- [Narrator] This is Scott Reisch,
a criminal defense attorney
who's practiced law for the past 25 years.
- I have represented many individuals in high profile cases.
- [Narrator] Today, Scott is going to break down
what Hollywood gets right and wrong
on television court scenes.
[suspenseful jazz music] [coffee splashing]
[fan whirring]
[siren blaring]
- I'm currently here at my office.
I'm the only one here.
We're trying to keep everybody safe with this quarantine.
First up, "Better Call Saul."
- Thank you for coming in today, Mr. Harkness.
I just wanna clarify a few things from your testimony
if that's okay.
- Okay.
- So, you were working at the Sandy Mart
the night of the 30th, is that correct?
- [Man] Got in at noon, left at midnight.
- The one thing this scene does very well
is the fact that it shows that the defense attorney
is questioning the basis for the reliability
of the identification.
The identification is essential in any criminal case
because they wanna make sure
that they get the right person.
- Sounds like it happened pretty fast,
but you say you got a good look at him, correct?
- Yes.
- [chuckling] You must drink stronger coffee than I do
'cause after 11 hours on the job,
I can barely see straight.
And it was dark out.
- And so here,
the attorney is questioning how tired they were,
what the lighting was correct,
how quickly events happened,
distracted by other events.
He all but says are you sure it's my guy?
I mean, he is really the only guy
sitting over here at the defense table.
There's a little defendant on the tag on the table there.
- Are you sure that's the person?
There's no doubt in your mind?
Take your time.
- [Man] I don't need time, that's him.
- At this moment, this clip takes a huge turn.
- Now, would you be surprised to learn, Mr. Harkness,
that the person you just pointed to is not the defendant?
- What?
- My client is in the back of the courtroom.
Mr. Siggy, would you please stand up?
- And then he has his real client stand up.
That would never take place in a real courtroom.
- He is named Hollis Early.
He's a bartender down in Belen.
He has a very good alibi for the night in question.
- Your Honor, objection!
- Oh, Mr. Goodman, really?
- You didn't recognize him either, Your Honor.
- An attorney cannot deceive the court like that
by having the defendant sit out there
and having somebody else sit at the defense table.
Unrealistic, would never happen.
You'd probably get sanctioned by the judge.
Next up, "The Good Wife."
In this scene, we have an attorney
asking a witness a question.
The witness then asserts her Fifth Amendment right
against self incrimination.
- Did you and Mr. Kimble stay together in Washington D.C.?
- I refuse to answer on the grounds
that it may incriminate me.
- At this point, the judge would more
than likely have a recess, send the jury out immediately,
and then inquire whether the witness has a basis,
a good faith basis or reason, to assert the
Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination.
And then at that point, the judge would more than likely,
if the person or the witness did not have their
own attorney, would appoint them an attorney
to advise them of their Fifth Amendment rights
and whether they in fact apply.
- Miss, I wanna make sure I understand what you're saying.
- Your Honor, the witness already--
- Now you're pleading the Fifth because you were involved
in Mr. Kimble's murder or because the-
- Your Honor it is not your place to ask my witness--
- Yes it is, Mrs. Florek.
- Now, the attorney that was asking the questions
really shouldn't be advocating for this client in any way
other than saying, "Your Honor, she's asserted her right,
"she should have independent counsel."
- [Judge] Now, you are taking the Fifth--
- Your Honor, if you compel my witness
to answer this question I am moving
for an immediate mistrial!
- Denied.
- It's somewhat admirable that the attorney would try
to protect the witness to the point of even facing contempt,
but that's really not her place as it relates
to that particular witness.
- [Judge] Mrs. Florek--
- You are piercing the Fifth Amendment right!
- Mrs. Florek, shut up!
- No, sir.
- Excuse me?
- So as this scene develops, the court
admonishes the attorney and tells her to shut up.
And if she doesn't, she would in fact be held in contempt.
- As long as you are attempting to circumvent her
Fifth Amendment right, I will not shut up.
- You will shut up or be held in contempt.
- That's realistic because to be held in direct contempt
the court kinda has to give you notice
of what you're doing wrong and if you do it
again, there's gonna be punishment.
- Then hold me in contempt.
And I will refer this
to the Judicial Conduct Committee for immediate action.
- But for an attorney, to threaten the judge
with a grievance is completely inappropriate.
I've never seen it done.
I just don't think it's very realistic at all.
Next up, "Law & Order."
- On the sole count of the indictment, murder
in the second degree, how does the jury find?
- This clip almost works for me.
When a jury comes back, normally the judge will be
the one that actually reads the verdict.
I've never been in a courtroom
where the foreperson reads the verdict.
- We find the defendant not guilty.
- Now, before that verdict is read the court will also
usually have security in the courtroom.
And particularly in a large courtroom where there's
a lot of emotion going on, the court would admonish
everyone in the courtroom that there would be
no outbursts, there will be no cheering, or booing,
or any emotion whatsoever and if you do so,
you will be removed immediately by the Sheriff.
Now, in this particular case, people were reacting,
hugging each other, for television purposes
but that would not happen in most courtrooms.
The judge wouldn't allow it.
[gunshot blasting]
This is unrealistic in just about any
jurisdiction I could possibly imagine.
Most jurisdictions have court security personnel
that you have to go through before you enter the courthouse
so you're not gonna be able to bring guns and knives
or anything of that nature into the courtroom.
Next up, "American Crime Story."
- Your Honor, at this time the People would ask
that Mr. Simpson step forward and try on the gloves
recovered from Bundy and Rockingham?
[crowd murmurs] [tense music]
- We have no objection, Your Honor.
- This clip is based on
the real life trial of O.J. Simpson.
He was ultimately acquitted.
This is a good teaching point
for what they teach you almost immediately in law school.
Don't ask a question
unless you know what the answer will be.
Every trial, there's always that moment
where something takes place and you just don't expect it
and sometimes it goes really well for you
and sometimes not so well.
You can tell from the scene that nobody anticipated this.
The defense didn't know it was coming.
Even Mr. Darden's co-counsel didn't know it was coming.
Look at the apprehension on her face, trying
to figure out what the hell is going on.
- Mr. Simpson, please approach the jury.
- When Mr. Simpson walked over
to the area in front of the jury,
his legal team followed him.
They were permitted to do that so that they could
actually view what was taking place
so that they could be able to cross-examine
on those issues when it was their turn to cross-examine.
- These gloves are too small.
- This clip reminds me of a principle
that you need to remember whenever you're trying a case.
Keep it simple and don't get cute.
Mr. Darden got a little too cute.
Up next, "The Good Fight."
- Unfortunately, I have misplaced my prescription glasses,
so I will try to make do with these prescription sunglasses
if you don't mind me looking a little bit like a movie star.
- So the first thing
that I see here is a very informal judge.
This is not that uncommon,
but most of the time the judges like
to be the standard bearer for the standard of decorum.
And the lack of formality really sets the tone
for the courtroom.
- Mike, could you angle that screen some more?
These sunglasses are polarizing.
- The judge forgets his glasses
and moves about the courtroom and takes a closer look
at the exhibit to help prove the witness wrong.
- Continue, please.
- Typically the court would not leave the bench
to move around the courtroom
to look at a particular piece of evidence.
So in this scene, it's almost a conversation
that's taking place between the judge, the witness,
the defense attorney, and the plaintiff's attorney.
Very unusual, even if it was just a trial to the court
the court would still, for purposes of making a record,
allow one party to conduct their examination
the other party wouldn't be able
to jump in and ask a question and then have it answered,
and then have the judge clarify.
- [Attorney] Then why didn't the company fire him?
- [Attorney] Your Honor, I think it's a little odd
that B.M.I.'s being censured
for doing the humanitarian thing?
- Oh, I don't think plaintiff is censuring them,
I think she just finds it odd
that they kept the thief on staff, as do I.
- And most of the time, the judge is not going
to allow a question to be answered simply
because he'd like to hear the answer to it.
There has to be a legal basis for that.
- [Attorney] Objection, asked and answered.
- Actually no I'd like to hear the answer.
- The judge actually points out for the attorney
what the answer would be from the document.
- Just how many hours did you question my client?
- I don't know, I didn't keep track.
- Well, it says seven hours here.
- That simply would not happen in a courtroom.
The case should be tried by the attorneys and not the judge.
Next up, "Castle."
This is the most unrealistic courtroom scene
that I have ever seen.
First of all, you have a witness on the stand, Castle,
who's up there testifying
as to whom he thinks the murderer is.
- Mr. Castle yesterday you testified
that my client was guilty of killing Mrs. Beakman.
Do you still believe that's true?
- No, he's innocent.
- Witnesses don't get to testify to that.
They get to testify as to what they saw,
what they heard, what somebody said,
if it was an admissible statement.
They don't get to speculate, let alone change their mind
on the witness stand based upon the attorney saying,
"Is there anything else you would like to tell this jury?"
- Mr. Castle, is there anything else
you'd like to share with the court?
- Yes, good people of the jury--
- That wouldn't happen.
That's what they call a narrative.
A narrative is when a question is asked of the witness
and the witness just goes off and gives a lengthy answer
that really just amounts to a big run-on sentence.
- The bathroom downstairs was occupied.
- And they're really not answering
the question that was asked anymore,
they're just really talking about
what they wanna talk about, that's prohibiting!
It has to be question, answer, question, answer.
So for him to go off
and then point out the real killer in the courtroom.
- It was her husband, Lloyd Beakman.
- I have never seen anyone try to point out
and say, "That's the real killer
"sitting over there in the courtroom."
And then, the daughter jumps up
and asks dad questions like maybe you did do it--
- No, no I remember because I was trying to find you guys--
- All right that's enough I want order.
[gavel bangs]
- And then the detective gets up
and starts interrogating this man, now accused of murder
in the courthouse, in the courtroom, in front of the jury.
- So you headed out to the yard,
you moved the basketball hoop over
so you could climb up it and get a better look.
- [Castle] But Sadie caught you,
spying in the window, didn't she?
So you came inside and accused her
of having an affair with Roger?
- Dad, what did you do?
- What did I do, your mother was having an affair with her.
- It would never happen, it just would never happen.
The only thing that this scene was missing was
for the Scooby Doo clan to pull the masks
off somebody's head and the person say,
"I would have got away with it,
"if it wasn't for those pesky kids!"
- Mr. Beakman you're under arrest for murder.
Come on.
- This was cartoonish and amateurish at best
and whoever wrote it
and allowed it go on screen should be fired
and never be allowed to write again.
[laughing in backround]
Too much? [chuckling]
It's true, that's terrible!
Next up, "The Big Bang Theory."
Before we get to the courthouse, I'd like
to call on your skills as an actress.
- So in this scene, Sheldon has to go
to court for a traffic ticket
and he scripted the testimony of Penny
to appear in court and testify on his behalf.
- What is this?
- I've taken the liberty
of scripting your appearance on the witness stand
because let's face it, you're somewhat
of a loose cannon, now--
- Now this is a very lighthearted scene.
But one thing is very realistic.
When you go to court,
you want your witnesses to be prepared.
But you cannot script the testimony
and give that script to the witness
to prepare in preparation for their testimony.
- Do you remember that date?
- Darn tootin' I do.
[audience laughing]
- If the court will excuse my homespun,
corn-fed Nebraskan turn of phrase.
[audience laughing]
- Excellent, go on.
- Any time you call a witness,
you want to make sure that you have prepared them
so they know what subjects they're going to cover.
And sometimes you may have practiced it,
but you don't wanna practice it so much
and rehearse it so much that it appears to be rehearsed.
- The reason that date is like,
so totally fixed in my memory,
[audience laughing]
is that I had the privilege to be witness
to one of the most heroic acts I've ever seen in like, ever.
[audience laughing]
- If you were to draft a question and answer
of the answers that you were, in fact, looking for
to be given in court
and the other side asked, "Was there anything
"that you did to prepare for this hearing?"
and you said, "Yes I read the script
"that my attorney gave me of his questions"
those questions would have to be turned over
so that the other side could review them
for cross-examination.
So you would never, ever, give the witness the questions
to be read before-hand
because if the question was ever asked,
and most attorneys never ask that particular question,
but if they did, they'd have to be produced.
It can be very embarrassing for everyone involved.
- Ugh, a teardrop rolls down my cheek?
[audience laughing]
- Only a suggestion, a catch
in your throat would work just as well.
[audience laughing] [sighs]
- But it is a fact
that it's a privilege to know you, totally.
[audience laughing]
- Sometimes, you want to present your witness
in a particular way or a particular light
that may not exactly be as who they are in everyday life.
However, juries are very smart people.
They can see when you are trying to B.S. them.
And if you try to change the way somebody comes across
on the witness stand, they will be able to see it.
Our next clip is from "The Practice."
In this scene, Eugene is at the appellate courts
to receive a decision based upon an appeal of a murder case.
- Unanimously find the confession to be admissible
the conviction therefore stands.
- This scene is very unrealistic.
Rarely does an appellate court ever issue a oral decision.
They're always in writing.
An appellate court is a court that reviews
a lower court's decision to make sure
that no legal errors were made
that resulted in an unfair trial.
- [Judge] Adjourned.
[gavel bangs]
- Permission to address the court?
Permission to address this court?
- When the case is over
and the matter is in recess, the case is over.
For an attorney to ask to address the court
to explain their decision wouldn't happen in any way.
- 10 years I've been puttin' them back out there!
Criminals, sometimes rapists,
sometimes murderers, 10 years!
All the time tellin' myself, "there's a reason!"
- You're 10 seconds from a contempt order.
- Do it!
- And the rant that Eugene goes off
towards these judges and is ultimately
held in contempt for would never ever happen
and you would be held in contempt.
- Take him and put him in lock-up.
- I'll rot in that cell
if giving you respect is a condition for my getting out.
- One can be held in contempt
for not following the rules of the court
and the contempt proceeding is really
to cleanse the dignity of the court.
That's the realistic part about it.
Next up, "Law and Order."
- Doctor, is it not a fact
that you had six bourbons on the rocks
at Chance's Pub not 45 minutes ago?
[crowd murmurs]
- In this scene, the prosecutor asks the witness,
the defendant, to take a sobriety test to prove
that he has a drinking problem,
which would ultimately lead to his culpability.
The prosecutor had his investigator police
officer follow the good doctor to see
what he did over the noon hour.
And the officer investigator saw that the doctor
had had several drinks over that noon hour.
- That many?
- The attorney had a good faith basis
to inquire about whether the doctor had anything
to drink prior to taking the witness stand again.
- What's going on, Mr. Stone?
- Does that doctor look drunk to you, Your Honor?
- What the hell is that supposed to mean?
- Normally a judge would not allow
the prosecution to have somebody get up
and do a road-side sobriety test
to see if they were intoxicated.
- Raise your arm to the level of your shoulder.
Close your eyes and point to your nose
with your index finger.
- In this particular case,
the prosecutor got lucky
because the doctor basically put his finger in his eye.
[crowd murmurs]
However, had he been able to touch his nose accurately,
it would have sunk the prosecution's case.
Going back to the simple thing, don't get cute
and don't ask questions you don't know the answer to.
He knew the answer of whether he had drinks,
he didn't know if he would properly touch his finger
to the nose during the test.
In the next clip, "Perry Mason."
I remember as a kid watching re-runs of "Perry Mason"
and if you went to law school,
you certainly watched a few "Perry Mason" episodes.
- The killer accidentally overheard Thompson's
phone call to Vivian Aimes, a phone call
setting up a perfect alibi for him.
- The first thing that I notice
is how close the attorney is to the witness stand.
That rarely ever happens.
You always have to stay at the podium
and have to ask permission to get that close.
- [Attorney] And then he killed Ned Thompson!
- No, no I didn't do those things
I didn't kill Ned Thompson!
- [Attorney] And you didn't plant Fallon's
note in his pocket?
- [Defendant] No, no!
- I have never seen such high drama
in the courtroom and I have never seen
a witness be cross-examined so intensely
that apparently then the attorney
then figures out who the real killer is
and points him out in the courtroom.
- [Attorney] You didn't kill Thompson but you did Mr. Wells!
[dramatic music]
- Yes, yes I killed Ned Thompson, I killed him!
- And, not only does he stand up
and say, "Yes I did it" he collapses in tears
while he's doing it and yet everybody
remains completely calm and silent
in front of the jury, unrealistic.
"Night Court."
- Unfortunately, word got out that anyone
not arraigned before midnight was set free.
- Ugh, we were so close!
- What jumped out at me
in this scene at first was I'm not aware
of any particular situation where
if the charges were not advised by a particular time
that the case would be dismissed.
In this scene here, the prosecutor actually
grabs the charges and reads them
in a speed-reading format
so that the defendant is aware of them.
[Attorney speedily mumbling]
Normally, it's the court
that advises a defendant of the charges against him
and the rights that come with him
when he, in fact, becomes a defendant.
- [Attorney] [mumbling], the end!
[cheering]
- This is a very fun scene
it adds a little bit of levity to the situation,
which is oftentimes a very serious time
for a defendant in a particular case
but it's just not very realistic.
[cheering]
- My God, man, gavel!
- Oh, yeah, yeah hung over for a grand jury
court is--
[dramatic music]
- As you can see, Hollywood gets lots of things correct,
and lots of things wrong.
Court is not as always dramatic
as they make it out to be in the movies or on TV.
But, there's always something monumental going on there
for the participants that are involved.