MovieChat Forums > Perry Mason (2020) Discussion > Why is Perry in Jail if Della found a "W...

Why is Perry in Jail if Della found a "WORKAROUND" Case to keep him OUT???

posted a year ago by joi2049 (5488)
32 replies | jump to latest

Remember Della saying that she'd look into finding a 'WORKAROUND" solution to the DILEMMA of the GUN situation?

Here's the conversation that you can find at the 28 MIN TIME MARK in S2/Ep 4 at the HBO/MAX site:

------------------

Perry: What about the gun that killed Brooks that's sitting in our safe?

DELLA: Us having the gun is a DILEMMA.

Paul: Well, They didn't give it to us, I found it.

DELLA: I'll look into it, There may be a workaround.
-----------------

Then later on there's another scene where she seems to find a workaround situation in one of the cases in a law book.

So WHY has PERRY gone to jail if she's found the "WORKAROUND???"

At the 49 MIN TIME MARK at the HBO/MAX site in S2/Ep 6:
-------------

Della: Your Honor I have a question about ADMISSIBILITY

Judge: I don't. Open the Safe NOW ...
-------------

At the 50 MIN TIME MARK:
-------------

Della (is seen reading the LAW BOOK):

Here, here. Uh. "Olmstead vs the U.S." The dissent argues for a wider application of the exclusionary principal."

It's post-Mayen. Maybe Durkin would be open to the illegal search, and seizure angle.

Perry: You talk to Anita about work?
------------

So apparently both the JUDGE and PERRY completely IGNORE Della when she tries to discuss this case with them, and as a result of that Perry also ends up behind bars for 4 MONTHS???

Or is this exclusionary principal involving "illegal search, and seizure" a reference to something else???

🤔

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olmstead_v._United_States#Impact

Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928)

This decision was overturned by Katz v. United States in 1967

Seizure of evidence

the general philosophy was that the process to obtain the evidence had little to do with admissibility in court.

In 1914, in the landmark case Weeks v. United States, the Supreme Court held unanimously that illegal seizure of items from a private residence was a violation of the Fourth Amendment, and established the exclusionary rule that prohibits admission of illegally obtained evidence in federal courts.

So does this mean all Perry had to do to keep out of jail was REFUSE to let them search his office where the GUN was found???

🤔

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

Found a fascinating discussion about the GUN SITUATION over at another message board:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Perry_Mason/comments/12ohi63/isnt_hiding_the_gun_illegal/

The conclusions are Brilliant, and they are also all over the place, making it nearly impossible to know which one is correct, or even IF there is a correct way in which to view the situation.

[–] letess (1020) a year ago

Spoilers. Kind of.
1. What if Paul Drake never went to Hooverville and found the gun in the first place?
I see the Gallardos having better luck if they never met Perry Mason.
2. What if Perry hadn’t angered Pete to break in and steal the gun?
3. What if Perry didn’t stop Della when she said 20 instead of 30?
4. How come Camilla didn’t use Burger’s photo to help the Gallardos seeing as they lost their land, their apartment and their sister. Didn’t the sister burn to death? She makes this big speech about saving women.

In true Chinatown-like revelations. I had no idea there was a government program in the ‘30s to deport Mexicans who were born in the US to free up jobs.

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

Thanks for your reply letess!!

1. "What if Paul Drake never went to Hooverville and found the gun in the first place?"
---

Good Question!!! Also Wish there was an answer for us in the show !!!

"2. What if Perry hadn’t angered Pete to break in and steal the gun?"
---

Apparently, Pete didn't STEAL the GUN. What he did was " ILLEGALLY BREAK INTO Perry's OFFICE & his SAFE" (cas Perry also forgot to change the combination of the safe from when Pete still worked for PERRY), and then tells the DA's OFFICE (who next EMPLOYS PETE) about what he found (a CRIME for which he also receives NO PUNISHMENT even though Perry GOES TO JAIL)???

How can Pete get away with a CRIME like that (BREAKING & ENTERING) ... which the DA or the PROSECUTION also uses to WIN the CASE ... and then there's also NO JAIL TIME for Pete who commits the CRIME???

And WHY doesn't anyone (like the JUDGE or PERRY) also ASK HOW the PROSECUTION knew that Perry had the GUN inside of his safe???

And WHY doesn't that also fall into a case of "ILLEGAL SEARCH & SEIZURE" when PERRY is forced (by the JUDGE who also orders a SEARCH of PERRY's SAFE) to open his SAFE and turn the GUN over to them???

"3. What if Perry didn’t stop Della when she said 20 instead of 30?"
-----------

Or what if he hadn't CHANGED the SUBJECT (asking if Della's new lover was the SNITCH) when Della tried to tell him that there might be a WORKAROUND case regarding the GUN situation due to the way that PAUL found it instead of PERRY or DELLA???

Here's the TRANSCRIPT of the SCENE again that you can find at the 28 MIN TIME MARK in S2/Ep 4 at the HBO/MAX site where PAUL also points that out to them:

------------------

Perry: What about the gun that killed Brooks that's sitting in "OUR" safe?

DELLA: "US" having the gun is a DILEMMA.

Paul: Well, They didn't give it to "US," I found it.

DELLA: I'll look into it, There may be a workaround.
-----------------

Also NOTE the way PERRY says "OUR" SAFE (not "HIS" SAFE) which also seems to indicate that Della (who is his LAW partner and the one who actually placed the GUN into the SAFE) is also just as guilty as Perry.

So is the "Olmstead v. United States" case (which is about ILLEGAL SEARCH & SEIZURE) the "WORKAROUND" case that Della said she'd look into to? If so, then WHY does PERRY end up in JAIL???

"4. How come Camilla didn’t use Burger’s photo to help the Gallardos seeing as they lost their land, their apartment and their sister. Didn’t the sister burn to death? She makes this big speech about saving women."
----------

MAKING MONEY by selling OIL to JAPAN OBVIOUSLY meant more to her than any HUMANITARIAN issue (which is also the reason why she HIRED the GALLARDOS to MURDER the other guy who threatens to tell the LAW what his DAD & Camilla were doing).

The question is did she get away with it (at the end when the FEDS show up at her place), or did she use the MONEY that she made to BRIBE others and/or HIRE an EXPENSIVE attorney that will find a way to see that she does NO TIME in JAIL for her CRIME???

I had no idea there was a government program in the ‘30s to deport Mexicans who were born in the US to free up jobs.

Me either. Were they born here or did they or their parents migrate here when they were still young kids? Could this be another "DREAMER" type of case where the more things change, the more they also seem to stay the same???

🤔

[–] letess (1020) a year ago

I guess what I’m trying to say all these bad things happened because they (the Gallardos) were affiliated with Perry. I laughed when he tells the judge. Don’t call a mistrial. I’m their best chance.

And Perry comes away with the idea he did a great job. His 4 months vs 30 years and how do you maintain a friendship with a guy that turns you over to the DA. That because you knew this guy has determined the life of another. Reckless. I assume Pete set up the train then. Did smart Perry think. Someone’s been here and did that. Is the safe in Perry’s apt or the ofc.

How did Camilla order Brooks’ hit. How did the Gallardos get the order to commit the murder. Normally, I would say well that’s illegal and that’s a life until you realized how Brooks destroyed their land. Their place and killed their sister. So there.

I think they (the Mason clan) had so much leverage with the photos that they could have done more. Although I was laughing when the photos spilled out on the table, and each saw a condemning photo pertaining to them and swooped in. I’ll just take that one.

I know you cite cases but Della was the mastermind in the courtroom and there was dealing and maneuvering outside. If it was true Perry Mason, he should have been the king of the masterminding and he wasn’t.

I love seeing this series as far as the atmosphere and it is beautifully done. I obviously could care less about the woke-obsessed and their meritless contributions to these discussions. But in true Perry Mason style, he got his clients off and this guy didn’t. He’s not so great.

If there is a season 3, it would be in 2024. But. I’m thinking…. It might not happen.

The ‘30s govt program scooped up people of Mexican descent and deported them. Many were US citizens. The authors of the show discovered this when researching the history of LA during this time period. It’s interesting to read about the makings of this show. In fact, fascinating. And it was a huge decision and one they really debated, to make them guilty.

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

It’s interesting to read about the makings of this show. In fact, fascinating.

Here's parts of an interview with the EP that explains how Perry feels GUILTY about the suicide of Emily (which may also explain how 4 months in Prison can help to free him from that guilt ... if he also sees his jail time as punishment for that matter). And it also talks about how US citizens were deported to a place where they didn't even know the language, etc.:

https://www.tvinsider.com/1090421/perry-mason-finale-season-2-explained-prison-sentence/

‘Perry Mason’ EP Explains Perry’s Sad Ending in Season 2 Finale

Haunted by the tragic fate of Emily Dodson

Perry Mason executive producer Michael Begler breaks down the poignant finale, looks back on the season, and shares his hopes for a Season 3.

Question:

What was the purpose of sending Perry to jail? I wonder if part of him thinks he’s kind of earned it because of what happened to Emily Dodson. I think he’s still kind of racked with that guilt.

Michael Begler:

Yeah. Again, I think that he feels that there’s so much up against them with the power structure with not only the wealth and the power, but also with the way the system is run in terms of how they look at these defendants and the preconceived notions of defendants, and if he’s going to get any sort of justice. Because he sees the gray, you know? He sees that this isn’t black and white. So much was taken from these kids. Brooks personally took it. They took their family farm, they took their apartment, they killed their sister, all for an empty stadium. And I think that those boys, their backs were against the wall, and they felt like they had no choice. And I think though he doesn’t condone the killing, he understands it and he feels like both these boys can’t go down for this and something’s gotta give.

Maybe it is a little bit of the residual feeling of guilt towards Emily and not seeing it through. Because he did have her life in his hands, and then when he didn’t step up, she kills herself. Well, he’s got these boys’ lives in his hands, and he can’t let that happen aagain, so maybe the best way is for him to take the sacrifice.

what we see and what you’re touching on is the sort of ripple effect of today that humanity unfortunately doesn’t change. We will see very similar attitudes towards people. And during this time — and a thing that’s just sort of touched on, but we don’t go that far in it — there were forced deportations of the Mexican population. We’re not even talking [about] people who were born in Mexico. We’re talking about people who were born in Los Angeles who don’t speak any Spanish who were put on trains and sent back because they felt they were taking jobs, they were a threat.

what he says to Della — it’s not about justice, it’s about the system. The system is so broken, and that’s really what the problem is.

at all their cores is the sense of morality. I think they all have that same sense, even though they come from very different places, and they know the right fights to have and the right places to push. And I think that’s what sort of bonds them. And honestly, I think they’re very driven to get at whatever the truth is that they need to get at. That’s what is so great about them as a team, but also what makes them butt heads so much, because they have such strong opinions. If we’re so lucky to get a third season, to see the next iteration of that will be a lot of fun.

I’m hoping that people walk away both entertained but then there’s that sort of ripple that makes you sort of reflect a little bit. That’s what I think the best television can do.

LOVE the part about how the show makes us REFLECT a BIT!!!

[–] letess (1020) a year ago

I was not concerned about Perry going to jail. He actually should have been disbarred. In fact, I can’t believe people are even concerned with his going to jail compared to his client getting 30 years.

Perry should have been disbarred. And then he could work with Paul as a detective and help out Della’s future cases. Making him human is fine. But he’s ruining people’s lives and if he had one iota of sense, he’d see that. I’m not in this guy’s corner. These two seasons show he’s not the guy. Anyone not seeing how fragile Emily definitively has no insight. This is something you have or you don’t. She was all over the place. He’s just a person that keeps making mistakes. With everything. Watching someone remorseful after all their eff-ups and who keeps making them is not watchable.

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

I was not concerned about Perry going to jail. He actually should have been disbarred. In fact, I can’t believe people are even concerned with him going to jail compared to his client getting 30 years.
-----------

Actually, it's the JUDGE who should have been DISBARED or REMOVED and a MISTRIAL called due to the way he repeatedly ignores it when both Perry and Della try to explain the PRECEDENCE case to him. PLUS he also refuses to issue a COURT ORDER to search PERRY's OFFICE SAFE and has them take "THE FIELD TRIP" instead. All of this is also explained on the other NEW TOPIC where you can also read the TRANSCRIPTS, and see how Perry was RAILROADED by both the JUDGE and the PROSECUTION into handing over the GUN when he also didn't have to without the issue of a COURT ORDER to do so.

GO HERE:

https://moviechat.org/tt2077823/Perry-Mason/644a9d94b43cdc49f581846a/Scene-with-JUDGE-DURKIN-and-Perry-inside-of-his-Chambers

---------------

Perry should have been disbarred.

---------

After reading those TRANSCRIPTS it's the JUDGE and the PROSECUTION who should have been DISBARRED or whatever is done in such cases. Because, IMO, Perry was also ILLEGALLY FORCED to hand over that GUN to them (due to an ILLEGAL SEARCH and SEIZURE process that he could also have REFUSED).

------------------

And then he could work with Paul as a detective and help out Della’s future cases. Making him human is fine. But he’s ruining people’s lives and if he had one iota of sense, he’d see that. I’m not in this guy’s corner.
-------------

Try to remember Della's also the one who talks PERRY into CHEATING on the BAR EXAM after the other ATTORNEY they worked for DIES. This is why I have more sympathy for him.

-------------
.
These two seasons show he’s not the guy. Anyone not seeing how fragile Emily was definitively has no insight. This is something you have or you don’t. She was all over the place. He’s just a person that keeps making mistakes. With everything.

-----------------

Maybe next season Perry will stop making the kinds of mistakes that he's been making??? Remember how he was MANIPULATED by the woman who buys his family farm (after he didn't pay taxes on the land)??? Then Della talks him into CHEATING on the BAR EXAM and PRETENDING to be an ATTORNEY when he shouldn't be??? Maybe sitting in jail for 4 MONTHS will give him the TIME that he needs to REFLECT upon how he got there and how to keep from ending back in there again???

🤔

[–] letess (1020) a year ago

Manipulated? If you don’t pay properly taxes for five years in California, the state takes it and auctions it. How can that be a good attorney?

This I can’t believe.
“Wasn't Della the one who talks Perry into CHEATING on the BAR EXAM???”
Are you blaming Della? Why can’t he study and pass the bar. This I don’t get. I’ve never heard of people cheating. The fact that he has to…. Again, not a really good attorney because he’s not an attorney.

ILLEGAL SEARCH and SEIZURE. This might have worked if the lead defense counsel wasn’t in possession of the murder weapon. Someone else, yes. Maybe.

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

"Manipulated? If you don’t pay properly taxes for five years in California, the state takes it and auctions it. How can that be a good attorney?"

-----------

Since it's been so long now since watching S1 (thanks to the COVID CRISIS), the impression one has may be wrong. But wasn't she also plying Perry with BOOZE from her BAR which was also a part of the reason why he failed to pay the taxes??? And that's also because she had plans to SWOOP in and buy the land??? Plus she also has sex with Perry and then shoves him off of the bed and onto the floor as if he were nothing more than a piece of meat that she was using???

Perry also wasn't an attorney at that time when he still worked as a detective for the other one who DIED.
-----------------

This I can’t believe.
“Wasn't Della the one who talks Perry into CHEATING on the BAR EXAM???”
Are you blaming Della? Why can’t he study and pass the bar. This I don’t get. I’ve never heard of people cheating. The fact that he has to…. Again, not a really good attorney because he’s not an attorney.
-------------

Since the other attorney they worked for DIES in the middle of the other case, there wasn't TIME enough for Perry to study long enough to pass the EXAM. So Della does the only thing that she could think of doing as a way to solve the problem that they found themselves confronted with at that time. And the way they did it was by getting a copy of the QUESTIONS on the exam beforehand from the other guy who'd already passed it (because just like Perry not changing the combination on the safe, no one thought to change the BAR EXAM questions). So officially he's an attorney now (also wonder how many other LAWYERS cheated on the exam the same way
as PERRY DID), but INTELLECTUALLY speaking he's still not qualified to be one yet.

----------------

RE: "ILLEGAL SEARCH and SEIZURE."

GO HERE where you'll find the TRANSCRIPTS:

https://moviechat.org/tt2077823/Perry-Mason/644a9d94b43cdc49f581846a/Scene-with-JUDGE-DURKIN-and-Perry-inside-of-his-Chambers

IMO, The reason why it was an "ILLEGAL SEARCH and SEIZURE" is because several times the JUDGE refused to listen to Della & PERRY when they both tried to tell him about the other PRECEDENCE case that indicates the proper way to handle the matter.

PLUS the JUDGE also REFUSED to issue the COURT ORDER when the PROSECUTION requested one, thus also making the SEARCH of PERRY'S OFFICE SAFE an ILLEGAL procedure.

Because instead of following the RULES, the JUDGE (who also should have been DISMISSED from the case) ORDERS everyone to "TAKE A FIELD TRIP" to PERRY'S OFFICE, where POOR PERRY, who doesn't know any better, OPENS up the SAFE revealing to them that the GUN is inside of it, when LEGALLY SPEAKING he wasn't under any kind of LEGAL obligation to do so.

Because neither the JUDGE nor the PROSECUTION had a WARRANT or anything else to FORCE PERRY to hand over the GUN to them. Remember how you also need a PROBABLE CAUSE before getting a SEARCH WARRANT to search someone's home? Without that COURT ORDER, they had no LEGAL right to FORCE Perry into going to his OFFICE to open that SAFE.

And since PETE's the one who reveals finding the GUN to the DA through another ILLEGAL SEARCH, that's also why a COURT ORDER couldn't be ISSUED.

Therefore, the reason why a MISTRIAL (along with the DISMISSAL of the JUDGE) should also have been the result instead of PERRY's arrest and 4 MONTH jail sentence.

At least that's the way I'm seeing it.

[–] letess (1020) a year ago

I see this series as being canceled. It is so good in some ways but there just isn’t enough of Mason in a good light. It would have almost been better if they didn’t pitch this as Perry Mason but a completely new series. By using PM, people are going to go back to the novels and the ‘50s TV series, and many of these people are not going to watch it or will stop watching it. And even if they did it this way, completely changing everything, I do wish they made Mason special and savvy. What I do love the most is there’s part of me that just wants to be there. In Los Angeles, as my family saw it, in the ‘30s but I do want to see a masterful Mason if it’s going to be Mason. To me he’s inept. If he had a another name, I would think this is just the kind of guy he is and inept as he may be, there’s at least the brilliance of Della and Paul to make it a good team. I just don’t think he’s smart. You don’t have to be an attorney to know that property taxes have to be paid and you need to get money to pay them. They were probably $10 a year back then. You have five years of not paying - they send you letters - you have to open your mail. A lien is put on the property …. Anyway - as far as getting his law degree - I don’t consider that cheating. If Burger said they haven’t changed the test in 20 years and you have an old test??? If Della forged her deceased boss’ signature to say he was an intern, then so what. I don’t think you had to go to law school - i don’t think Gardner went but he did work at a law firm. He passed the bar in 1911. But It looks to me, this Mason, has no knowledge of anything pertaining to law. Della does but he is a dunce. The gun is another issue and although Mason’s intentions are good, he flubbed this one up. That’s what I think. And again, saying that 30 yrs was fine when it looked like 20 yrs would fly just put me off. And there are mitigating circumstances in that the murdered victim killed the defendant’s sister by fire. I don’t think this series will have a S3 unless they can convince HBO it can move faster and Mason is better at the game. If it is canceled, he will be in jail forever. In hindsight, we will all miss it and it will be one of those series that long after we will wish they made a S3 with a whole new perspective, if that could even happen. But as it stands, PM did such a lousy job professionally and privately, jail in TV eternity is fine with me.

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

I prefer the PREQUEL story ARC we've gotten to the FORMULAIC story telling that took place back in the 50's.

Also found some articles that confirm MASON has PTSD and say some other interesting things about him:

https://www.rollingstone.com/tv-movies/tv-movie-reviews/perry-mason-hbo-review-1011679/

Mason’s creator never showed much interest in his hero’s backstory: As one fan of the novels put it to me, “Gardner was so parsimonious with the details that the only thing we know about Mason’s background is that he’s a Leo.” The new TV show sets out to fill in a lot of blanks.

This Mason is a World War I veteran with severe PTSD, living in the ruins of his family’s dairy farm, which is on the verge of being swallowed up by the local airport run by his pilot girlfriend Lupe

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2020/06/perry-mason-matthew-rhys-review

The rotten underpinnings of LA’s criminal justice system resonate with what’s on the news today—and in creating a backstory for how Mason meets his investigator Paul Drake, the show finds a way to explore policing and race by casting Drake with a black actor, Chris Chalk. Proto-feminist Della Street (Juliet Rylance) is not just here to be flirted with; she advocates for the women in the story, especially the bereaved mother of the dead child,
the story doesn’t let us into their interior lives quite enough. It’s a glaringly deficiency

https://www.polygon.com/2020/6/19/21296376/perry-mason-review-hbo-reboot-series-matthew-rhys-police-justice-system-shows

HBO’s Perry Mason takes a critical look at America’s flawed justice system

questions about Hollywood’s role in selling feel-good stories to a public that should be hungering for real change.

by taking their time, Fitzgerald and Jones are able to produce something that feels timeless. It’s a period piece that doesn’t make viewers feel good about how far we’ve come, but rather points out how hard it is to deal with the problems that have always been there.

Perry Mason was unrealistic in that Perry never negotiated pleas or even not-guilty verdicts — he always proved his clients were entirely innocent. Fitzgerald and Jones’ version draws on noir characters’ dogged insistence about finding the truth above all. They posit that just as the wrongfully accused shouldn’t have to settle for a lesser sentence, society shouldn’t settle for a world where justice isn’t done.

At a time when politicians and police leaders are arguing that police brutality is the result of “a few bad apples,” Perry Mason shows a justice system that has always been rotten to its core. But it also provides a vision for a way forward, in a world where the innocent and disenfranchised are protected, and the guilty can’t hide behind their power, whether it comes from money or a badge.

It's also pointed out how Perry doesn't try a court case for the FIRST 3 BOOKs of the BOOK versions of the story:

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/leisure/arts-and-culture/a32947129/how-perry-mason-hbo-tv-different-from-original/

"This time around, Perry Mason follows the arc of one crime—
he’s a much more complicated and troubled character than Burr’s ever was.

“It wasn’t a huge leap,” Jones says. “When you start reading the novels, the guy doesn’t appear in court for the first three books.

We wanted to step back and figure out how he becomes this guy.”

“Knowing we wanted multiple seasons of this show, we tried to take dogmatic ideas about justice and the nature of men"

And says this about PETE:

Perry’s backup investigator, whose search for leads is too often delayed by his desire to use E.B.’s expense account to buy fine meals and trips to a brothel"
-----------------------
which also means Perry should have known not to TRUST him this past season cause if he abused the expense account of his former boss, why not also do the same thing to Perry???

In other words, PETE's the one that I can't stand.

And I also hope we get several more STORY ARC's in the next upcoming seasons of the show.

[–] letess (1020) a year ago

I read all of this before. Actually, there’s more to Mason story in Gardner books - he asks Della to marry him several times.

Here’s what I think. They started off with a reboot. Susan Downey scouted for material for her husband, Robert, and thought Perry Mason looked like a good bet. He was busy; they got Rhys. There is very little backstory to Gardner’s novels - just the trial scenes. Also, Paul Drake has lots of other detectives. Della is a brunette, etc. I like the arc too - it just that it went so much in another direction, that it should have been an original series. It alienated a whole group of viewers. I think the backstories are interesting but not great. I like the aviatrix as she reminded of me of Katy Jurado. That was the most realistic one for me. Alternatively, I don’t know if they realized it but the storytelling part of S2 parallels the movie Chinatown and to some extent LA Confidential. And that is what makes this series good. I do think Perry should excel in something, and I have a feeling that if there is a S3 - they will write it showing Perry as doing much better at a lot of things. In the article you gave me the link to - it says -
“Do you go out on a high, or do you face the danger of puttering out on the third?’’
To me, they have been puttering all through S1 and S2. They have this rich series and somehow something’s missing. And what is missing is that you have done so much to completely gut the Perry Mason story that they should have abandoned the whole thing and start with an original series. Then I wouldn’t have to say - where’s the glory of Mason? I can watch a “schlemiel” - as The NY Times calls Rhys’ Perry - and not really care because I am watching a new character.

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

Perry should excel in something, and I have a feeling that if there is a S3 - they will write it showing Perry as doing much better at a lot of things.

Didn't he already excel last season when he WINS the other case that involved Emily?

But then he fails when he didn't do anything to see that she got some help???

So he gets involved in the CIVIL CASE, which is also the reason why he's made enough money now to keep his own business afloat, due to the kick backs that he gets each time another new SUNNY grocery store is opened up.

So he excels when he WINS the case last season, feels down in the dumps again this season, before the show ends with his firm making enough money for the first time to remain in business.

In other words, financially speaking, he's also in a position now for the first time to take on more cases (like the other cases the other character from the 50's dealt with).

Because he's also been involved in 2 VERY HIGH PROFILE cases now that's given him lots of publicity in the press.

So just like PETE told Perry not to tell the others in JAIL about his being an ATTORNEY, cause they'd be bugging him to represent them, perhaps they'll also already KNOW who he is due to the way that he's been in the press???

And surely that will also result in still others coming to his firm asking for help even when he's also still sitting there in jail for 4 months???

In other words, IF there's another season of the show, then I'm also thinking that things will change and pick up quite a bit in S3.

But Della may also be the one who handles most of work at the office while Perry's still in jail, where he'll probably also be busy dealing with cases for the other inmates???

Thus we may also we go from "puttering" along to WARP SPEED case wise???

Plus I'm also thinking that Della finds a way to get Perry OUT of JAIL before he serves the entire 4 month sentence, due to the way that "FIELD TRIP" to his office was done without the issue of a COURT ORDER (which also amounts to being a case of "ILLEGAL SEARCH & SEIZURE" regarding the GUN that they found inside of his SAFE).

Because without a COURT ORDER to search his OFFICE, imo, that's pretty much the same thing as SEARCHING the home of someone without having a SEARCH WARRANT to do so.

🤔

[–] letess (1020) a year ago

Valid points but…Della isn’t going to get Perry out of jail. It’s only 4 mos. You have to ask yourself why you (I think it might be just you) are trying so hard to find legal precedents to get the gun dismissed. The story’s already been told. Why are there transcripts? It demonstrates the show wasn’t really well written if you have to rewrite it.

Matthew Rhys saying that the S3 will be his last is kind of a pre-emptive strike to get the 3rd one made because I really think HBO is teetering on whether to go forward. And the part of going out with a bang really says something. They have this great series with great plot lines and great locales and I think it was a mistake to attach it to Perry Mason characters AS THEY REIMAGINED HIM, not them. They could have done this on their own with original characters. Rhys is the best actor; some of the other ones, I don't feel the same. There’s something wrong with the pace as well. It is very slow.

Here are excerpts from the articles YOU cited that say it better than I:

Rolling Stone:
“But the story’s a mess — at once convoluted and a bit too dull to fill eight hours — and the idea of giving Mason the origin story he never had ultimately proves more trouble than it’s worth.”

“Maybe no one confesses on the stand in real life, but it can be fun to see them do it in fiction.”

Bustle: Rhys actually said this:
“They could even bring a new cast in if they wanted to advance it 10 years or whatever,” he said, theorizing that they “could totally” kill off Mason and go back in the timeline. “One of the hardest things in this business is reinventing the wheel or trying to make an original move that no one’s done before.”

That’s right - Rhys as Perry saying - they “could totally” KILL off Mason.

So, what these all say is that the stories and the style are better than the new Perry Mason character they created.

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

Della isn’t going to get Perry out of jail. It’s only 4 mos. You have to ask yourself why you and other viewers are trying so hard to find legal precedents to get the gun dismissed.

Never worked in a law office before like you, but what worries me is someone might be able to have Perry DISBARRED ... due to this jail sentence that he shouldn't be serving ... due to the way the JUDGE never issued a COURT ORDER as requested by the DA ... which makes what happened an "ILLEGAL SEARCH and SEIZURE" of that GUN ... which Perry also had NOTHING to do with (because Paul's the one who finds it and Della's the one who places it into the SAFE).

So imagine the next case or trial where some other attorney for the prosecution may make a motion to DISMISS PERRY due to his having served this JAIL TIME that he shouldn't even be serving.

-----------

YOU again:

The story’s already been told. Why are there transcripts? It demonstrates the show wasn’t really well written if you have to rewrite it.

------------

MY reply:

Acutally those are QUOTES from the show that I TYPED UP myself by using the closed caption option while watching those scenes again.

Not sure what you mean by rewriting it. But if you mean finding a way to release Perry from jail ... due to the INCOMPETENCY of a JUDGE ... who orders a FIELD TRIP to Perry's office ... instead of the COURT ORDER that the DA requested ... then, imo, that's not rewriting it ... not if someone can also file an APPEAL to have PERRY released from jail ... due to the way the lack of PROPER LEGAL PROCEDURE wasn't followed.

As was pointed out previously, it's pretty much the same as if someone SEARCHED someone's HOME, and then SEIZED something inside of it without first getting a SEARCH WARRANT to do so.

Or not following PROPER PROCEDUCE by telling someone they have the "RIGHT to REMAIN SILENT" when they're arrested.

When LEGAL PROCEDURES like this aren't followed, usually that also means no jail time ensues thereafter.

So imagine Perry meeting up with some other Attorney in jail (who did his homework and didn't CHEAT on the BAR EXAM) who points out to Perry that he shouldn't be there due to the JUDGE's REFUSAL to issue a COURT ORDER demanding Perry turn over the GUN.

That's NOT REWRITING the show. It's CORRECTING a situation that should NOT have happened in the first place.

In almost every REVIEW of any show that I've read Rolling Stone has always BASHED and ATTACKED it for some reason. That's why I don't pay that much attention to their REVIEWS, especially when there are also so many other POSITIVE ones about the show in comparison to their typically and characteristically NEGATIVE ones.

And after BINGE watching parts of the show again today it's EASY to see the show is BRILLIANTLY written, and is NOT a MESS. But one can also reach that kind of a conclusion by watching it WEEKLY (where one also tends to forget things that one is more aware of by BINGE WATCHING IT).

Perry's PTSD (which causes him to forget to pay the taxes and lose the farm), for example, is triggered again this season by his GUILT over the death of EMILY. And that also tends to make him a bit absent minded, especially when Della tries to explain something to him.

But PERRY also figured out the FINGER PRINT on the STEERING WHEEL of the CAR had been PLANTED there (due to the way it was REVERSED in such a way that the defendant couldn't have placed it there himself).

But we also tend to OVERLOOK that COURTROOM SCENE where Perry displays just as much BRILLANCE as DELLA did in her SCENE where she figures out the BELT was used to choke women that Brooks has his sexual encounters with.

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

Still another thing to NOTE was the other CONVERSATION that PERRY has with the JUDGE, who said back in the 1890's when he first got his LAW DEGREE and people were more IDEALISTIC, LA still had a chance to be "UNCORRUPTED the way that it is now.

In other words, due to that conversation, and the GOOD WRITING that's created the show, we can also proceed from that point forwards to be AWARE of the many other ways in which the JUDGE reveals HIS BIAS and CORRUPTION during the trial (just like that other guy who works for the DA does during the trial who attacks the defendant's for being immigrants when they ARE NOT because they were also BORN here in the US).

Therefore, imo, not just PERRY, but the DEFENDANT himself, who's been given the 30 year prison sentence, should also be able to FILE an APPEAL, and either get the sentence reduced or have the first trial declared as a MISTRIAL.

Because in addition to the PRESS calling PERRY MASON a MAGGOT and other NAMES (which the prosecuting attorney also does in court with the JUDGE doing nothing about it) , we also had that other RUSH LIMBAGH sp??? type of character spitting out still more PREJUDICE against the defendant's on his RADIO PROGRAM (which he was also encouraged to do by the MURDER VICTIM's FATHER).

So where's the GAG ORDER??? Why didn't the JUDGE also issue one for that guy???

To put it still another way, "The DEVIL is in the DETAILS" and the show is FULL of them, which ROLLING STONE also OVERLOOKS.

Because, imo, whoever writes those ROLLING STONE REVIEWS is either too lazy to take the time to explore those kind of DETAILS, or else maybe they simply lack the kind of SOPHISTICATION that it takes to see them.

At least that's the way I see it.

As for the actor who portrays PERRY leaving the show, what may happen is he marries the teacher, has more children with her, buys another farm or ranch, and then he may let Della & other characters like Paul run the firm for him so that he can spend more time with his new wife and kids (horse back riding or whatever like the MURDER VICTIM and his father use to do back when Brook's was growing up).

Or Della & Paul might also get SPIN OFF shows where Perry would make infrequent appearances instead of being the LEADing character in the show???

[–] letess (1020) a year ago

I am sorry. I don’t think I read everything you’ve written, and you really put a lot of work into it. But do you really think there will be a S3? If they decide to renew S3, it will be in 2024 and I honestly don’t think they are going to spend a lot of time on this stuff. We will probably see Perry come out of jail in the very first scene. There’s not going to be disbarment and that case is a done deal. They will move on to a bigger case and one in which Perry will be formidable. These first two seasons he was just getting started. That’s impression I get if you read the writers and Downey’s account of what they want to see for Mason going forward and are just waiting on HBO.

Here’s what the writers are saying: “Well, I’m hoping it doesn’t end with him in jail,” Begler said. “I can put it this way: to me, we just started. You know, like even though he’s in jail, it’s only for a short time, but I feel like Perry is now by the end of the season becoming the lawyer that he knows he can be.”

They really took a gamble to wait this long to just getting started and for us to now see realcourtroom drama and a dynamo attorney. I can’t believe they - Team Downey and the writers - couldn’t see this.

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

Here's what seems to indicate we might get another Season:

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/leisure/arts-and-culture/a32947129/how-perry-mason-hbo-tv-different-from-original/

We wanted to step back and figure out how he becomes this guy.”

“Knowing we wanted multiple seasons of this show, we tried to take dogmatic ideas about justice and the nature of men"

So it's pretty clear from that statement that MULTIPLE SEASONS is the goal.

And starting with tomorrow 2024 is also only 8 months from now.

I'm thinking we'll see Perry helping lots of others in jail. Then maybe they'll also repay him for his help by helping him once they're out of jail.

Is concealing a MURDER WEAPON a FELONY?? Maybe the disbarment issue comes up in court during another case ... IF another prosecuting attorney tries to have Perry dismissed from representing a client ... on the grounds that a FELON should have had his LAW LICENSE revoked.

And that's when we might discover how Perry shouldn't have even spent any time at all in jail due to the way the JUDGE never issued a COURT ORDER, but had them take a "FIELD TRIP" to Perry's office instead.

But yes, you're probably also right about how FORMIDABLE Perry will be from this point forwards. Cause he's also made LOTS of MONEY from that GROCERY STORE chain idea, which will also make him a VERY RICH MAN instead of someone who can't pay his property taxes.

Then the question also becomes will he be able to keep the MONEY from CORRUPTING him the same way as it has Camilla, the JUDGE, or the father of BROOKS.

In other words, imo, the GAMBLE they've taken has also paid off with Perry going from RAGS to RICHES (so to speak). So what will he be like after he becomes a RICH MAN??? Will he still be willing to champion the poor and the downtrodden??? Or will he turn his back on them and become just as CORRUPT as the other judge???

Anyhow, I like the VERY CLEVER way that they've given him the kind of a BACKSTORY that the books & the 50's versions of the show never gave the other Perry character. Because now we can see where he's been before he gets where he's going, and what kind of an effect (if any) that's going to have on him.

Will Perry still have a KIND HEART, or will he turn into someone just as POWER HUNGRY as that other guy was in court who prosecutes the other boys before the DA finally FIRES him???

Also found this:

https://www.wklaw.com/knowing-about-a-crime-and-not-saying-anything

WebMay 20, 2014 · The felony is a federal offense; If you willfully conceal the commission of a felony federal offense, you can be charged with “misprision of a felony.” Misprision of a felony is a form of obstruction of justice

https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Tampering-with-evidence.htm

The U.S. government takes tampering with evidence very seriously. A person who is convicted of the crime under federal law may face a prison sentence of not more than 20 years, a fine, or both. (18 U.S.C. § 1519.)

State penalties vary. Some states make any tampering with evidence a felony offense. Other states make it a felony to tamper with a felony investigation or case and a misdemeanor to tamper with less serious cases. You'll need to check your state laws for the applicable penalty.

So the next question is what was the CA STATE LAW regarding such matters back in the 30's???

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

Here's a couple of more links that also seem to indicate PERRY might be in some deep DOO DOO as far as the future of his law career is concerned:

https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/greedy...

WebMar 31, 2015 ·

Don't be tardy. The good news (or not) is that some states allow disbarred lawyers to eventually apply for readmission. The bad news, according to the ABA, is that only about 10% of lawyers who apply for reinstatement actually get reinstated.

https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=2.48.220

WebAn attorney or counselor may be disbarred or suspended for any of the following causes arising after his or her admission to practice: (1) His or her conviction of a felony

So even IF Perry is disbarred, apparently he can also still reapply for ADMISSION to the BAR again.

But there's also only a 10% chance that the BAR would accept him back in again.

But with the FACT made evident that the JUDGE never issued a COURT ORDER, and only had them take a FIELD TRIP to Perry's office to retrieve the GUN, it also seems like the BAR should be willing to allow Perry Admission again ... IF he does ever get disbarred (due to the ILLEGAL SEARCH & SEIZURE procedure involved in how the COURT came into possession of the gun).

Still another thing to NOTE is how Perry could also have CALLED (or had someone else like Della call) his office and ask the new ASIAN secretary to remove the GUN from the safe before the JUDGE and the prosecution got there.

🤔

[–] letess (1020) a year ago

Columns are too narrow. I’m post a reply to this under original post. Hope you see it.

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

Here's another article that indicates the actor who portrays PERRY might not continue after the end of S3 IF there's a S3:

https://www.bustle.com/entertainment/perry-mason-season-3-premiere-date-cast-plot

Though HBO’s Emmy-winning drama Perry Mason was conceived as a limited series, Matthew Rhys returned for a second outing as the titular criminal defense lawyer in March. And it might not be the last we see of him: HBO has yet to renew Perry Mason for Season 3, but Rhys hinted that one last comeback might be in the cards. “There's a cliche part of me that thinks to round out and do three would be the way to bow out,” the star and executive producer revealed to Forbes in March

So maybe that could also open the way for Della to have the LEADING ROLE in the show???

🤔

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

And Perry comes away with the idea he did a great job. His 4 months vs 30 years and how do you maintain a friendship with a guy that turns you over to the DA. That because you knew this guy has determined the life of another. Reckless. I assume Pete set up the train then. Did smart Perry think. Someone’s been here and did that. Is the safe in Perry’s apt or the ofc.
-------------
Yes PETE set up the train, but PERRY also has a conversation with DELLA where he thinks LYDELL did it, and Della says she doubts it cas that's not his style, thus also proving once again how Della is MORE CLEVER and INSIGHTFUL than Perry (who also accused Della's new love interest and his own new love interest of Betraying them).

But then DELLA also GOOFED in regards to having ADMIRATION for Camilla (who gets the other guy to hire the Gallardos to kill BROOK's).

Perhaps PERRY also felt GUILTY for placing PETE into a situation where he had no other choice but to work for the DA (due to the way thatq Perry decides to only work on CIVIL cases)??? Maybe the BEATING that he gave PETE also resulted in getting his ANGER at PETE's BETRAYAL out of his system???

---------------

How did Camilla order Brooks’ hit. How did the Gallardos get the order to commit the murder. Normally, I would say well that’s illegal and that’s a life until you realized how Brooks destroyed their land. Their place and killed their sister. So there.

-----
Was it the man with the wife who was addicted to OPIUM who hired the Gallardos??? The same guy who also gave Perry all of the PHOTOS??? As SLEAZY as Camilla was, she probably also knew the HISTORY of how BROOKS caused the death of the sister, and how that could be used as a motive for the murder (which would also motivate Camilla to have someone HIRE the Gallardos who could be easily framed).
----------
If it was true Perry Mason, he should have been the king of the masterminding and he wasn’t.

I love seeing this series as far as the atmosphere and it is beautifully done. I obviously could care less about the woke-obsessed and their meritless contributions to these discussions. But in true Perry Mason style, he got his clients off and this guy didn’t. He’s not so great.
--------

Perhaps what makes this NEWER NOIR version of PERRY just as GREAT is how he's also just as MORALLY UPRIGHT as the other one was from the 1950's.

🤔

[–] letess (1020) a year ago

I don’t see him morally upright at all. He puts into motion deceit and bad luck. And then feels bad later. To me, he’s a failure. I’m mean honestly. If you were in a jam, would you hire him?

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

I don’t see him morally upright at all. He puts into motion deceit and bad luck. She said And then feels bad later. To me, he’s a failure. I’m mean honestly. If you were in a jam, would you hire him?

----------------

Wasn't Della the one who talks Perry into CHEATING on the BAR EXAM??? Wasn't she also the one who places the GUN into the SAFE??? All Perry did was PULL the BLINDS closed.

And YES if I were in a JAM I'd HIRE HIM, because at least you'd also know he CARES about you and is willing to do whatever it takes (and then some) to try to see to it that you get some kind of JUSTICE.

And he did also SAVE the LIVES of the 2 guys who were heading for a HANGING before PERRY took over their case.

Right???

And PERRY also didn't get upset with Della for placing the GUN into the SAFE, and was willing to shoulder ALL of the BLAME himself for it being there (when we also know that's not the case).

And how many lawyers do you know who would be willing to do JAIL TIME as part of a PLEA Agreement for their client(s), where a part of the BARGIN was to SURPRESS the fact that the MURDER WEAPON existed and was in CUSTODY of the COURT???

As you may recall, because of PERRY's strategy, all the JURY knew about was the GUILTY PLEA. In other words, for them there was also NO other PROOF that the defendants were GUILTY.

So that's why I'd HIRE PERRY instead of someone else who mostly cared about how much MONEY they could make from taking a case.

[–] letess (1020) a year ago

I think Perry acts impulsively wo thinking about the consequences and then feels guilty and will take the punishment. Paul finding the gun is not the problem. Perry fostering a contentious relationship with Pete made the gun an issue. If something is supposed to be kept safe, then it’s your responsibility to do that. Perry even charges into the school and punches the guy wo ever thinking about his son. If he didn’t have the teacher who had a tender spot for him and his son, then that’s just another thing he’s bad at. He doesn’t get his son. This kid is kind and obedient and they might not get along later. And then he’ll suffer some more.

I’ve worked in law offices, I don’t think he’s a good attorney. I think the outcome of his last client could have been a different one. Of course, during this time period the Gallardos were probably lucky to find him. A public defender would not be good. But then we follow Mason; it looks promising and then realize that the outcome could have been better if he wasn’t so flawed. And for me, it was the interruption - the 20 yrs to 30 yrs. That’s the thing I think everyone thought. Why did you stop Della? There’s nothing in my mind that says he couldn’t have gotten 20. The writers have their reasoning on this. But if you buy into the first part, then it’s beyond belief. And then taking the 20 and reducing it even more - I mean the murdered guy burned down his property, his dwelling, and burned his sister alive - he didn’t take revenge, which is the American way - it fell in his lap - someone was going to pay them to get rid of him. He must have thought he hit the lottery.

And then there’s something about Perry that he wants to suffer. Continuously. You know, I think I don’t like this series and I would be happy if they didn’t renew. The writers pitched a good series and then blew it up to the point that it doesn’t digest well. At $70M a season, HBO would do well to dump it. If they didn’t renew Rome for the last three seasons that could have been and one of the greatest series of all time, then get rid of this bungled mess. The last we see of Perry is that he is in jail. That’s fine with me. Let him stay there. He’s unbearable and obnoxious.

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

"I think Perry acts impulsively wo thinking about the consequences"

I agree. Like you said he PUNCHES the guy who insults him right in front of his son and his other classmates. Then he also BLAMES the woman for BETRAYING him who got him out of that mess.

And that was also PETE's fault that PERRY BLAMES the teacher, and Della's new love interest, and LYDELL for breaking into his home instead of PETE. And that's also because PERRY also TRUSTED PETE not to BETRAY him.

So the problem seems to be how PERRY's too TRUSTING when it comes to people like PETE and the other woman who supplies him with BOOZE and then buys his family farm???

And without PERRY's help most likely both of his DEFENDENTS would have been HUNG (which was also made evident by their request for Perry to write WILLS for them).

So even though he LOST the case, PERRY also still SAVES their LIVES, whereas when he WON the other case, EMILY DIES.

Therefore, even though he's not really QUALIFIED to be an attorney, he's most likely also still done a BETTER JOB than any other attorney would have done or have been willing to do.

Right???

And isn't that mostly also because PERRY REALLY CARES about the CLIENTS that he represents whereas most other lawyers would probably only see their clients as just another PAY CHECK???

🤔

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

And then there’s something about Perry that he wants to suffer. Continuously.

Good catch letiss !!! I also agree with this assessment as well. But this would probably also become a PSYCHOLOGICAL problem rather than a LEGAL one???

And perhaps watching S1 again would also reveal the reason why PERRY seems to have some kind of SADISTIC streak where he needs to SUFFER???

Did we ever see any FLASHBACK scenes that indicated what his parents were like???

🤔

Thank goodness for HBO/MAX where you can also dig through the scenes searching for some FLASHBACK scenes from his childhood. Or at least for the scenes with Perry in them???

ALSO found this article:

https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20200619-perry-mason-review-a-detective-show-for-our-dark-times

Matthew Rhys stars as the scruffy, no-nonsense noir hero, fighting for justice against corruption and fraud. The series’ shadowy world suits the current mood, writes Caryn James.

he is haunted by his time in battle during World War One, seen in occasional flashbacks. He is in debt, living in a ramshackle farmhouse his parents left him, next to a private airfield with an ‘Airplane Crossing’ sign sticking out of the dusty ground.

The way I see it, there’s what’s legal and there’s what’s right, says Mason

Unlike so many noir detectives, this Mason is no womaniser. Now and then he has convenient sex with Lupe (Veronica Falcon), a blunt, hard-drinking pilot who owns the airfield and is the opposite of a glam noir femme fatale. He has an estranged ex-wife, a young son and no visible future.

Rhys plays him with absolute clarity.

has a calm, straightforward, slightly defeated tone. At times Mason is a selfish jerk, but we see that his behaviour comes from a desperate need to simply survive. Mason often works as an investigator for a gentlemanly lawyer, EB Jonathan (John Lithgow)

So maybe it's his experience during WW1 that's responsible for the way he SUFFERS??? They didn't call it PTSD back then (because they called it being SHELL SHOCKED), but isn't it still also pretty clear that he SUFFERS from the symptoms of having it???

🤔

[–] letess (1020) a year ago

Continuing here with last of your posts. As columns were too narrow.

I think you are spending way too much time and energy on the disbarment and the gun. At the end of this series, I believe disbarment was off the table with his going to jail for 4 mos.

For this series to work for S3, they have to start fresh. They already took Mason to the depths. The writers are essentially saying. Please HBO. Give us just one more chance. The imposter attorney will be gone. The schlemiel will be gone. He’s just getting started and will be the remarkable attorney we all know and love.

Did you know…
The creator and writers of the S1 are gone. They were replaced with new writers. Writers of the Knick. A brilliant series. Why do you think that was? To me, it looks like HBO had trouble with S1 and wanted it to go go in a different direction that’s why S2 took 2 yrs. Now, they have the same dilemma. Only these writers dumped Perry in jail. And either we’re left with that or…. It is kind of blackmail.

Since you focus on the details can you answer me this. In the defense of the Gallardos, do you recall anytime in the courtroom where either Della or Perry told of the devastation the Gallardos experienced bc of Brooks And his stadium. That in clearing the area. They burned the land. Their apartment. And Gallardos’ little sister was burned to death. Do you recall any of this. Now that’s a powerful reason for killing someone.

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

Wonderful idea about posting to the OP as a way to keep from dealing with too narrow columns!!! When that's happened before we usually began new topics. So thanks for the heads up about how to deal with this very annoying problem!!

You might be right about starting fresh in S3, but WHY did they go to the trouble of having the JUDGE refuse to issue the requested COURT ORDER if they're never going to deal with it, or with the way that could also be grounds enough for a MISTRIAL, particularly if they'd also try to APPEAL the case as a way to get the 30 year sentence reduced for their client.

And why wouldn't they also file an APPEAL when the JUDGE also admits to Perry how he's been CORRUPTED by his desire to MAKE as much MONEY as possible instead of sticking to some kind of an idealistic notion of justice???

Sure they've taken Perry to the depths (as you've put it), but what about this CORRUPTED BIASED JUDGE (who also fails to issue a GAG ORDER for that guy on the RADIO)? Or what about Camilla and Brooks father selling OIL to JAPAN??? Shouldn't we also see THEM taken to the same kind of DEPTH as well??? Especially when Camilla's also the one who HIRED and PAYS the boys to KILL the VICTIM (who's also responsible for their homelessness and for the death of the young sister)???

No also had no idea the creator & writers of S1 are gone. Also never heard of the KNICK before either. But COVID is probably also the main reason for the DELAY in getting S2 made. Did you also hear about a possible writer's strike in HOLLYWOOD? That might be another reason why HBO hasn't renewed the show for another season yet.

The reason why they didn't go into the BACKGROUND of the GALLARDOS in Court was due to the GUN issue. Because once Perry knew they were GUILTY, that changed everything & prevents Perry from being able to present them in a favorable light. Della and Perry also discussed this matter in one scene.

PLUS, if the JURY knew about Brooks making their family homeless (not just once but twice by first taking the farm away and then burning down the apartments they inhabited to build that STADIUM), wouldn't that also make them appear GUILTY (due to having a MOTIVE to kill BROOKS in revenge for what he'd done to them)?

If CAMILLA and the father of BROOK's are CONVICTED, and it becomes known that Camilla's the reason why Brook's is dead (to keep him from revealing the OIL was being sold), seems like appealing the other case to reduce the sentence could be interesting enough.

Because not only is CAMILLA responsible for the death of Brooks, but she's also responsible for the deaths of KOREANS and anyone else the JAPANESE were using that OIL to attack (which eventually also leads to the attack on PEARL HARBOR when they attacked and destroyed most of the ships in our own NAVY).

And then comes still more INJUSTICE when people who were born and raised here in the US lost their HOMES, by being placed into INTERNMENT CAMPS, for no reason other than the color of their skin (due to the PARANOIA that ensues after the attack on PEARL HARBOR).

All this so CAMILLA can be RICH and sit around smoking POT & drinking her BOOZE (that she also ORDERS DELLA to bring up to her from down below in her MANSION). Needless to say, I'd also like to see CAMILLA placed behind BARS where she belongs for the rest of her life.

🤔

[–] letess (1020) a year ago

First of all, why are you calling the judge biased and corrupt. Everything he is doing is above board and he’s doing an excellent job.

Here’s what you missed.
The gun has been confiscated and everyone meets in the judge’s chambers. The public does not know what’s going on. The dilemma in front of the judge is that he will have to declare a mistrial and no one wants that - except Tommy says he could live with it much to the chagrin of Burger. The judge and Burger do not like Tommy and see him as an aggressive guy with inflammatory actions and beliefs that could harm the public’s view of the court system.
The judge asks both counsels - after calling it a shit show - to do two things: (1) figure out how to make the gun admissible and (2) draw up charges against Mason.
Fast forward to Perry sitting down next to the judge at the shoeshine spot 30 minutes before the judge is to pronounce his decision in his chambers.
Perry says that his clients will benefit more with him as their counsel than a public defender and he will fall on his sword and do time
Next we are in judge’s chamber with both counsels. The judge did in fact say he was going to declare a mistrial but he now sees that going forward would be best. The gun will be admissible and Tommy wants to say it’s from Mason’s safe but Della says it wasn’t in the brief. The provenance of the gun is determined to be Hooverville. The judge says Mason will do 4 months in county jail. That’s the deal they struck. There is no disbarment. That’s it. The next scenes have to do with with the photos and striking up a deal for Perry’s clients with Burger. The future of Camilla will be in S3 if we get that far.

So your looking up all these things is really not necessary and one has to ask if people who are viewing this feel the need to re-litigate a TV show, then everything is way out of hand.

As far as not mentioning the fire in defense of brothers - well one is already burned up all over his neck. You would have to blind and stupid not to wonder how and why that happened. And the one brother has to admit he’s guilty and will be doing 30 years - so that cat is out of the bag there. It would help for his defense that if he did, they should know why. I am sorry but I don’t think this is the Perry Mason I want to see. He should have known when the train was set up and that there was a burning cigarette - to try and reflect not who has been in the apt but what could be in there that could be incriminating. And trying to blame the teacher - does she even smoke? When he and Pete were at the racetrack Pete made it very clear that he had limited income and he couldn’t afford doing these crazy things. I hate the way the brother got this horrible deal and I don’t even want to see this show if they can’t make it work. They should have kept the S1 writers because I would like to see what they would have come up with. It was pitched as a limited series - so when was the original ending supposed to be. Your trying to get Perry out of jail - for what - it is only 4 months. This is a blip. And then you try to blame the aviatrix at the farm for Perry not paying his property taxes. It’s just a pile of excuses for a dismal attorney. The other guy is in for 30 years because of Perry.

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

There's a scene with PERRY where the JUDGE ADMITS to his CORRUPTION. He says back in the 1890's when he first began his law career LA had a chance to not be CORRUPTED, but soon thereafter MAKING MONEY was all that mattered to him anymore.

Then he doesn't ISSUE the GAG ORDER for that guy on the RADIO who BASHED & ATTACKS the defendants. And he also does NOTHING when the PRESS attacks Perry (calling him PEDRO Perry and MAGGOT MASON, etc.), which is also REPEATED again in COURT by the guy prosecuting the case (who is also later FIRED by the DA once he burns the photos of himself with his lover).

Then the JUDGE also REFUSED to issue the "COURT ORDER" the prosecution requested for the GUN, and says they'll take a "FIELD TRIP" to Perry's office instead, which results in the "ILLEGAL SEARCH & SEIZURE" situation. All of these things are probably also grounds for the DISMISSAL of the JUDGE & a MISTRIAL being declared upon APPEAL.

And the JUDGE also calls it a SHIT SHOW before he DENIES the request for a COURT ORDER & then ILLEGALLY confiscates the gun during the FIELD TRIP (thus also proceeding to continue with his own version of a SHIT SHOW after giving them his "DO AS HE SAYS/NOT as he DOES himself" LECTURE). 🙄

And MASON's the one who OFFERS to do the 4 MONTHS in jail as part of a
bargain made with the DA (not the JUDGE). In other words, No DEAL was struck with the JUDGE. So whoever wrote this SUMMARY is wrong, because they're the one who missed what's actually going on in the show.

And looking up things is also a result of watching and WRITING DOWN what's been SAID in the show, rather than depending upon reading some summary or recap of it that's incorrect (due to the way the PLEA DEAL for Perry going to jail was struck with the DA NOT with the JUDGE).

Perry's problem is he TRUSTED PETE too much not to suspect that he's the one breaking into his HOME & HIS OFFICE. Because he thinks PETE's CORRUPTED character had as much HONOR as Perry does himself to BETRAY him that way. So, imo, PETE's the problem. Not Perry. THE GUN also was NOT in the APT. It was in the SAFE in Perry's OFFICE. And the teacher also over heard Perry talking to Della at his OFFICE (which is the reason why he suspects her).

And Pete also uses that limited income line as an excuse to LEAVE Perry there at the racetrack instead of taking him home. PETE also USED & ABUSED the EXPENSE account of their FORMER BOSS to purchase expensive MEALS & pay HOOKERS for sex making PETE's character just as CORRUPT as CAMILLA's.

Perhaps the original writers also quit because of COVID??? Needed to find other jobs when filming shuts down?

As was explained before, the FEAR is now that he's a CONVICTED FELON for TAMPERING with the GUN as EVIDENCE, PERRY won't be able to PRACTICE LAW anymore, due to the way another PROSECUTOR will probably also make a MOTION to have him REMOVED from the case and/or DISBARRED the next time that he has another COURT CASE.

IMO, the BARTENDER woman who OWNS the BAR, flys planes, & took Perry's farm away from him was also sexually USING PERRY for her BOY TOY. Note the way she also encouraged his ALCOHOLISM as well. PLUS Perry also suffers from PTSD due to serving in the TRENCHES in WW1. And then this woman further ABUSED him by taking away the farm when if she REALLY CARED about him she could have helped him by giving him LOAN & PAYING the TAXES for him. In other words, to me she's just as GREEDY as CAMILLA, Brook's father, and the JUDGE.

And I also suspect the 30 YEAR SENTENCE will be REDUCED, and/or the guy will also be RELEASED from PRISON for TIME SERVED upon APPEAL of the case.

Because PERRY also still has a GOOD HEART and isn't in the profession primarily seeking MONEY & POWER like CAMILLA, Brook's father, and the JUDGE.

[–] joi2049 (5488) a year ago

So WHY is PERRY going to jail if she found the workaround???
S2/Ep 6
30 TIME MARK: DELLA (Perry's Apprentice) CROSS EXAMS WITNESS

46 TIME MARK: BACKWARDS view of the DOOR: PERRY MASON ATTY AT LAW (SCENE where PETE breaks into PERRY's OFFICE and his SAFE where he finds the GUN.

46 MIN TIME Mark: MASON concealing murder weapon in his PRIVATE SAFE scene

JUDGE:

I warned the two of you I will NOT have this trial turning into a Goddamn CIRCUS
Here I am trying to control you two fking clowns. Jesus!

47 MIN TIME MARK:
JUDGE ASKS PERRY:
is MULLIGAN'S ALLEGATION TRUE?
PERRY (stuttering)
I'd like to speak with my COLLEAGUE, MISS STREET.
I BELIEVE THERE'S PRECEDENCE HERE.

Prosecution asks judge for a COURT ORDER to surrender the GUN.

At the 48 MIN TIME MARK at the HBO/MAX site:

Judge DURKIN says:

given Mr. Mason's disrespect for the COURT and his flagrant disregard for the RULES he doesn't believe a Court Order WOULDN'T BE SUFFICIENT.
Instead, we will all take a FIELD TRIP TO YOUR OFFICE.

------------------------

https://moviechat.org/tt2077823/Perry-Mason/644a9d94b43cdc49f581846a/Scene-with-JUDGE-DURKIN-and-Perry-inside-of-his-Chambers

So after the JUDGE IGNORES PERRY's claim that there's a PRECEDENCE for how to handle the matter, the JUDGE (who also shows DISREPECT and FLAGRANT DISREGARD for the RULES) also IGNORES the request for a COURT ORDER by saying that it "WOULDN'T BE SUFFICIENT."??? !!!

And then he also says that instead of a COURT ORDER being issued they'll "TAKE A FIELD TRIP TO PERRY's OFFICE" ??? !!!

WTF???? !!!!!!

Surely this has got to be GROUNDS for a MISTRIAL or DISMISSAL of the JUDGE when a JUDGE doesn't even ISSUE an ORDER for Perry to turn over the GUN???

And then he also BROW BEATS MASON into letting them "TAKE A FIELD TRIP to his OFFICE??? "
---------------------
RE: "ILLEGAL SEARCH and SEIZURE."

IMO, The reason why it was an "ILLEGAL SEARCH and SEIZURE" is because several times the JUDGE refused to listen to Della & PERRY when they both tried to tell him about the other PRECEDENCE case that indicates the proper way to handle the matter.

PLUS the JUDGE also REFUSED to issue the COURT ORDER when the PROSECUTION requested one, thus also making the SEARCH of PERRY'S OFFICE SAFE an ILLEGAL procedure.

Because instead of following the RULES, the JUDGE (who also should have been DISMISSED from the case) ORDERS everyone to "TAKE A FIELD TRIP" to PERRY'S OFFICE, where POOR PERRY, who doesn't know any better, OPENS up the SAFE revealing to them that the GUN is inside of it, when LEGALLY SPEAKING he wasn't under any kind of LEGAL obligation to do so.

Because neither the JUDGE nor the PROSECUTION had a WARRANT or anything else to FORCE PERRY to hand over the GUN to them. Remember how you also need a PROBABLE CAUSE before getting a SEARCH WARRANT to search someone's home? Without that COURT ORDER, they had no LEGAL right to FORCE Perry into going to his OFFICE to open that SAFE.

And since PETE's the one who reveals finding the GUN to the DA through another ILLEGAL SEARCH, that's also why a COURT ORDER couldn't be ISSUED.

Therefore, the reason why a MISTRIAL (along with the DISMISSAL of the JUDGE) should also have been the result instead of PERRY's arrest and 4 MONTH jail sentence.