6

I don't watch a lot of courtroom dramas so maybe this episode expected me to understand something I just didn't but I didn't quite understand what happened with the courtroom verdict. They were defending this guy and it seemed like they were doing quite well. I especially like the pretty on-the-nose comment about their defendant facing judgement outside the courtroom. It was all played up like they were going to win a not guilty verdict for their client.

I didn't get what Fisk's goal was then. We see the man in glasses have a very vague conversation with the mob boss about taking care of Healy without leaving another body. We see him recover the gun Healy tried to use in the bowling alley and know he did something to keep the killed mob guy's people quiet. He also blackmails two of the jurors and at the end of the episode we cut from a hung jury to Healy free.

So I really just don't understand what happened. Was the man in glasses/Fisk doing all this because otherwise Matt and Foggy would have lost the case? The episode seemed to be playing it up like they were doing well and it would be nice to see them as competent lawyers. And even if all that was the case and I just missed it, how do you go from a hung jury to Healy being free in the next shot? Isn't there just a retrial and that guy would still be in jail until an actual verdict was found?

  • I totally don't get it. They were going to win. The show made it seem like they were going to win. If the jury was going to vote not guilty, why then have the blackmailed juror cause a hung jury? The whole show and the blackmailing the jurors made it seem like Fisk wanted him to go to jail. – user40266 Aug 19 '16 at 22:39
7

A hung jury results in a mistrial, and may lead to the defendant being retried under some circumstances. However, in the event of a hung jury, the odds of a retrial are relatively low, due to the possibility of running afoul of double jeopardy clauses. SOURCE

As for why Fisk still blackmailed the jurors, in spite of how well Murdock and Nelson appeared to be doing, I think that's a simple matter of leaving nothing to chance. They won't risk losing a valuable asset like Healey based on the whims of twelve civilians.

  • Thanks for the source, that explains why he was set free I guess. The thing that still gets me is the fact that one of the juror's during the final verdict was blackmailed by Fisk and his people (presumably to vote not guilty) is that the rest of the jurors were voting guilty. I think this is still kind of odd since the show seemed to show us Matt and Foggy doing well to defend their client. – Tony Apr 17 '15 at 17:22
  • Unless of course the juror was blackmailed to vote guilty which resulted in the hung jury. There is that comment form Healey "you made a fine speech Mr. Murdoch". But if that's the case I really don't understand what Fisk's goals through this whole thing were. – Tony Apr 17 '15 at 17:26

You must log in to answer this question.

protected by Community Jan 9 '17 at 14:55

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .