She brought up the license of trade and all that when she was grilling him about how fraudulent his business was, but she never used the health code violations clearly committed by Nick and his buddy even though she witnessed their entire unsanitary popsicle-making operation, in her argument-- a point which I'm sure Nick wouldn't easily pull up a license for to shut down.

Earlier in the movie, before she realised she'd been scammed, she told off the elephants about their ungloved trunks and how that was a serious health code violation. This proves that she is well versed in zootopian law, specifically health and safety regulations.

She saw Nick melt the popsicle down somebody's unsterile roof and down an old pipe (probably rusty and riddled with God-knows-what type of microbes and grime), then poured into paw prints (made by paws that walked all over the city, stepping in who knows what all day) in the snow to freeze back into miniature paw-shaped popsicles! POPSICLES which were then sold and EATEN by hamsters and other mammals! Those hamsters might as well lick the city's sidewalks because doing that and eating those popsicles is basically the same frigging thing, germ-wise.

Like, she noticed all the necessary lacking licenses and all that but she didn't notice THIS? She could have used his business to put him out of business, lol. She could have waited for the next day, tailed him covertly, then filmed him go about his business of making popsicles which probably smell like feet (and which Nick later eats himself rolls eyes) and used that as evidence against him.
And that's it, her win the b-a-g; smart bunny, dumb fox.

Maybe she didn't think of it when in mid-argument with Nick, but like, COME ON JUDY!


1 Answer 1


Very good point has been made in the question. But there is another important point we should keep in my mind while asking this question. It was only Judy who witnessed all the process of manufacturing those popsicles. We already know that Judy is a cop in the movie. A cop can do nothing if he has no evidence. Evidence is must to prove a crime in the court of law.

You may ask, same Judy has made the same argument in the ice cream parlour against elephants about health code violations. It is to be noted that there were many other animals waiting after Nick(fox) and his buddy. So there were eye witnesses in the issue of health code violation of elephants. We know there is no such evidence in the case of Nick's business.

When she makes her argument against Nick citing Zootopian law about his fraudulent business, Nick says a word,

It's your word against my word.

But Nick almost stumbles when he finds his words were recorded by Judy in a carrot looking pen recorder. This evidence made Judy strong and Nick weak. Above words appear in the climax of the movie too.

Judy did not have any video evidence or any witness that Nick was making health code violation. Judy knew that a case without a proper evidence would make weak in the court of law and will be closed in no time.

  • 1
    mmm, true. Now that I think about it, if she had time to go look up his tax records a day after she found out about him being a con artist, she probably used that time to also film his whole popsicle-making method too. Smart Bunny. Oct 25, 2017 at 11:45

You must log in to answer this question.

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