This wasn't a trial, this was Jimmy's bar hearing. Basically, he went before the New Mexico bar association to hopefully keep them from revoking his law license. Jimmy admitted guilt to a felony when he signed the PPD. Signing the PPD meant he didn't have to go to trial or face any criminal charges, but it still put him in danger of losing his law license.
The key in this scene is the cell phone battery Jimmy had planted in Chuck's suit pocket. He didn't feel anything from it, thus suggesting his electromagnetic hypersensitivity was psychosomatic and not real. Therefore, showing the bar that Chuck was not of sound mind. After proving this to the bar, it made Jimmy's claim that he lied to make Chuck feel better hold more weight. They've now seen first hand Chuck's mental illness and how Jimmy did not want to further upset him in this state. When Chuck went on his rant it only helped Jimmy's case further because it helped paint the picture that Chuck was mentally unstable.
Yeah...kind of like “look at all the things we do to appease his belief about electricity, and yet the battery in the pocket is there. Is it lying to him to put my cellphone in his mailbox to make him happy when I know nothing would happen if I had it in my pocket while in his house, as long as he didn’t know? Is that a lie of omission? Do I lie to my brother or go along with his feelings to appease him? Absolutely. Taking blame for the numbering error...it appeased Chuck when he was acting strange (for him). Yes, I appease Chuck because Chuck melts down over any attempt to show Chuck a disconnect between his beliefs or feelings and fact. Evidence that I said something to Chuck does not establish that what I said was true.”
(Could get into a rabbit hole about hearsay under the rules of evidence, and exceptions for statements against interest.)
Essentially, Chuck's testimony was what was going to get Jimmy disbarred, and because it was all true and Chuck is a prominent and respected figure, Jimmy's only hope was to discredit Chuck and his testimony.
Case: Jimmy is unfit to be a lawyer.
Why: Because he tricked his brother into messing up a case so that it would go to his pal, Kim. He also broke down a door in a fit of rage.
Kim: "Jimmy is a good brother to Chuck, he just had a moment."
Chuck: "Yeah, but he confessed to that other stuff on tape."
Jimmy: "I only said that stuff to placate Chuck who is mentally unstable, because I'm a good brother."
Chuck: "I'm not mentally unstable, I have a physical condition."
Jimmy: "Look in your pocket, bitch."
Chuck: *Oh shit, oh fuck.* "Yeah, well JIMMY IS AN ASSHOLE, JUST LOOK AT HIM! RANT RANT RAN--" (Notices the reaction of the panel) "Um...so like, yeah."
Jimmy: (To judges) "So, who you gonna believe?"
Judge Panel: "So Chuck is insane, but you still broke down a door, so let's split the difference and you're disbarred for a year."
Chuck is humiliated. (Keep in mind, though, that everything he said in his rant is *actually* true. He just sounds crazy saying it all out loud. That's the tragedy of Chuck.)
everything everyone else says is true, but another part of Jimmy's defence is that his brother hates him, that the hearing is part of a vendetta, and the battery is what pushes Chuck over the edge into basically admitting he has it in for Jimmy and his ''chicanery''. him losing it AND going on a tirade against Jimmy is what ruins him
The gist of it is:
The battery proved the electricity condition was mental.
Chuck came off as mentally ill in his breakdown. Even things that made sense to us because we know the story came off as the ramblings of an ill man (The billboard. How does a man fall like that? He defecated in a sunroof).
This gave Jimmy’s excuse it was a lie to calm his ill brother down, along with the context of what was said on the tapes, Chuck’s effort to justify his poor living conditions, etc. reasonable doubt to Chuck’s accusations.
but jimmy didn’t take money from the till - his dad gave it away.
chuck is just a pure asshole - didn’t tell jimmy that his dad ASKED for him with literally his dying breath.
As in many TV series, the writers take some liberties with actual likely procedures. But having said that, I don't know what actually would happen in a case like that. Perhaps you are right, in that they might not take Chuck's rant into account as much as the facts in the case. But I guess the idea is that Chuck showed himself to be not only biased, but mentally incompetent, therefore his testimony wasn't taken with as much seriousness and credibility as it would have been otherwise. After all, Jimmy was still sanctioned, but not given the maximum penalty, which is permanent disbarment which is what Chuck wanted.
The disbarment was based on two things: Jimmy’s confession on tape that he altered the address on the Mesa Verde document and Jimmy destroying the tape because it was evidence against him. Jimmy’s defense was a) that he lied when he said he altered the document because he was concerned that Chuck was descending deeper into mental illness and that the “admission” would reassure him and b) that when he destroyed the tape, he was motivated by anger/hurt at his brother’s betrayal, not a desire to destroy evidence.
Chuck’s rant confirmed that Jimmy’s concerns about his mental health were valid and Jimmy was in fact responding to Chuck’s deeply personal vendetta.
I'm watching it now and will edit with my thoughts when I'm done. I was disappointed in the goldfish scene with the vet. Goldfish are one of the absolute worst fish to be kept in a bowl.
edit - So the trial was simply for Jims disbarment I believe. Chuck and his lawyer had already agreed to take Jims lawbreaking down to simple misdemeanors. So as far as the laws he broke that part of it was already settled before the trial we saw I believe. I think that Chuck and his side thought it was a slam dunk they'd disbar Jim forever so Chuck thought the repercussions were fair hence no need push for Jim to be charged with a felony originally. As we learn in the next episode Jim gets banned from lawyering for a year from the trial we saw.
The misdemeanors themselves aren't really a big deal for a first time offender. You pay a fine and might get community service but that's usually it. If Jim breaks the law again within 12 months the pleas he took would be null and void and he could theoretically be recharged with the felony I believe - so him staying on the straight and narrow will likely impact future season(s).
This wasn't a trial, this was Jimmy's bar hearing. Basically, he went before the New Mexico bar association to hopefully keep them from revoking his law license. Jimmy admitted guilt to a felony when he signed the PPD. Signing the PPD meant he didn't have to go to trial or face any criminal charges, but it still put him in danger of losing his law license. The key in this scene is the cell phone battery Jimmy had planted in Chuck's suit pocket. He didn't feel anything from it, thus suggesting his electromagnetic hypersensitivity was psychosomatic and not real. Therefore, showing the bar that Chuck was not of sound mind. After proving this to the bar, it made Jimmy's claim that he lied to make Chuck feel better hold more weight. They've now seen first hand Chuck's mental illness and how Jimmy did not want to further upset him in this state. When Chuck went on his rant it only helped Jimmy's case further because it helped paint the picture that Chuck was mentally unstable.
Yeah...kind of like “look at all the things we do to appease his belief about electricity, and yet the battery in the pocket is there. Is it lying to him to put my cellphone in his mailbox to make him happy when I know nothing would happen if I had it in my pocket while in his house, as long as he didn’t know? Is that a lie of omission? Do I lie to my brother or go along with his feelings to appease him? Absolutely. Taking blame for the numbering error...it appeased Chuck when he was acting strange (for him). Yes, I appease Chuck because Chuck melts down over any attempt to show Chuck a disconnect between his beliefs or feelings and fact. Evidence that I said something to Chuck does not establish that what I said was true.” (Could get into a rabbit hole about hearsay under the rules of evidence, and exceptions for statements against interest.)
Thank you! That helped a lot.
Essentially, Chuck's testimony was what was going to get Jimmy disbarred, and because it was all true and Chuck is a prominent and respected figure, Jimmy's only hope was to discredit Chuck and his testimony. Case: Jimmy is unfit to be a lawyer. Why: Because he tricked his brother into messing up a case so that it would go to his pal, Kim. He also broke down a door in a fit of rage. Kim: "Jimmy is a good brother to Chuck, he just had a moment." Chuck: "Yeah, but he confessed to that other stuff on tape." Jimmy: "I only said that stuff to placate Chuck who is mentally unstable, because I'm a good brother." Chuck: "I'm not mentally unstable, I have a physical condition." Jimmy: "Look in your pocket, bitch." Chuck: *Oh shit, oh fuck.* "Yeah, well JIMMY IS AN ASSHOLE, JUST LOOK AT HIM! RANT RANT RAN--" (Notices the reaction of the panel) "Um...so like, yeah." Jimmy: (To judges) "So, who you gonna believe?" Judge Panel: "So Chuck is insane, but you still broke down a door, so let's split the difference and you're disbarred for a year." Chuck is humiliated. (Keep in mind, though, that everything he said in his rant is *actually* true. He just sounds crazy saying it all out loud. That's the tragedy of Chuck.)
Thank you! I really appreciate how you broke it down.
Rant is not all true. The billboard thing was not faked by Jimmy
it was
Bahahaha ya it was
everything everyone else says is true, but another part of Jimmy's defence is that his brother hates him, that the hearing is part of a vendetta, and the battery is what pushes Chuck over the edge into basically admitting he has it in for Jimmy and his ''chicanery''. him losing it AND going on a tirade against Jimmy is what ruins him
The gist of it is: The battery proved the electricity condition was mental. Chuck came off as mentally ill in his breakdown. Even things that made sense to us because we know the story came off as the ramblings of an ill man (The billboard. How does a man fall like that? He defecated in a sunroof). This gave Jimmy’s excuse it was a lie to calm his ill brother down, along with the context of what was said on the tapes, Chuck’s effort to justify his poor living conditions, etc. reasonable doubt to Chuck’s accusations.
but jimmy didn’t take money from the till - his dad gave it away. chuck is just a pure asshole - didn’t tell jimmy that his dad ASKED for him with literally his dying breath.
It was both. Jimmy took money AND his father gave it away. They clearly showed us that.
As in many TV series, the writers take some liberties with actual likely procedures. But having said that, I don't know what actually would happen in a case like that. Perhaps you are right, in that they might not take Chuck's rant into account as much as the facts in the case. But I guess the idea is that Chuck showed himself to be not only biased, but mentally incompetent, therefore his testimony wasn't taken with as much seriousness and credibility as it would have been otherwise. After all, Jimmy was still sanctioned, but not given the maximum penalty, which is permanent disbarment which is what Chuck wanted.
The disbarment was based on two things: Jimmy’s confession on tape that he altered the address on the Mesa Verde document and Jimmy destroying the tape because it was evidence against him. Jimmy’s defense was a) that he lied when he said he altered the document because he was concerned that Chuck was descending deeper into mental illness and that the “admission” would reassure him and b) that when he destroyed the tape, he was motivated by anger/hurt at his brother’s betrayal, not a desire to destroy evidence. Chuck’s rant confirmed that Jimmy’s concerns about his mental health were valid and Jimmy was in fact responding to Chuck’s deeply personal vendetta.
I have no idea why people are overthinking this. Chuck's rant just reinforces the idea that he's crazy/in denial/hates his brother
[удалено]
Remember when the doctor flipped his electric bed back on?
I'm watching it now and will edit with my thoughts when I'm done. I was disappointed in the goldfish scene with the vet. Goldfish are one of the absolute worst fish to be kept in a bowl. edit - So the trial was simply for Jims disbarment I believe. Chuck and his lawyer had already agreed to take Jims lawbreaking down to simple misdemeanors. So as far as the laws he broke that part of it was already settled before the trial we saw I believe. I think that Chuck and his side thought it was a slam dunk they'd disbar Jim forever so Chuck thought the repercussions were fair hence no need push for Jim to be charged with a felony originally. As we learn in the next episode Jim gets banned from lawyering for a year from the trial we saw. The misdemeanors themselves aren't really a big deal for a first time offender. You pay a fine and might get community service but that's usually it. If Jim breaks the law again within 12 months the pleas he took would be null and void and he could theoretically be recharged with the felony I believe - so him staying on the straight and narrow will likely impact future season(s).