise in all areas of the law, most lawyers after graduating from law school and passing the bar exam specialize in a particular area of law. This specialization requires the lawyer to go beyond the broad concepts of law as a whole and to become knowledgeable and proficient in the sometimes minute details of a more specific area of law. Even then, some lawyers will go even further to focus on one aspect or another of that particular area of law. This results in most lawyers being members of many even smal...
Who is the lawyer you may ask? What kind of person is the lawyer throughout the story? The lawyer doesn’t mention anything about himself except the fact of his job and age. He doesn’t even give his name nor the name of anyone in the story. Through the words that he speaks, the lawyer is a person who like to have structure. The enactment of dealing with people on a personal base is to much of a confrontation for lawyer. Through the ordeal of his interaction with each of his scriveners we learn that the lawyer plays it safe.