Hollywood Law / Live-Action TV

Hollywood Law in Live-Action TV.

---

The following have their own pages:

• Blue Bloods
• Daredevil (2015)

---

• 24:
  • Season 1 suggests that David Palmer (then a senator) and Jack Bauer came to know each other when the former headed up a Senate subcommittee that Bauer's unit did operations for. In real life the military is exclusively under the authority of the executive branch; a Senate subcommittee might be keeping a close eye on such a unit but do not have any authority to give them orders.
  • One plot point in Season 2 features a coup against President Palmer, attempting to invoke the Section 4 of the 25th Amendment, to remove him from office by declaring him unfit to serve. The show makes it seem like it's a matter of a simple majority vote by the Cabinet, and the President is tossed out on his ear. In Real Life, the situation is far more complex. For one, the request to remove the President has to be submitted in writing to Congress, and the President is allowed to submit his own opinions on the matter. And long deliberations would likely ensue. The 25th Amendment, or at least Section 4, has never actually been invoked, so it's hard to say exactly what the process would look like. But it would undoubtedly take days, maybe weeks, and not a couple hours like on the show.
• Accused, a British TV show where each episode opens with a person on trial (not always for murder, either) and then reveals through flashbacks how they got there, contains one example. In the second episode, it's a British soldier who served in Afghanistan. Problem is, the crime he's accused of occurred in Afghanistan on a British military base, against a fellow soldier, yet he's put on trial in a civilian court back in the UK. Any crime on a military base, committed by a soldier, against another soldier, would fall under military jurisdiction and be tried by a military court.
• All in the Family: One episode contained probably Hollywood's worst misunderstanding of Miranda rights ever. And considering how badly Hollywood usually understands that subject, that's saying a lot. In that episode, Archie is mugged and reports the crime to the police. The police catch the perpetrator and read him his Miranda rights in perfect English after the arrest. However, they have to release him because the mugger didn't understand a word of English. As stated in "Common Examples" above, that's NOT how Miranda rights work. Another episode has Archie getting arrested for possession of a weapon without a permit when he lets a policeman into his house, but the case is then thrown out of court because the officer didn't have a search warrant. The plot is meant to deliver an Aesop about why cops have limits on how they can enforce the law. A case of Hollywood Law causing a Broken Aesop, since police officers don't need a warrant to search a home when they have the homeowner's consent to enter.
• Becker: It's hardly believable that the malpractice suit at the end of Season 3 would have ever seen the inside of a courtroom. First off, Vinny's poor shape and lifestyle made him a heart attack waiting to happen regardless of whether he got on the treadmill or not. In addition, Becker didn't force Vinny to start exercising... he did it of his own free will, and it's standard procedure at most gyms to sign a waiver that absolves anybody else from responsibility should a health issue occur. To add insult to injury, the plaintiff's attorney framed his case against Becker as a character assassination, which had no bearing on the suit and would have been quieted by any reasonable judge. On top of everything else, the defense attorney sleeping with one of the character witnesses was totally unethical, and it's hardly plausible that Becker would've held onto her counsel after that. Granted, the denouement of the arc ended in a Moment of Awesome in which Becker lampshaded most of these things, but the premise of the story was extremely unrealistic.
• On Billy, in one episode, the eponymous Scottish immigrant talks about winning the green card lottery. Being from Scotland, it would be impossible for him to enter the lottery; residents of the UK (excluding Northern Ireland), are among those barred from entering the lottery.
• On Bones, Diplomatic immunity is badly abused in two cases.
  • In the first, a diplomat is threatened with being returned home to be prosecuted, in which case she'll be put in prison and killed by other inmates. To avoid this, she waives immunity. Too bad for her, immunity belongs to the state, not the individual, so she can't actually waive her own immunity.
  • Later, villainous hacker Christopher Pelant falsifies records to claim Egyptian citizenship, without any mention of him actually having (fake) diplomatic status. Somehow, all Egyptian tourists are diplomats now, and the Egyptian government is hot to protect a guy they just now heard of from standing trial for murder.
• From the Boston Legal page. Please note that David E. Kelley is a former lawyer, and as such, he chucked realism under Rule of Funny.
  • Even non-lawyers know that lawyers can't meet with judges ex parte, and that evidence has to be relevant to be admissible.
  • Once the show brilliantly lampshaded and subverted this. When a judge asked why both parties in a case were being represented by lawyers from the same firm (an impermissible conflict of interest in real life, of course), Denny said "It saves on guest cast".
  • One episode featured the lawyers representing the estate of a soldier killed in Iraq, under a state law fraud theory in state court due to misrepresentations by the recruiter. Everything about this is wrong: the federal government can't be sued on a tort theory in state court, the federal government can only be sued for a tort like fraud under the Federal Tort Claims Act, the government is immune to tort suits surrounding military operations, the Feres Doctrine would bar the suit in any event, and the FTCA also exempts the government for causes of action that accrue overseas. All of these mistakes are in one storyline of one episode.
  • Another one featured Alan's assistant refusing to pay her federal income taxes. She was charged criminally, and argued that she didn't pay because she disagreed with various government policies. Alan then asked the jury to return a not guilty verdict for that reason, and they did so. Perhaps needless to say, that's not a valid defense, such evidence would never be admitted, and Alan's argument would also not be permitted. There are many real life cases on this issue, because so many out there are eager to not pay their taxes.
  • Carl Sack and Lorraine represent Nantucket, Massachusetts when they want to build a nuclear bomb for protection. Any real judge would throw that out of court instantly and then order the lawyers to be examined for mental reasons.
• Cold Case often crosses into this territory. Even though it is a Police Procedural, given the vivid flashbacks and the appearance of a victim's ghost in every episode, it's moreso fantasy-driven:
  • Plenty of times a suspect has requested an attorney while being interrogated, only for the detectives to shame or otherwise trick them into not getting one.
  • Some witnesses are more involved in the episode's featured crime(s) than they admit, but due to Selective Enforcement not everyone is punished. Episodes "Love Conquers Al", "The Sleepover", "Start Up" and "The Goodbye Room" (to name a few) have a person that continuously stonewalls investigators in their knowledge/involvement, but aren't arrested by the episode's end.
  • A pretty blatant example happens in "Iced". The Victim of the Week's Jerkass best friend at one point is asked for a sample of DNA to test his against the child of said best friend's girlfriend that he conceived through rape. He turns them down flat, only for Detective Vera to hold him down and forcibly swabbed the DNA from his mouth, ultimately proven their suspicions. The suspect was certainly a prick, but the act was pretty illegal on many fronts.^note In real life, the police either get a warrant to collect DNA, or they wait until the suspect disposes of something the police know has their DNA on it and falls under the "garbage is public" rule.
• Columbo:
  • The show utilized the same Hollywood Law trope in every episode— while also being something of a Jerkass: Columbo would basically disguise his surveillance of a suspect, by pretending to simply question the person as a witness— nonstop throughout the episode. In this manner he would thus badger, harass and trick the suspect into revealing evidence that would eventually convict them. This is highly illegal, breaching many various civil and ethical protections against police abuse and harassment; however, even when suspects complain about Columbo's nonstop harassment in order to end it, this proved no avail, as Columbo would simply claim that it "proves" that the person is guilty, and that "he's touching a nerve." This made Columbo into more of a Vigilante Man than a policeman, since he was always right, and never incorrectly harasses an innocent person: however in reality, the law is not made to presume that the police are always right, but to protect the citizen's presumption of innocence. For evidence why this is necessary, you need only look at people who have been wrongly convicted of crimes due in part to overzealous police and prosecutors who are completely sure of their guilt.
  • Columbo also had a bad habit of tampering with evidence. The way he handled evidence, there was no chain of custody and most of what he would try to admit wouldn't be permissible in court because he would just walk around, pick something up, put it in his pocket, and keep it there until he was ready to share it with the murderer.
  • In one instance, "Agenda for Murder", Columbo is visiting the suspect — lawyer Oscar Finch at his office. While waiting in the office for the guy to come in, Columbo takes a piece of gum out of the wastebasket. Later he shows it to the suspect, as well as the piece of bitten cheese from the crime scene.^note The suspect has a very uniquely shaped canine. The impression shows up on both. Problems include: the wastebasket was in the office, and does not come under the 'garbage is public property' ruling; the trash has to be out at the curb, in a dumpster, etc. Also, any real forensic detective would have fits at Columbo hauling around a vital piece of evidence like that cheese like that, in a plastic bag, without even an evidence label. Broken custody chain of evidence = darn near impossible to use in court.
• CSI: “Invisible Evidence” centers on evidence in a case being thrown out due to the failure to obtain a warrant. However, it’s been pointed out that the “good faith” clause exists that allows the evidence to be used if the police acted in good faith that a warrant existed.
• Dallas never handled courtroom storylines well:
  • Bobby Ewing's girlfriend Jenna is forced to marry her abusive ex-husband Renaldo Marchetta, who then turns up dead, apparently by her hand. She is arrested for the murder, meets Bobby in jail, and tells him her version of what happened. During the trial, he is then called to the stand to recount for the jury what she had told him (which would be hearsay and completely inadmissible), asked his opinion of her mental state at several points in the story he's retelling (as he's not a psychiatrist, this would be irrelevant), and finally is asked whether he feels she could have committed the murder (not only was he not even there, his personal opinions are not admissible). The show explains that Bobby was called to the stand to tell Jenna's story to the jurors without her being cross-examined, which is of course why it would never have been allowed in real life. In any realistic scenario, Bobby would never have been called as a witness, as he had no testimony of the events to offer. If Jenna wanted her story told, she would have had to testify on her own behalf, exposing herself to cross-examination by the prosecuting attorneys.
  • Witnesses are allowed to testify to statements the defendant made in criminal trials under a hearsay exception called "Opposing party statements" (some states don't even consider it hearsay at all). Bobby could've repeated Jenna's statements if he was being questioned by the prosecution. However, the defense in this episode is barred from using this exception, as it has to be statements made by the opposing party, and the defense is not opposing itself.
  • Family matriarch Miss Ellie is tired of J.R. and Bobby tearing the family apart fighting over control of Ewing Oil, so she decides to go into court, have her deceased husband Jock declared mentally incompetent so his final will is overturned, then sell the company. During the trial, she is asked if she feels Jock was, in fact, mentally incompetent (again, she's not a psychiatrist). Her answer is (roughly) "I know you need me to say it, so the answer is Yes." Needless to say, this kind of answer would not be accepted in any court and would probably result in a tongue-lashing from the judge.
• Elementary:
  • Sherlock often breaks into suspect's homes to secure evidence, claiming that since he is only a consultant, little things like the 4th ammendment don't apply to him. Except he's an NYPD consultant, on their payroll, so far all intents and purposes he is bound by the same rules as the police are. Any evidence he obtains in reality would be quickly tossed out of court.
  • A pretty severe one, given the premise of the show. Sherlock and Joan are often shown questioning witnesses/suspects without NYPD presence or permission, entering and searching private property on their own without a search warrant, plus sometimes Sherlock collects evidence from crime scenes for his own personal use. It's difficult to understate what a huge no-no this is in criminal investigations. In the real world the defense attorneys for the criminals Sherlock captures would have a field day with this, these criminals would have all had mistrials, and Sherlock himself would be under arrest, not to mention no longer consulting with police. Eventually this comes up and is very, very thinly masked with Blatant Lies by Sherlock (e.g. claiming that locked doors were "just open").
  • In "Art Imitates Art" an artist creates images using photos taken off social media without permission. No one mentions the fact that the owners (many of whom are very angry about this) could have him charged with copyright violation and the photos taken down.
  • A Russian says he's uncowed by police threats of sending him home to where he's wanted if he doesn't cooperate, as the US doesn't have any extradition treaty with Russia. However, the police fail to point out that extradition or not, the State Department could still turn him over to Russia. The extradition treaty simply formalizes this, obligating one country to turn over wanted fugitives if the other goes through proper procedures.
  • In "Be My Guest", Sherlock goes after a man holding a woman captive without telling the police, saying they wouldn't have enough evidence to get a warrant. Which is not true, since he read the man's lips showing he was conspiring to have her murdered, and saw a photo of her on his phone with a chain around her neck. Based on his testimony, that would be more than enough for a warrant, which Sherlock being not only a highly knowledgeable genius but having worked with the police for years, should know by now.

• Frasier often uses the trope of "the legal victim."
  • In a famous episode, Frasier and Daphne are sued by jilted super lawyer Donny Douglas, for "breach of (marriage) contract" (Daphne's last-minute refusal to marry Donny) and "tortious interference in a private contract" (via Frasier's meddling). Breach of Promise of Marriage is not grounds for a suit anymore in most jurisdictions. Washington state had also ended punitive damages in suits at the time Donny sought them in his. It also could only be applied against the man who broke his promise to a woman, never against a woman who broke her promise to a man. ^note Because women in the days when this tort began typically did not work, they were thus reliant on men for support, and so this amounted to a promise that they would care for them financially that was broken, which is cause to sue someone in similar cases to this day. Another reason is that it was assumed they started screwing while they were engaged, which meant if she didn't marry the guy who deflowered her, she was ruined forever. Also, it is incorrect terminology, since Daphne had never actually entered into any contract. Donny, a lawyer, should have known he himself could be sued for doing that (it's called abuse of process). It's also not "tortious interference" for someone to urge a would-be bride to not go through with the marriage (which is not a contract by itself).
  • Likewise on an earlier episode, Frasier was deliberately sold a counterfeit painting for $60,000, but is told the police "have their hands full with murders and robberies" so apparently they can't be bothered to investigate this. While it's stated that he could sue, Martin tells him that he'd end up losing more money than he paid for the painting that way. In reality the police tend to take fraud and grand theft very seriously, particularly against a rich and influential person such as Frasier, while Martin—having connections due to being a former cop—likely could pull strings to get the case handled quicker as well. Depending on how the art dealer functions, it could also easily be taken to the federal level, since the FBI has an entire division dedicated to fine arts crime.
  • Martin, a former police detective, also recounts a Miranda Rights example, where he lied about having fully read them when the suspect actually broke free midway through and he had to chase him down. As shown above, the failure to Mirandize does not make an arrest invalid, and even if it did, the interruption was the suspect's fault, so he had no need to lie about it at all. Martin also says he saw the suspect shoot someone, at which point his Miranda Rights would be utterly irrelevant.
• How I Met Your Mother: Despite one of their main characters being a law student, eventually lawyer, the series has never much cared to present a vaguely realistic legal world. Highlighted by a civil trial over a polluted lake, let's count the offenses:
  • Marshall had superhunk Brad (played by Joe Manganiello) as his opposing counsel in said civil suit. Brad pretended to be interviewing for a job at Marshall's firm so he could steal their strategy for the case, which is a quick trip to state bar association for disbarment.
  • Somehow, the jury was made up entirely of women who were biased in Brad's favor because they wanted to fuck him. Only a severely incompetent lawyer would even let it get this far, in real life jury selection is a long process carefully negotiated between the two sides.
  • Finally, the judge, who is very obviously attracted to Brad, shows blatant favoritism throughout the process, and when Marshall manages to win, awards a tiny judgment. The blatant favoritism on display means a real quick appeal process in which the trial judge is reversed and possibly reprimanded.
  • In the end, a "guilty" verdict is rendered, despite this being a civil case (civil cases are ruled in favor of the plaintiff or defendant, only criminal trials use guilty and not guilty). Not to mention that despite there being a jury present throughout the trial, it's the judge who renders the "guilty" verdict, then determines what damages will be paid. These are the main, and only, functions of a jury at trial.
• Sam Puckett on iCarly is arrested for assaulting an ambassador and gets off scot-free and never has to deal with the issue. Rule of Funny obviously applies.
• Jane the Virgin:
  • Petra's claim that she had a right to Rafael and Jane's baby is ridiculous on the face of it and never should have been a serious legal threat.
  • Some of the Manipulative Bitch legal maneuvering that Petra pulls off to harass Raf would never hold up for a second in court
• Another British example is Judge John Deed. Shall we count the ways?
  • The eponymous judicial hero allows the jury to 'reconsider' their verdict on the basis of what the accused says just before sentence is passed. They change their minds and let him go.
  • Judge Deed is sleeping with a pretty barrister, has a barrister for an ex-wife AND a barrister for a daughter (eventually). All three appear before him, with no one mentioning the clear conflict of interest at hand.
  • After realizing the whole establishment is out to get him, said Judge begins a very public crusade to get the Home Secretary (a very senior politician) fired. In fairness, the Home Secretary is a complete ratbag who takes bribes from people who arrange the murder of a dangerous witness and make at least two attempts on Deed's life. From outside Deed looks like Hollywood Law, from inside he looks like The Last DJ.
  • After deciding that a jury has been tampered with, Judge Deed decides that they should have found him guilty and, without any investigation as to jury tampering at all, puts the suspect in jail so there can be a retrial. The defense barrister is completely ignored, even after saying the magic words of "habeas corpus" and asking for directions to the Court of Appeal.
• Law & Order:
  • One episode had Jack McCoy team up with a judge to get a drunk driver convicted of multiple counts of first-degree murder as part of the judge's crusade. Jack goes so far as to blackmail one witness into being out of the country during the trial and suppresses all evidence that the guy was drunk off his rocker when he committed the crime, with the judge DeusExMachinaing on Jack's behalf all the way. Fortunately, during the trial, Jack comes to his senses, and starts to show the evidence that the guy was drunk (and so was guilty of manslaughter, but not murder). The only reason the judge didn't report Jack's abuses in the trial was because he was in as deep. In that one, at least, they acknowledge that what McCoy and the judge were doing was wrong, and it's brought up several times later on as an example of McCoy's willingness to engage in misconduct if he thinks he can get away with it. In recent years, though, lots of drunk drivers have started to face murder charges, so they could do this legally if the episode were written more recently.
  • In an older episode, a guy beats his girlfriend (with her consent) to cause a miscarriage and frame the rich lawyer they intended to sue, taking careful measure to ensure the fetus was under 24 weeks old so they could avoid going to prison. Ben and the others act like there is nothing they can do and have to use all sorts of legal loopholes, never mind the original couple conspired to commit blackmail, perjury, defamation, and fraud.
  • Too many examples to list, but whenever a judge tosses out evidence against the defendant early on during a trial to make the case that much harder for the prosecution, though the defendant will often get their just desserts in one way or another. However, one prominent example comes to mind:
  • "Hubris": A warrant is issued to search the suspect's apartment but the courier hasn't brought it yet. Knowing the suspect will get there before the warrant, Det. Green sticks a toothpick in his lock to keep him from entering. The courier arrives a few seconds later and the police bust in and seize a videotape of the murders. The judge tosses the tape since the police secured the area before they had the warrant (even though they had reason to believe he'd destroy the evidence and were well aware the warrant had been issued) — but in reality, it is totally legal to secure a scene if there's a concrete possibility that the evidence will be removed, destroyed, or otherwise endangered before the search warrant arrives; what the police can't do is actually start the search process before the warrant arrives.^note As an example, if the police had strong reason to suspect that a criminal had evidence on his computer, they could secure the location and prevent the suspect from touching it so that he can't alter or delete the information; they just couldn't actually fire it up and look at the contents until the warrant arrived.
  • In "Patient Zero," a man is charged with killing his mistress's child (dosing them with stolen SARS virus that she survived). His wife testifies that she was with him at the time, but breaks down on the stand and changes her story a couple of times. Outside the courtroom, she admits that she was deliberately playing the jury, and the jury returns a not guilty verdict because they can't be sure what the truth is. McCoy and Southerlyn watch the husband and wife walk out of court hand-in-hand, and are apparently so bewildered by their defeat that they completely forget they have an iron-clad case for perjury against the wife. Not to mention completely ignoring the handful of felonies the husband committed in getting the SARS virus to begin with.
  • In "Gunshow," the season ten premiere, a gunman opens fire on a crowd in a public park, killing over a dozen people. Once arrested, he confesses to the police. The judge in the case, however, excludes the confession on the grounds that the suspect's mother had told Lt. van Buren that she was calling a lawyer for her son, and that the police therefore had no right to continue the interview, since the suspect's right to counsel had been invoked. The problem is that the suspect was not a minor, and, as such, his mommy could not invoke his right to counsel for him. If he was properly Mirandized, and did not invoke his right to an attorney, nor his right to remain silent, then the police had every right to continue questioning him. The only reason for this was so that McCoy would end up prosecuting the gun manufacturer instead ^note never mind the fact they had been immunized from lawsuits by Congress at that point in one of the more Anvilicious (to say nothing of asinine) episodes in the show's run.
  • In "Turn the Page" it's stated that Elliot murdered his first three victims in Brooklyn. As such, the Manhattan DA would have no authority to try him on those charges, even assuming they had enough evidence. It would be a matter for the Brooklyn DA to do (or not).
• Law & Order: Special Victims Unit:
  • A common example throughout the series is Olivia's constant assertion that their job is to believe the victim. The police certainly do have an obligation to treat victims sympathetically. But their job is to investigate and determine the truth, not to take victims at their word and only look for evidence that supports their claim.^note More specifically, she's close to a true statement — in the sense that their job is to take the victims seriously and not immediately disbelieve them either — but she takes it to the extreme, thinking that they should always assume the victim is telling the unvarnished truth unless and until they have clear evidence otherwise. Several episodes show exactly why this is a bad idea, with "victims" making false accusations or at least not telling the whole truth.
    • Some episodes show the opposite side as well, when one or more of the detectives comes to believe the accuser is lying based on circumstantial evidence. A particularly striking example takes place in "Witness", in which the detectives are initially skeptical that the victim, who is known for being dramatic, might be lying about having been raped; the episode ultimately reveals that she was telling the truth.
    • "Doubt" is actually an example where this comes up in two different forms. As soon as the report is made, Elliot and Olivia form immediate, opposite opinions as to who was telling the truth, and stubbornly cling to them. As the episode progresses, each of them is forced to admit that they may be wrong. Unusually for SVU, the episode never tells us which version of events is true, or even which one the jury believes; the entire point of the episode is to highlight the extreme uncertainty present in such a case.
  • In "Silence" the bishop has repeatedly confessed to Father Sweeney after sexually abusing minors. Father Sweeney finally breaks the seal of confession after Stabler urges him to and says he'll testify about what was said. Per New York state law though this is inadmissible. All communications between a priest and penitent while giving a confession are privileged, so Sweeney couldn't be a witness as to what the bishop confessed even if he'd done this. The only exception is if the penitent voluntarily waives the privilege-that was definitely not the case here.
  • In "Crush", the DA forces Detective Benson to arrest a teenage girl on child porn charges (for "sexting" pictures of herself) in an effort to coerce her into testifying against an attacker. When she does so, the DA attempts to drop the charges, but the judge overrules her and sentences the girl to several years in prison. While the end of the episode reveals that the judge was corrupt, this has two problems. First, the arrest was an obvious case of Malicious Prosecution, which is a felony, and was one of the few cases (it's a notoriously difficult charge to prove in most jurisdictions) in which it would be an Open-and-Shut Case. Second, even in juvenile court, the judge has no power to do any of that.
  • In "Popular", a nurse cites doctor-patient privilege in refusing to talk with Detective Stabler when she treats a middle school girl who claims her teacher raped her. Captain Cragen, Stabler's wife, and even the victim herself give Stabler grief for bothering to do his damn job and investigate the rape; even Stabler treats the whole thing like he's breaking procedure because the privilege is so sacrosanct. Doctor-patient privilege does not cover evidence of a crime: when a medical professional comes across evidence of things such as child abuse, they are required by law to report it to the authorities. A clear-cut admission from their patient would leave them with no wiggle room whatsoever for neglecting their duty in this case.
  • In "Manipulated", the detectives use a facial recognition program to compare a picture taken on the street to the DMV records for driver's licenses. The judge later throws this out, claiming that the technology was too inconclusive and all the subsequent evidence was tainted. A person has no privacy expectation in a picture taken on a public street or their driver's license photo, so comparing them to each other cannot possibly be a violation of the 4th Amendment. Without a violation, the tree isn't "poisoned" and the remaining evidence is acceptable. What's more, the unreliability of the technology bears upon its admissibility at trial, but they don't need the computer match at trial—once the computer found the picture, the detectives confirmed it by the eyeball test and the suspect's admission. Even further, they already knew of the suspect because he was the husband of the victim's boss and they had an easy argument for inevitable discovery (they would have recognized him from the photo given time).
  • In "Presumed Guilty", even after it was revealed that Fin's ex-brother-in-law had been stopping the attack against Fr. Shea, he is still labeled a vigilante, and the Obstructive Bureaucrat DA says he had no business assaulting someone while on parole, but should have just called 9-1-1. In Real Life, the law recognizes the difference between vigilantism, which is illegal, and defense of a third party, which is not. If you see a crime, such as a burglary or vandalism in progress, and you assault the criminal, or you assault a criminal after a crime has been committed, that is vigilantism. If, however, you see someone being assaulted, you are well within your rights to intervene, even if you literally have to fight off the assailants. (N.B. In some jurisdictions, you had better make sure the person you are helping is actually the victim.)
  • One episode has Judge Donnelly take a leave of absence from the bench to prosecute a woman who had fled on a murder change years beforehand when Donnelly (the prosecutor on the original case) let her go to the bathroom and she climbed out a window. Not only does this make no sense, as she no longer works for the district attorney's office (she would have had to resign when she became a judge), no judge would allow her to act as prosecutor anyway since she clearly had a personal vendetta and was a material witness to the felony escape charge.
  • In "Venom", Darius Parker gets a judge to throw out damning evidence against him (including a full confession) because he had made a comment earlier in the interrogation to the effect that he had a lawyer representing him in an unrelated case. In reality, it's extremely unlikely that any judge would rule that the detectives could reasonably be expected to interpret an offhanded, apparently conversational mention of a lawyer as him invoking his right to counsel, especially since in retrospect it was pretty clearly an intentional setup by Darius. What's more, the judge makes a statement to the effect that he knows it's iffy but that he's granting the suppression just to make an example because he feels the police department in general has been playing a bit fast and loose with right to counsel provisions; that alone should be good enough to get the ruling overturned on appeal, as he's pretty much admitting that he wasn't judging the motion on its own merit.
  • In "Her Negotiation", the judge declares a mistrial after it turns out the physical evidence may have been contaminated. This isn't grounds for a mistrial in real life. The defense can present it to the jury and encourage them to ignore that evidence, but the judge wouldn't declare a mistrial, especially if it was only possible, not certain, that the evidence was contaminated.
  • In "Psycho/Therapist", William Lewis, who is defending himself and called Olivia as his witness, asks to treat Benson as a hostile witness. In real life, this means asking a witness leading questions; in the SVUniverse, this apparently means being allowed to scream at a victim while quite literally foaming at the mouth. Made especially painful by the fact that Barba had been objecting almost constantly before this, but stayed silent the entire time Lewis was screaming at her, up until the end, when he feebly protests that Lewis has crossed the line, though this could have been strategy on Barba's part to show how aggressive and violent Lewis is since he'd been playing the meek victim all trial.
• Matlock turned the Cornered Stool Pigeon into a Beaten Dead Horse; in every episode, Matlock would simply corner the witness with new and unaccepted evidence, which he had not previously shared with the prosecution, and basically convict the person on the spot with some ridiculous Deus ex Machina.
  • There was even an episode called The Juror that was basically 12 Angry Men Matlock version.
• Monk:
  • Monk, even though he's a private consultant, would technically be considered a full-fledged law enforcement agent if the case in question is one brought to him by the SFPD.
  • In "Mr. Monk and the Captain's Wife," Captain Stottlemeyer is in charge of the investigation into the shooting of a tow truck driver, during which Stottlemeyer's wife Karen collided with the tow truck and was knocked into a coma. Although Leland has an interest in finding the man responsible, he would have to recuse himself from the investigation in real life because of the severe conflict of interest at hand.
  • In "Mr. Monk and the Bad Girlfriend", Monk searches Linda Fusco's house and finds evidence that implicates her in the shooting of her business partner. Because Monk essentially broke in and wasn't carrying a search warrant, any evidence he found would probably be rendered inadmissible in court. The evidence in the house did lead Monk to discover a rental truck in a police impound yard that turns out to contain a fake bedroom set Linda constructed for her alibi. Due to its location, it's possible that the truck and any evidence inside it might be admissible under the "inevitable discovery" rule (since it's very likely the contents would have to be inventoried at some point).
  • There's no way Roddy Lankman's cheating scheme on the game show Treasure Chest in "Mr. Monk and the Game Show" would be able to go on for as long as it did. Most game shows generally have people on set who are put there to watch for evidence of rigging and make sure the show is fair to everyone. Not to mention, ever since the quiz show scandals of the 1950s (after several contestants came forward revealing they were being coached the answers to questions), Lankman would be running afoul of federal laws that make it a crime to rig a game show. In fact, Monk's father-in-law would probably be obligated to tell the federal authorities first and then bring Monk in if they couldn't find anything.
  • In "Mr. Monk Goes to the Bank," Stottlemeyer and Disher are shown as being in charge of the investigation into a bank robbery. While the SFPD in real life would probably investigate a bank robbery so far as being first responders, taking initial witness statements and securing the crime scene, they would not be the lead investigating agency on the case; the FBI would, as banks are federally insured.
  • In "Mr. Monk and the Really Really Dead Guy," the main characters butt heads with the FBI, who've been called in by the mayor to handle a potential serial killer case. This would never happen in real life as a) the FBI (and other federal law enforcement agencies) normally cannot unilaterally "take over" a case from state or local law enforcement and prevent them from investigating unless there are extremely unusual circumstances, b) the case didn't even fall under FBI jurisdiction, as a case can only fall under FBI jurisdiction if the perpetrator crosses state lines or the crime involves multiple states or interstate commerce, or is one that interferes directly with the federal government's business, none of which is the case here.
  • In "Mr. Monk Is at Your Service," a car accident supposedly kills Paul Buchanan's wealthy parents, and the fortunes of their respective children are said to depend on which of them died earlier. Under California intestacy law, if a husband and wife die within five days of each other, neither of them inherits from the other, regardless of who technically died first. (Of course, if the decedent leaves a will, then this law does not apply, but any competent estate lawyer would include a similar provision in the will. In fact, many wills are far stricter, requiring the recipients to survive for at least a month before they're eligible to receive anything.)
  • In Mr. Monk in Outer Space, Monk proves that Brandon Lorber was already dead when someone shot him. Stottlemeyer says that officially it's no longer their case because, he says this means no crime has officially been committed. He's wrong: shooting a dead body constitutes attempted murder.
• In Northern Exposure, a young Jewish doctor named Joel Fleischman (Rob Morrow) goes to medical school for free, in exchange for agreeing to practice in an Anchorage, Alaska, hospital for four years. However when the contract falls through and he is released from it, he then finds that the Fine Print sentences him to a 15-year prison sentence, if he fails to practice for four years in the boondock town of "Cicily" instead (the legality of which is likewise confirmed by an Amoral Attorney). Such a contract is not only legally impossible, but would in fact constitute involuntary servitude under the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution—needless to say this is completely illegal. Insult is added to injury, likewise, when the doctor later learns that the contract somehow binds him to five years of practice, rather than four (actually a shallowly disguised plot device to extend the series). In addition, the doctor is threatened with death by a vigilante, if Fleischman tries to break it. In actuality, the doctor could only be subject to civil suit for damages, as well as possible revocation of his medical license; and a death threat naturally is a crime by itself. While this would sway most people, the writers clearly chose to pursue Hollywood Law (as well as Vigilante Execution) as the first in a long series of many tropes which would later characterize the series.
  • Actually, it's not at all clear that the doctor would even be subject to a civil suit for damages. Personal services contracts are notoriously difficult to enforce. If the contract had a liquidated damages clause that the court held not to be excessive, the plaintiff would be able to get those damages, but that would probably be it. Alternatively, they might be able to get restitution damages, that is, the return of the money spent on his tuition, but that would be about it.
  • Furthermore, the obligor of the contract was the State of Alaska, which therefore would be in breach for unconscionability and unequal bargaining-power against a lay individual with limited resources to contest the contract (Fleischman). Fleischman clearly did not agree to the terms deduced by the series, but only agreed to practice in Anchorage, not Cicely or other "under-served areas;" but the law was trumped up in order to suit the series narrative.
  • The legal errors could be overlooked due to the fact that Fleischman got his legal advice from his girlfriend, who was not even a lawyer but a law student, and could have been acting under a premise that he "could have gone home at any time, but he wouldn't have believed it" (in a similar fashion to The Wizard of Oz). However later in the series he did consult with an actual lawyer, who declared the contract "bulletproof."
• In a British example, an episode of Rumpole of the Bailey ended with a revelation after Phyllida Trant Erskine-Brown was going to "leave the Bar" if certain offers were made; she did so by becoming a judge. Cut to a scene of her presiding over a case and giving her husband Claude Erskine-Brown a hard time; a judge would not be allowed to preside in a case where her spouse is appearing (it's a conflict of interest). This is a rare example for Rumpole, which was written by John Mortimer, an experienced barrister who knew all the ins and outs of the legal system; it's probably because Claude was a regular character and Phyllida had been a regular, and the sight of Phyllida presiding over the hapless Claude was too good a joke to miss.
• Seinfeld:
  • The series finale; Good Samaritan laws do not work that way for a number of reasons:
    • They're to ensure someone who helps an obviously ill or injured person cannot be sued later for unintentional injury or death. Even the compulsory good Samaritan laws only apply to people who are injured or ill, not being threatened by a mugger. And these crimes only require the bystanders to report the crime, not jump in and start crime fighting.
    • The arresting officer states "within reason". Random strangers stopping any crime, much less a mugging, is not reasonable, especially when a police officer is at the scene the entire time.
    • The punishment for violating a compulsory good Samaritan law is a small fine ($100-$300) with no jail time.
    • Regardless of how the Good Samaritan law itself is written, bringing in dozens of "character witnesses" to recount every misdeed the defendants have ever committed is still incredibly illegal under U.S. law. Character witnesses can only called in if the defense tries to use the defendant's character as a defense, which is not the case here.
    • The police officer that arrested them only did so by watching the entire robbery, doing nothing about it, and then arresting four bystanders/witnesses to a violent crime with video evidence, for not doing his job, even with a completely fictional representation and gross exaggeration of actual laws.
  • In The Bottle Deposit, Newman and Kramer try to return bottles in Michigan for the higher deposit. Michigan prohibits out of state bottle returns, and limits returns to $25 a piece, though this is probably justified since Kramer and Newman weren't thinking beyond getting the bottles there.
  • Also in "The Bottle Deposit", after Jerry's mechanic snaps and takes off with Jerry's car because Jerry doesn't treat it with the care and reverence he feels it deserves, Jerry's insurance company refuses to acknowledge that the car was stolen on the basis that he willingly surrendered the car keys to the mechanic, meaning he has no financial recourse if his car is not recovered. The police investigating it certainly think it's a theft. Then again, insurance companies are infamous for making up the most ridiculous reasons to avoid paying out a claim.
  • In "The Bris", after a suicidal mental patient jumps off the hospital roof and lands on George's car, the Hospital Administrator refuses to pay for the repairs and is disgusted to the point of anger that George would be such a horrible person to try and "profit from a tragedy." The hospital is 100% at fault for the accident (roof access should be restricted just like razor blades should be confiscated), and George is well within his rights to demand they pay, even filing a lawsuit. In fact, he could provide testimony in court for the patient's family should they file a lawsuit. Of course, in this case, the administrator could have just been trying to weasel her way out of paying, and George was cowardly enough to buckle under her intimidation and not attempt an actual lawsuit, especially since she gave him the impression that doing so would make people see him as a heartless monster.
  • Another episode had Kramer agree to take part in a police lineup when a cop announces that anyone who does so will get $50, and of course he's the one the witness identifies with the implication being he'll be arrested. Police lineups don't work that way. To start with they don't use random volunteers, the whole point is that the volunteers resemble the suspect. Also the witness identifying Kramer would not lead to his arrest, it would just result in the actual suspect being released barring other evidence.
• United States of Tara: During the first season, Kate tries to bring a sexual harassment complaint against her boss. It's dismissed because their relationship appears to be consensual (although he does get fired), but no one seems to notice the fact that she's 15 and he's at least in his early twenties (played by an actor who was 32). Kate is stated to be 15 at least twice after she files, and the age of consent in Kansas is 16. Under the law, consent cannot be given, so it's not just sexual harassment, it's statutory rape. This would doubtless come out during the lawsuit, and he'd be prosecuted.
• Veronica Mars had many of these, especially in Season 2.
  • When Duncan Kane had to kidnap his daughter? Not a chance in HELL the grandparents could have gotten custody away from the biological father, even if he hadn't been from a gazillionaire family — well, maybe a CHANCE, as 2/3 of the remaining gazillionaire family members had been investigated and/or tried for interference in the murder investigation of their daughter, because they believed their son, the father, was guilty due to a medical condition which causes uncontrollable, unpredictable and violent blackouts. Also, the mother was also from a gazillionaire family and big in their church.
  • The trial of Aaron Echolls at the end of season 2 had the defense attorney asking about Veronica's sexual history and confidential medical info, then directly introduce hearsay from an absent third party (directly, as in the lawyer himself told the jury that the absent person had said X).
    • Reality Is Unrealistic. California evidence law was the first to be codified and differs in several ways from most states, especially when Proposition 8 in 1980 made a lot more fair game. If Veronica Mars's sexual history was relevant, even just to show bias, it would be allowable so long as not to prove consent to a rape. Hearsay from an absent third party may also be used on cross-examination to a witness, provided it meets certain qualifications. However that's usually a stupid idea as attacking character of a witness allows the defendant's character to be attacked. But bringing in Veronica's medical records should've brought a mistrial and sanctions (if not disbarment) against Aaron Echolls' lawyer, as those are wholly confidential.
  • Speaking of Aaron Echolls' trial, it's not said why he wasn't charged, say, with kidnapping Veronica, assaulting Keith, and trying to kill them both by setting some guy's house on fire. Did the local prosecutors just forget about HOW they caught Aaron in the first place? Any sort of forensic investigation at all would have blown huge holes in the story he gave to the police (that he got into Veronica's car with her permission, she crashed, and they walked to the guy's house and called for help, after which Keith arrived and attacked him unprovoked. The homeowner, the only uninvolved witness, "mysteriously disappeared" before the trial), like, if Keith attacked unprovoked why are Aaron's fingerprints all over the gas can which started the fire? Why was there a fire in the first place? And it is somewhat unlikely that Veronica would have climbed inside and locked herself into an old refrigerator, and set it on fire. There would certainly be hair and blood inside the fridge from Veronica. There are a lot more things than that too.
• In The Drew Carey Show, Mimi Bobek originally gets a job with Drew's company by threatening to sue for "discrimination" if they refuse to hire her for wearing clown-like makeup and clothing on the job, claiming that it's "discrimination against her appearance." However, such laws only pertain to a person's natural appearance, not the way a person chooses to look-and clown make-up and clothing are obviously chosen, not natural. And, in the US, laws don't protect discrimination on the basis of general appearance (i.e. you look like a clown, you're not going to get a job-that's perfectly legal and understandable). There's a limited number of protected characteristics (race, religion, gender, etc.) that are the only ones you can't refuse to hire based on. Or if it's something protected by the Constitutionally-protected Rule of Funny (never mentioned which constitution).
• CSI: "Invisible Evidence": A patrolman stops a car for a broken tail light, arrests the driver on an outstanding warrant and a CSI finds evidence of a murder in the trunk. The judge tosses the evidence because neither the patrolman nor the CSI applied for a warrant to search the trunk. The Fourth Amendment does not apply whenever a person is being arrested in their car (covering the patrolman) and anytime a car is impounded, as the police have to inventory its contents (covering the CSI). The Supreme Court in Arizona v. Gant ruled that a "search incident to arrest" at a car can only be conducted if the search is likely to turn up evidence of the crime the person is being arrested for. You can search the car of someone being arrested for DUI for alcohol bottles but you can't if you're arresting him for reckless driving for example. IF the police SEIZE the car however, an "inventory search" can be conducted at the impound lot on the grounds that the police don't want to be accused of stealing something from the car if the perp is let go. Of course as it turned out when the CSI team re-investigate the case, searching for evidence that will be admissible, they discover that the driver was innocent — he was being framed by the car wash employee, who planted the bloody knife in the back seat and smashed the tail light so he would be stopped.
• The fourth season of Lost had "Eggtown", in which the flash-forwards followed Kate's murder trial. For every one aspect of the law it got right, it got three or four wrong. For a comprehensive list of all the blunders, see its page on Lostpedia. Just to start with, it takes place in California, for an Iowa murder she's accused of, and goes off from there.
  • Another big one: Kate's mother suddenly has a change of heart and refuses to testify against her, which somehow destroys the prosecution's entire case. Even if she can't be convicted of her father's murder anymore, how does the loss of this testimony have any impact on all the other crimes she committed?
• Torchwood: Miracle Day has the governments of the world (including the US) making major changes to the legal system almost overnight as a response to the Miracle. Some of these laws are clearly unconstitutional, yet no one takes notice and nothing is heard from the Supreme Court. As an example, they burn people who may be conscious alive, which is a violation of the Fifth Amendment (deprivation of life without the due process of law) plus the Eighth Amendment (i.e. cruel and unusual punishment) at the same time, while Oswald Danes also gets the rule on double jeopardy wrong. You can't be tried more than once for the same crime. No one said your death sentence cannot be executed twice (back when hanging was the standard execution method, many first attempts failed, e.g. if the rope broke). His claim for this being "cruel and unusual punishment" would only be accepted if they could not find a method of execution that wouldn't cause him undue pain. And if they couldn't, all that means is they couldn't attempt to execute the sentence again—it would be commuted to life, but he certainly wouldn't be set free.
  • Particularly since the procedure for most death sentences contain the phrase "until dead", which covers failed attempts.
• In an episode of Little House on the Prairie, Judd Larabee is accused of burning down Jonathan's barn. A judge is called in to preside over the case. When he arrives, he appoints Charles as the jury foreman even though Charles is the best friend of the victim. He then assigns Charles with the task of selecting a jury. Throughout the case, the judge scolds people for wasting the court's time when they try to present evidence. When the jury deliberates, they have 11 jurors who say Larabee is guilty and one juror who thinks he's not guilty. The judge then orders the one juror to stand up and explain why he thinks the man is not guilty before dismissing him from the jury. Then, he replaces the juror, but only after asking the replacement what his verdict would be. No one objects or finds any of these actions to be unusual. Not to mention all that 'conflict of interest' stuff.
• Raising Hope has convicted serial killer Lucy's conviction and death sentence commuted/expunged due to police taking what was considered excessive action during an escape attempt after she was electrocuted. First of all, the court system CAN'T commute your sentence because of a guard's actions in prison, especially murder convictions. Only the state governor or US President can commute sentences. Death row prisoners who almost escape don't make the top of the list, as you'd expect. Second, Lucy should have been left strapped into the electric chair until declared legally dead—she shouldn't have been able to even try her escape. Lampshaded in season 3's "Modern Wedding" episode when Burt complains that every year "she comes back in some crazy way and messes up our lives again. It's gettin' old."
  • Taken to the extreme in the fourth season episode "Adoption," when Burt and Virginia, completely unqualified, manage to stumble their way through successfully defending an innocent man in court using every TV law drama cliche in the book.
• Short-lived FOX legal procedural Justice (2006) centered around a criminal defense firm and their cases, somehow managing to avoid many common pitfalls. It took one move for all credibility to go flying out the window: the prosecution calling the defendant to the stand to testify. Neither the judge nor the legal team objected, but every single student of US history did.^Why?The defendant in a criminal case can never be compelled to testify under the Fifth Amendment (the right against self-incrimination). Defense attorneys may have their clients testify, if the defendant has no choice and/or has material information, a solid alibi, etc., but that decision is always weighed against how badly the defendant's credibility can be destroyed by the prosecution on cross-examination. Since a lawyer cannot argue a client is not guilty if the client has admitted that he is and no lawyer will ever allow a witness to be asked a question they don't know the answer to (e.g., "Did you do it?"), the safest and most common move is to keep the defendant from testifying, no matter how much they want to, as it's more likely the defendant will somehow screw it up, alienate the jury, and/or make things worse, when all the defense attorney has to do is create reasonable doubt. Even if a defendant were set to testify at their trial, they would never be called by the prosecution as no defendant can be a witness for the prosecution (i.e., a witness against themselves). If they take the stand during their defense, the prosecution has the right to cross-examine them as a witness, but that's it. Even if a defendant pleads self-defense or insanity, they still are not a witness for the prosecution and will testify in their own defense after the prosecution has finished. If the prosecution knows the defendant will testify, due to the nature of the plea, the prosecutor will call witnesses and experts to build an argument that renders a defense claim null (e.g., a forensic expert). This is another reason why insanity pleas are much less common in real life than in court: if a defendant pleads insanity, it becomes a character trial, and the prosecution gains access to the defendant's psychological records (i.e., the defendant loses doctor-patient privilege). This for the record is why the prosecution dropped their motion to have Aurora theatre shooter James Holmes's notebook (given to a therapist, under privilege) released—Holmes pled insanity, at which point the prosecution had full access to all material documenting his state of mind. And now you know.
• In an episode of the legal drama Equal Justice, the attorney for a physician charged with assisted suicide does not dispute that he did it, nor does her client. Rather, they argue, as the prosecution says, that "the law is wrong." Problem is, that's jury nullification, and in reality the prosecutor would object right there, as it's unethical for a lawyer to argue that, rather than simply defending it. This one is a staple of many courtroom dramas.
• On at least two episodes of Due South, confessions for murder are forcibly extracted at gunpoint. Said confessions would be totally worthless in court, no matter how many people witnessed it (any competent defense attorney would simply claim that their client would have been willing to say just about anything if it would get their accuser to put the gun away, assuming the judge didn't just rule that a confession made under obvious duress is inadmissable in the first place). On one occasion the person holding the gun was herself a police officer, and should have known better (not to mention gotten in a lot of trouble for doing it in the first place).
• In Orphan Black, it's believed by everyone involved that human clones secretly created using a patented biological technique are legally the slaves of the patent holders, who can do anything they want to them. The multiple problems with this are explained in detail at the work page, but let's just say here that intellectual property law does not work like that. It might be explained away as the bad guys taking advantage of the characters' legal ignorance to intimidate them, but one of the protagonists is an academic biologist who really ought to know this stuff.
• Breakout Kings had a lot of this. First of all, the US Marshals' Service does not have the authority to reduce a prisoner's sentence by one month, or at all. This may seem shocking, but prison sentences are actually legal rulings imposed by courts of law, and cannot be altered by an agency of the executive branch (the US President could theoretically commute their sentence or pardon them if they're convicted of federal offenses, but see here—^note It's not that a deal of some sort to shorten a convict's sentence could never happen at all, but it would be much more involved than what is depicted on the show.). Secondly, the Marshals' service is part of the federal government, meaning that it has no responsibility or authority over state prisoners, but at least one of the convicts on the team, Shea, was in a state prison—Ossining, or Sing-Sing. Also, many of the runners the team chases are shown escaping from state prisons (Marshals take over when a state prisoner flees across state lines, but not before).
  • Also, in the episode "SEAL'd Fate" in season 2, the plot turns on a private military contractor firm that was hired to carry out covert ops by the US government, one of which turned out to involve the commission of war crimes. At the end of the episode, the runner, who was an employee of the company who broke out to expose the company's culpability, was taken out of the Marshals' custody by the CIA. The CIA is barred by statute from arresting anyone on American soil, or conducting any kind of operations whatsoever domestically. Also in that episode, the Marshals were locked in the company's offices when the runner broke into the building; after this, the Marshals just walk away. Again, shockingly, it's actually a crime to imprison law enforcement officials (or anyone actually, outside some obvious exceptions) against their will. For some reason, the Marshals act like there is nothing they can do about this. That whole episode was obnoxiously idiotic.
• Person of Interest:
  • In the season four premiere, Reese (in his new persona as a detective), doesn't bother with filling out the paperwork justifying his shooting a drug dealer because he didn't fire his gun. Even though the circumstances behind the shooting are easily justifiable (the guys he shot were trying to rob and kill him), this is a no-no. It doesn't matter if a cop shoots his attacker with his own gun or the perp's gun, what matters to the department is that the cop shot somebody, and that has to be legally justified—every officer is put on leave until Internal Affairs clears it.
  • In "Wingman", Reese stops a suspect through shooting him in the knee (as is his signature). It's different now, Fusco points out, because he's a detective. Their captain rightly chews him out, but no one mentions that the NYPD could be sued, not to mention the injured suspect filing an excessive force complaint, quite possibly even a civil rights violation. Also, since Reese has already done this three times in a month, he should not even be back to work since Internal Affairs would have taken away his gun and he'd be on leave until cleared (not likely in this case) as it says above.
  • What makes both of these really egregious is that in earlier seasons it was played more realistically — Carter lost her detective's shield between the second and third seasons because a Dirty Cop stole the evidence that justified a shooting she was involved in before IA arrived to investigate.
• The Good Wife: Peter's first day back in the State's Attorney's office comes with this insane declaration: no plea bargains. Something better than 95% of all cases are pled out before a trial these days, independent of jurisdiction. This is in part because it's much less work to not have to fight a case out in front of a jury. The show itself is consistent in showing how much work is cut off for both sides when a plea is taken. So, while saying on one hand that the amount of hours the staff can work is being cut, he enforces a new policy that would exponentially increase the amount of work needed.
  • In "Dark Money", the firm has some evidence excluded because it was obtained from illegally hacking into a computer. However, the exclusionary rule applies only to illegally obtained evidence the government (or someone working on their behalf) collected and attempts to submit for a criminal case. They are not government employees, and this was civil. The judge could therefore not exclude this, though he would likely inform the police and they might face criminal charges.
  • In another episode, it comes out that Kalinda had falsified evidence to get Carey acquitted, and that Diane had presented that evidence to the court, but with no knowledge that the evidence was false. The show acts as though Diane's good faith was not a defense; at one point, Diane says that what she has done is "strict liability." In modern times, there actually are now some strict-liability crimes, but they are rare, and suborning perjury is not one of them. Her lack of knowledge that the evidence was fake is actually a complete defense for her. The show was relying on Rule of Drama, obviously.
• One of the plot arcs in Modern Family's fourth-season finale, "Goodnight Gracie", which follows the whole cast to Florida in the wake of Phil's mother's death, has Mitchell accompanying Gloria to court to answer an old charge against her ... and deciding he likes getting back into the courtroom, so he winds up representing just about everyone else there. While the episode figures into his character arc because it leads him to conclude he wants to get back into litigating cases in court again, it's extremely unlikely that a Florida judge would let a lawyer from California, presumably not a member of the Florida bar, just up and represent clients before her. An out-of-state lawyer can be allowed to represent a client temporarily (called pro hac vice or "for this purpose") but it would be very likely only one at a time.
• Wonder Woman (2011 pilot):
  • Claiming someone engages in illegal activities without proof is called slander and could easily get someone sued. Wonder Woman calls a press conference to announce this, fully acknowledging her lack of proof, and yet suffers no consequences. She also admitted to the entire world that she has broken the law to stop a crime she can't even prove was committed.
  • Doesn't even touch the detective's blatantly illegal (not to mention stupid) advice to WW that if she breaks into the villain's lair, the police will be able to investigate it because it's now a crime scene. Yes it will be, for a crime that Wonder Woman committed, and the police let her do. The only way this works is if Wonder Woman already has blanket immunity to prosecution, which opens a whole new can of worms that's even more terrifying, but would be sadly consistent with everything else we see. Also, if she's deemed to have been an agent of the police in doing this, any evidence they find will be suppressed.
  • Worse, matters legal get significant attention in this series (it is David E. Kelley writing it, after all). It all serves to keep before us exactly how illegal every single thing Diana does is, even as the plot treats her like everything she does is right. She literally commits more crimes than her enemies.
  • The show seems to think that because Wonder Woman is not officially connected to any law enforcement agency, she is above the law. That's actually the opposite from the truth, as law enforcement officers have quasi-immunity, while civilians have none.
  • Her ex-boyfriend is assigned to investigate her for illegal activities, despite the fact that this is clearly a conflict of interest. At the end, he drops the investigation and declares her clear with a smile, thus showing why conflict of interest is a problem in the first place.
• In the fifth episode of The Flash (2014), "Plastique," the army, under Gen. Wade Eiling, shows up early on to take over the investigation from the Central City police. This is of course a blatant violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids the use of the US Army to enforce the laws of the states (unless authorized to do so for a specific situation by an Executive Order or act of Congress).
  • Numerous criminal metahumans are imprisoned at Star Labs over the course of Season 1. However, they lack any authority to do that, therefore this is illegal imprisonment for which they could be prosecuted and sued. Even when it's revealed, there are no legal consequences. It helps that Iron Heights got modified for metahuman prisoners.
  • In the real world, police officers involved in shootings are typically placed on administrative leave while the shooting is investigated. Nothing of the sort happens to Joe.
• The Practice: Creator David E. Kelley, despite himself being a lawyer, gets lots of details wrong (or perhaps discards them for dramatic purposes).
  • In "Line of Duty", Bobby learns from his prosecutor girlfriend that the police will be raiding a drug house—one which his drug dealer client runs. So he warns the client to get out, and all but tells him there is not only an informant in his organization, but also his name. Instead of fleeing said drug dealer client was packing up when the police arrived, and four officers were murdered, plus their informant. When the police discover what he did, Bobby is charged with reckless homicide, and in his defense he argues that his legal duty to represent the client covered warning of an impending arrest. The judge agrees. Not even close. Though attorneys must zealously represent all clients, this has to stay within the bounds of the law. Unsurprisingly, warning your client that he was about to be arrested isn't just illegal, but makes you an accessory after the fact to his crimes. It's also really unlikely that he would be charged with only reckless homicide, since that warning caused four cops to be killed, and that of the informant (remember, tipping him off was accessory after the fact) meaning he could be convicted of felony murder. The judge dismisses the case because she can't be sure of what Bobby was thinking when he tipped off his client. However, there is more than enough evidence for a trial, and such issues must be left up to the jury. The standard for ordering a case bound over for trial (probable cause) is much lower than to convict someone (beyond a reasonable doubt).
  • The attorneys are frequently seen holding conversations with the witnesses or accused while they're on the stand, without any line of questioning. This is even lampshaded in "The Case Against Alan Shore" when Alan calls the firm out for this and asks if the judge is going to say anything, but receives no response.
  • In "Checkmate" Joey Heric, the defendant who is going pro se, gets called as a witness by prosecutor Helen Gamble. The judge allows it over his entirely correct objection that this violates the Fifth Amendment because he "opened the door" by saying he killed the victim in self-defense during his opening statement, which is supposedly testimony. This is not the case however, and no reasonable judge would permit it. Any subsequent conviction could be overturned.
  • Bobby and Helen are in a relationship while both are still taking cases against each other. Later Lindsey and Helen are housemates and close friends while doing the same thing. In both cases, it would be unethical due to the potential bias they could have towards each other. Though it's unclear if the judges know of this sometimes, they never bring it up among themselves either until one case where Judge Hiller says it would be fine while in reality, they don't allow this.
  • Lawyers are frequently shown having ex parte meetings with the judges privately in their chambers without opposing counsel present. True, it still happens sometimes, but often it's arranged right in front of the opposing counsel without objections.
• The trial in series 2 of Broadchurch has by the broadcast of the second episode been criticized for its great inaccuracy, mostly to increase the drama. Most glaringly multiple witnesses sit in the audience of the murder trial, but the defense bullies Mrs. Latimer and Ellie to an extent that would be severely reprimanded in real life, and the killer's confession is dismissed far too easily.
• How to Get Away with Murder: The main student characters are all first year law students. In the United States, first year law students aren't allowed to work more than twenty hours per week if they're full time students — it's a rule in place by the American Bar Association to allow the students to focus on their educations.
  • Also, in one episode the first year law students are taken to the law firm to witness an interview between the attorney and her client. Since the students are not employees of the law firm, the interview would not be subject to the rule of attorney/client privilege, and anyone witnessing the interview could be subpoenaed as to what they saw or heard.
  • A real attorney did a bang-up job of dissecting the problems with the first episode here: [1]
• No Ordinary Family:
  • Teachers aren't allowed to arbitrarily change grades on formal exams from B to F without providing some pretty strong evidence. Doing that and officially entering it into the system (almost certainly without following procedure) is a crime just as serious as hacking. It's like lawyers don't exist or something...
  • It's also pretty safe to say that teachers do not have the ability to arbitrarily hand out and take away scholarships.
  • George claims he's responsible for the crimes of a gangster due to vicarious liability as he screwed up a previous case when the guy got Off on a Technicality. This only applies to a superior being responsible for the acts of their subordinate (most often employer-employee). George is a prosecutor, and may be rusty on civil liability or just making a metaphorical point, but what he says isn't accurate either way.
• The Slap, at least in the American version, involves a criminal prosecution in New York City of a man for slapping a misbehaving child, which slap resulted in no permanent injury. Two police detectives are assigned to investigate the case, an Assistant District Attorney brings charges, and two separate judges allow the case to move forward without dismissing the case out of hand. In real life, the idea that the NYPD, the largest municipal police department in the United States, would waste the time of not one but two detectives to investigate the slapping by an adult of a misbehaving child where there was no actual injury, or that a New York ADA would actually prosecute in such a case, does not pass the laugh test. If it did happen, almost any judge would dismiss the case as a waste of the court's time. Note also that the series makes no mention of a grand jury, which the defendant has a right to in New York; it is unlikely that you could find twelve jurors, even out of twenty-three, the maximum allowable size of a grand jury in New York, who would vote to indict in a case of this sort. If he were prosecuted, most likely it would only be for a misdemeanor assault, where grand juries are not required. Misdemeanor assault in New York is punishable with up to a year in prison and/or a fine of $1,000. The parents might sue him as well.
  • Indeed, in a subsequent episode, there is much discussion of a civil suit, with experienced lawyers talking as if the plaintiffs would have some chance of winning a significant judgment. In reality, damages in an intentional battery case are limited to 1) economic damages, i.e. medical costs and lost wages, 2) non-economic compensatory damages, e.g., pain and suffering, and 3) punitive damages. Since the victim suffered no real injury, there were no medical expenses, and, as the victim was a child, no lost wages, there can be no economic damages; the parents claimed psychological damages requiring therapy, but it is unlikely that they could prove such damages. Since the injury was just an open-handed slap to the face, pain-and-suffering damages would not amount to much either. Pain and suffering are impossible to quantify precisely, but lawyers have been known to ask juries how much money they would demand before agreeing to undergo the same injury; maybe you'd get a couple of hundred dollars for that. As for punitive damages, those can be extremely high, but a) trial judges will usually reduce them if they seem excessive, and b) the Supreme Court has stated in strong dicta that punitive damage multipliers in excess of single digits are violations of substantive due process, meaning that any punitive award in substantial excess of the compensatory damages would be overturned as unconstitutional. As such, the most the plaintiffs could get would be a couple of thousand dollars,^note which the defendant could easily afford assuming the jury was willing to give them anything. Given such a small possible recovery, it is unlikely that they could have found a lawyer willing to take the case.
• Extant: When the Sheriff of Vaspar Island refuses to search for Ethan because he is a Humanich, John punches him in the face. However, instead of facing charges and jail time for assaulting a police officer, he only spends a few hours in a holding cell before being released. While no one has to file charges, it's pretty unlikely he wouldn't. Police don't like people punching them.
• In The Royals, it is eventually revealed to the whole world that Liam and Eleanor are not the children of King Simon, meaning that Queen Helena had an affair; it is then revealed that she and Prince Cyrus deliberately arranged the revelation to prevent Liam from becoming the regent after Simon is nearly killed and left in a coma. There are two problems: first, the show seems to ignore the fact the Helena has just been publicly exposed as having committed high treason. Second, the show acts as if this will somehow stop the abolition of the monarchy that Simon had set in motion. If anything, further scandal attaching to the monarchy, and the fact that the publicly beloved King Simon was no longer heading the family, would if anything make Parliament more likely to pass the bill for the abolition referendum that Simon had called for. The regent does not actually have the power to veto bills passed by Parliament; the king or regent only signs them out of respect for tradition. Shockingly, the British monarchy is just a figurehead with no real power. No monarch has vetoed a bill for over three centuries.
• Sherlock: In "Many Happy Returns" one character explains his theory that Sherlock was a juror on a murder trial in Hamburg, Germany. Germany does not employ a jury trial system for any criminal or legal case. While there are lay judges and professional judges rendering verdicts in a number of criminal cases, the episode portrays the system as an American style jury system, which is factually incorrect.
• iZombie: The show has gotten flak for a number of Hollywood Law moments, particularly Liv investigating the case, and interviewing suspects, despite her lack of legal authority, Clive's tendency to make empty cop threats, and the lack of lawyers being present during most interrogation scenes.
  • In the eighth episode of the first season, Peyton, who works for the DA's office, gets Major out of jail by telling one of the officers that, because the paperwork had not been time-stamped, continuing to hold Major would violate "habeas corpus statutes." There actually are federal statutes relating to the writ of habeas corpus, but habeas corpus itself is a common-law writ, not a statute. Also, simply failing to stamp a form would not violate the writ. Habeas corpus would allow Major to petition a court to require the police to show that they have valid cause to hold him. It would not require his immediate release. Justified in this case, however, because Peyton was actually just fast-talking the officer to get Major, her friend, out of jail.
  • Season two episode "The Whopper" has Blaine's father's will revealed to be a Video Will. Video wills are invalid and will not be probated. Under Washington state's statute of wills, all wills have to be in writing; Washington, like a few other states, does allow nuncupative wills in limited circumstances, but no more than a thousand dollars can be disposed of by nuncupative will, not the billions seen here, and, in any case, the video will here still did not comply with the requirements for nuncupative wills.
• The series Two and a Half Men sets up the series premise with the most egregious case of Hollywood Law, when Alan's disgruntled divorce lawyer (Heather Locklear) exacts personal revenge on Charlie by deliberately giving Alan's ex-wife everything possible in the divorce settlement— right in front of Alan. Not only would this be non-binding due to legal ethics violations, but a client can overrule an attorney at any time, or simply fire them; they don't have carte blanche to do as they please over a client's objection. Which is what Alan naturally does but now has to find a new lawyer and still has to pay the previous ones bills. In reality, he not only wouldn't have to pay, but could sue her for this. Not to mention have her disbarred.
• In the NCIS episode "Semper Fortis", a retired Navy corpsman renders first aid to three people she found in a nasty car crash, saving the lives of two of them, and is promptly arrested for practicing medicine without a license (the show claiming that despite going through essentially the same medical training, a retired Army medic is considered a trained and licensed EMT, but a retired Navy corpsman is not). However, Virginia (the state where the accident happened) has a Good Samaritan Law on the books which covers attempts to provide medical assistance in life-threatening emergencies, which means that even if she doesn't have a license, what she was doing was entirely legal.
  • In the Season five episode "Lost and Found", a Cub Scout is discovered to have been reported as kidnapped by a non-custodial parent years previously. Later investigation also connects the boy's father to a convenience story robbery gone bad that resulted in a dead clerk. Gibbs and company eventually clear the man of the armed robbery and murder charges, but that doesn't change the fact that if a court takes custody of a child away from a parent and assigns it to someone else, taking the child back is kidnapping a minor, which is a serious crime. There is no way that NCIS would legally be allowed to just turn the kid over to a man who had been stripped of his custodial rights and his wife, who is not the child's biological mother, and send them on their way. The fact that the couple in question had apparently been good parents to the boy and the boy's legal guardians (maternal grandparents) were long dead might count in their favor at a Child Services hearing (assuming the father avoids jail time), but it would be Child Services, not NCIS, who would determine what happens to the child in a case like this, and the most involvement they get shown having in the episode is Director Shepherd saying "It's late on a Friday, everyone at Child Services has probably gone home for the weekend, the kid can stay at my place until they get back on Monday" (which is probably not correct procedure and could get her in trouble).
  • In the season 21 premiere, Nick is arrested for the murder of a man who had exploited his family as a child. What actually happened was that he went to the man's house intending to kill him, but couldn't bring himself to do it after beating him up, so he went to a bar and got drunk. He then went along with the FBI's accusations because he believed that his sister had killed the man after he left and he wanted to protect her. After the team gets a confession from the person who really killed the man, Nick is released from prison and returned to duty. In real life, clearing Nick of murder would not change the fact that he had broken into a man's house, committed an act of premeditated assault and attempted to murder him, so the fact that he was unsuccessful in committing the actual murder would have gotten him a reduced sentence at best rather than being released. And an ex-cop with a record like that would likely never be allowed to carry a badge again (It should be noted that Gibbs was suspended and eventually forced to retire over less serious offenses two seasons prior).
• Heroes: In "Ink" Peter Petrelli, a paramedic, is sued for injuring a man by dislocating his shoulder while rescuing him. This turns out to be false, but in any case there were no grounds to sue in the first place: the Good Samaritan Law immunizes any person who accidentally injures someone when attempting to help them from liability.
• Franklin & Bash. Like, the whole thing.
• Our Miss Brooks: In the (television) episode "Hospital Capers", a lawyer (a literal ambulance chaser) gets Mr. Boynton to sign a contract hiring him as counsel—the contract features a hefty penalty if Mr. Boynton chooses to terminate his representation. When Miss Brooks visits the lawyer, he hands her ever larger magnifying glasses to read the contract's fine print. Lampshaded when the lawyer admits to Miss Brooks that he's been disbarred in several states.
• The Wire:
  • Averted when Avon makes his deal to snitch on Dwight Tilghman, the dirty guard he just set up to commit murder through "hot shots". We first see Avon and his lawyer, Maurice Levy, meeting with the prison warden and an investigator from the State Police. After Levy outlines the terms (in exchange for the information Avon provides, he gets his parole hearing moved up a year), he reminds them that a state's attorney needs to be in the room when they next speak, as they're legally obligated to. Sure enough, at the next meeting, the State's Attorney is there as is a representative from the parole board.
  • When the police go to search Tilghman's car on Avon's information, a belligerent Tilghman thinks they have no right to do this without a warden. The warden responds that under the terms of his employment, he consents to his vehicle being subject to search anytime he parks it on prison property. This is probably true, but the warden didn't even need to say that, as federal and state courts have repeatedly held that any searches of people, vehicles or anything else under prison jurisdiction require only reasonable suspicion, not probable cause, due to the higher security requirements of prisons.
  • Cutty's nurse looking into his prior admission history and learning that way of his criminal past is a major HIPAA violation that could at the very least get her suspended. Then again, this is Baltimore...
  • Averted, in the Montage Out out of the final episode, we see that Pearlmann and Daniels have both moved on to careers as a judge and lawyer, respectively. The only problem is that they're lovers and he's trying a case in her court, so she has to recuse herself.
• Austin & Ally is pretty egregious when it comes to minors and contracts. The protagonists are teenage pop singers in an Adults Are Useless setting. In one second season episode, Allie is "signed" to perform as part of a group. The adult running the group claims to "own" her thanks to the contract she signed. At no point is the fact that both Allie and her manager are minors and cannot sign contracts for themselves brought up. It comes up other times where a record producer will offer to "sign" a character on the show, but since it's only an offer, it can be assumed the actual signing is done by parents with lawyers present.
• Both subverted and inverted in the comedy series The Grinder where Dean, an actor who played an attorney for eight seasons, joins his family law firm thinking he can do it for real. The running gag of the series is Dean constantly coming up with ideas on cases based on what his series did and his lawyer brother Stewart has to explain that in real life, that doesn't work. It's inverted as often, Dean's ideas do work out simply because they're so wild (and judges often willing to look the other way due to his celebrity).
• Last Week Tonight with John Oliver had John Oliver, on the eve of the 2015 Canadian Federal Election, playfully and preemptively paying a $5,000 fine for violating a Canadian law of being a foreigner inducing voters in Canada with a big comic production with Mike Myers urging voters to not vote for Prime Minister Stephen Harper. The amused officials at Elections Canada explained the next morning that inducement must involve material goods like money and a foreigner simply stating an opinion is perfectly acceptable.
• In Shark, Sebastian "the Shark" Stark (James Woods) was a defense attorney who quit and became a prosecutor after a client he got off on assault charges against his wife murdered her. Problem is, a defense attorney can't just quit while representing a client who's facing charges (as here). It's Rule of Drama, clearly.
• The Mentalist: About 80% of the cases Jane closes would be thrown out of court in real life because he used some form of coercion or intimidation to get a confession and/or reveal the location of key evidence (in particular, the episode "Blood in, Blood Out" would really have ended with the killer walking and Jane, Rigsby, and Cho being brought up on assault charges).
  • Not to mention how many times they handle evidence without properly documenting it or handling it with gloves. A defense lawyer would've had a field day with how much they contaminated the crime scenes.
  • In "Red Listed", it is revealed that, due to Jane's antics on cases, a few criminals ended up being acquitted or having their cases dismissed.
  • In one episode a hitman—a psychopathic, sadistic hitman who had been killing for years, no less—is released on the technicality that Jane uncovered the evidence leading to his arrest by illegally breaking into his apartment, thus forcing the judge to declare all subsequent evidence Fruit of the Poisonous Tree. This would never work in Real Life and would, at worst, have led to a new trial, if that; the evidence itself included video tape of the murder, a confession, and entrapment of him being hired by Van Pelt to kill somebody. Such a sociopath would never be released so easily.
    • Justified in a sense. At that point, still halfway through the episode, the judge remains one of the possible hitman contractors, so the writers don't want to clinch the real culprit right away.
  • The season 4 premiere takes the cake though; Jane has murdered a man he believed to be Red John, and he is let off because he convinces everyone that the man was Red John. In fact, this and later episodes frequently say that if the guy wasn't Red John, Jane would be going to prison for the murder. Whether or not the man was Red John should be irrelevant—Jane committed murder, and admits to it, with numerous witnesses to the crime. He should go to jail regardless. The only possible way out is if he was found temporarily insane thanks to confronting the man he believed to be his wife and daughter's killer, but that is unlikely since he was illegally carrying an unlicensed gun (specifically to kill Red John), and had announced repeatedly to colleagues and others that he was hunting Red John not to arrest but to kill him. However, given his sympathetic backstory with regards to Red John, it's likely this is jury nullification, which, though legally iffy, does occur.
    • This one is mentioned in-episode. Jane's legal strategy is basically to paint the dead guy as the Asshole Victim he was ^note apart from the Red John connection, it was discovered that he and his wife had been holding a teenage girl captive and hope that that, combined with an even remotely plausible excuse (the temporary insanity defense), would be enough to make the jury acquit, even if they technically should have convicted on the evidence, because the defendant (Jane) is more sympathetic and likeable than the victim. It works.
    • You also have both sides presenting information that a real-world judge would probably throw out as irrelevant. On the prosecutor's side the question of whether or not the man was Red John would be irrelevant — the issue would be whether Jane thought he was with fair reason (and since he can truthfully state that the man he killed both claimed to be Red John and knew things only Red John would have, he could easily establish fair reason). For Jane's part, any of the victim's crimes that don't have an established link to the Red John murders, like his kidnapping of the teenager, would also be excluded since that has no bearing on the central question of the case.
• Daredevil (2015) has enough examples to get its own page.
• Jessica Jones (2015):
  • When Jessica Jones is collecting people who've been mind-controlled by Kilgrave in order to have them testify in Hope's trial:
    • They put them all together in a support group (thereby weakening all their stories because they've had time to be influenced by each other), rather than interview each person separately.
    • They don't think about subpoenaing the restaurant staff from the first few episodes. You know, the staff that have very little reason to lie and can positively say "that woman right there walked in with a creepy British guy who made us do things we didn't want to do." Nope, just go out and get a bunch of random people who at best can only testify that someone exists who can force you to do stuff (no proof that Hope was under his influence) and are far less believable, because at this point they're all mentally unstable or have good reasons for wanting to excuse their actions by lying about someone else making them do it.
  • Their plan is to kidnap Kilgrave, hold him prisoner, torture him into confessing, and then use that as proof. The only time that's going to be admitted as evidence is when they all get charged with kidnapping and torture. It'll be great for a trial... Hogarth's, Trish's, and Jessica's trials. Kilgrave's? Not so much (and that's assuming he wouldn't just command the guards to release him when arrested). It's such a bad idea that Jeri tells them it would never work, and instead, they use their crime to draw a police officer to the scene and make him watch. This is also a bad idea, since he would then be obliged to arrest them, and they still can't use this against Kilgrave legally.
  • Towards the end of the first season, Jeri Hogarth's secretary/mistress Pam kills Hogarth's wife Wendy to save Jeri, after Kilgrave commanded Wendy to kill her. Afterwards, Jeri attempts to serve as Pam's counsel during her questioning by the police; given her relationship to both people and also as another victim in the case, there's a conflict of interest present. On the other hand, Jeri may have just been doing "stand-in defense" for both herself and Pam (since they're both, at minimum, persons of interest, if not suspects/witnesses) and just handling things until she can get another attorney to come down and start taking full charge of the defense; in other words, Jeri just wanted to be there to make sure Pam didn't say anything incriminating before she could arrange real, ethical, legal representation for them both and start handling the case.
  • It turns out in season 2 that Hogarth Chao & Benowitz requires their attorneys to sign a “medical disclosure” clause to inform the firm of medical conditions that have the potential to affect job performance. Once Jeri’s partners learn she has ALS, they try to force her out of the law firm with a severance under the pretense it is their fiduciary duty to protect the law firm. One blog points out that there's a small problem with this “medical disclosure” clause designed to terminate lawyers: it is illegal.
    • New York law, specifically N.Y. Exec. Law § 296, states that it is an unlawful discriminatory practice for any employer to discharge anyone from their employment because of disability or predisposing genetic characteristics. Forcing employees as a condition of employment to disclose health information that can then be a pretext to fire anyone goes to the heart of protecting anyone with a “disability” from being discriminated against. There was no effort to make any reasonable accommodations for Hogarth, just remove her from the firm.
    • There was no evidence that Jeri Hogarth was no longer competent to practice law. She did not have any symptoms at the time her partners confronted her. Their plan was to dismiss her from the firm, which is discriminatory conduct based on someone’s disability. As such, the contractual requirement to disclose medical conditions required the disclosure of health information that would otherwise be protected, and used as a license to discriminate against those with medical conditions. It's no wonder why in his one-scene cameo, Foggy called bullshit on the medical clause, because this in his eyes would be no different from someone firing Matt from a law firm on the grounds that his blindness rendered him incompetent from practicing law.
    • Furthermore, they don't even need to do it this way, as there are valid reasons to terminate Jeri Hogarth: she has committed jury tampering, which is grounds for disbarment; asking Jessica to rough up Wendy as inducement to sign a divorce agreement was a crime; having an affair with her secretary Pam, while not a crime, was an HR nightmare waiting to happen, to say nothing of the later sexual harassment lawsuit from Pam; attempting to use Kilgrave to secure Wendy’s signature on divorce papers resulted in Wendy’s death; she made an illegal purchase of a handgun from Turk Barrett that would later be used in a homicide (making Jeri an accessory to said murder); ruining Kith's marriage and driving Peter to suicide in season 3 (another case where the action isn't illegal but would be more than enough justification for a firing); and it's up for debate whether her entertaining with Hookers and Blow was legal, let alone the ethics considerations. But instead of going after Jeri for any of her serious ethical breaches and even outright crimes as grounds for termination, Chao and Benowitz picked discrimination against someone with a disability as their beach to die on. Not the best legal strategy.
    • There's also the separate question that Jeri’s practice includes criminal defense (cases like Jessica, her mother, Hope, etc, plus a lot of Foggy and Marci's cases), patent litigation, and estates (her work with Danny Rand), which are all highly specialized practice areas. This is like a doctor who is an orthodontist, vascular surgeon, and pediatrician. Sure, it is possible, just highly unlikely. Moreover, Jeri’s malpractice insurance has to be expensive.
  • Jessica Jones in season 3 appears to be susceptible to “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree.” This doesn’t extend to people who aren't in law enforcement or work for them, and definitely not “anonymous tips.” The pictures and the claimed connection would be more than enough for a warrant to search Sallinger’s apartment.
  • Trish Walker's downfall at the end of season 3 sees her snap, kill three serial murderers (including Sallinger), and then get brought in by Jessica. She is then sent off to the Raft, established in Captain America: Civil War to be this submarine prison for enhanced individuals. There are several problems with this:
    • First off, Costa says the people on the Raft “pulled jurisdiction” on Trish. They never make clear what that means. Yet the Raft, at least as established in Captain America: Civil War, seemed to be created ad hoc for the Sokovia Accords. International agreements like the Sokovia Accords do not override the U.S. Constitution, especially agreements that weren’t even ratified by the United States, so there's no explanation as to how they could possibly get jurisdiction over Trish when all her crimes are state crimes in New York State.^note On the other hand, it's possible that maybe it just means Trish falls under federal scrutiny, since Ant-Man and the Wasp showed Scott and co. having an FBI agent who monitored them
    • More problematic is the implication is that Trish wouldn’t even get a trial. Which is terrible. Costa says that due process doesn’t apply to supers, which is a blatant violation of the Fifth Amendment (the right to a trial and due process), as well as the Eighth Amendment (which holds that the punishment must be proportional to the crime). It’s actually a double whammy there: first, it's hard to imagine how an underwater prison is a proportional punishment even to Trish’s (numerous) crimes; second, it’s explicitly stated that she’s being treated differently because she’s enhanced. This is a status crime (where you’re punished just for being who you are) which, surprise surprise, is unconstitutional in the United States (and also violates international laws).
• Luke Cage (2016):

  • Every time a suspect asks for a lawyer, the interrogator continues asking questions, hoping to pressure the suspect into talking. Even Inspector Ridley, who is characterized by her belief in following the system, does so. In reality, the police must end an interrogation the moment a suspect asks for legal counsel, and can only resume once a lawyer has arrived. While there ARE instances where cops try to skirt around this, they usually try to do so by changing the subject or asserting that their past or present questions weren't part of any "official" interrogation, not by simply ignoring the request as seen in this show. If they do, and it's recorded, anything they get after this isn't usable in court.
  • Only once has this actually played realistically. In the second episode of season 2, Misty lets herself into the interrogation room to question Arturo Rey, after he's already lawyered up. After Donovan shows up to bail out Arturo Rey, Ridenhour calls Misty out on this.

  • After the Candace interrogation in "Blowin' Up the Spot", Mariah leaves, telling Misty, "You know what, I'm not under arrest, and I change my mind: you wanna talk to me, you call my lawyer." The statement "contact me through my lawyer" does NOT apply to police officers, meaning the cops could still call Mariah back for questioning if they had any reason to without having to go through her lawyers. "Contact me through my lawyer" only applies to other lawyers, as they have ethical rules stating, for instance, that a lawyer may not contact an opponent who has retained their own counsel (to stop a lawyer browbeating the other side into confessing, or in a civil case, stop them from coercing concessions etc. from them).
  • Shades making bail is treated as if he skated on all criminal charges he was facing. Posting bail is not the same thing as "cleared of all charges." Bail is a guarantee of a later appearance in court. If you don't appear, it means you'll be tracked down and arrested, then put in jail until your trial, plus faced with a bail-jumping charge too. Furthermore, people on bail tend to be subject to various other restrictions on what activities they can engage in, meaning Misty would've had grounds to rearrest Shades when she, Luke and Claire caught him and Mariah at Pops' barbershop.
  • During Shades' interrogation, Inspector Ridley says that as a participant in Diamondback's hostage situation, Shades is facing multiple kidnapping with a weapon charges. In real life, as one hostage was killed during the course of the hostage situation, he (and every other participant) would also be charged with Felony Murder for the murder of Damon Boone. In fact, it's amazing Shades even was granted bail in the first place, as there are multiple witnesses who would have seen him holding the hostages and he came at a police officer and a civilian while armed with a gun, which is two counts of assault with a deadly weapon. (It's implied that a judge may have been paid off, seeing as Shades and Mariah pay off another judge in order to get Arturo Rey bailed out)
  • In real life, Misty would probably be forced to recuse herself from the case once Luke became a suspect/person of interest in the Cottonmouth crimes. Her one-night stand with him generates a conflict of interest.
  • Luke's backstory plays fast and loose with human research ethics (which have been codified into law since WWII). FDA regulations explicitly forbid the use of prisoners in research providing no direct benefit, except in very specific cases (most of which require that the research have no or minimal risk). They also forbid using reduced sentencing as an incentive toward consent—that's textbook coercion. That said, it is established that Seagate is a very corrupt prison, so they may be fully aware that they are breaking the law.
  • The NYPD doesn't have a 29th Precinct. The 29th Precinct is a fictional establishment created because the NYPD requires films and TV shows to use fictional precinct numbers to tell film cars apart from in-service patrol cars. The 29th happens to fall within the numbers of the actual police precincts for Harlem: the 23rd, 25th, 28th, 30th, and 32nd.
  • Misty mocks Shades for dismissing his lawyer halfway through his confession, causing him to be unaware of the terms of his deal. But his lawyer would have had to make the terms of the deal clear to him before he decided to take it and make his confession, not after. Unlike real property or the hearsay rule, legal ethics is fairly straightforward.
• Iron Fist (2017):
  • A minor case, but when the DEA SWAT team raids Colleen's dojo on the "tip" from Harold's frameup, they kick in the door without first shouting "Police! Open the door!" Part of the reason the police do that is... pretty much to avoid this exact situation; there is a significant percentage of civilians with combat training, many of which live in high-crime neighborhoods just like Colleen's where having their homes invaded by violent criminals is a very real possibility. Sure, Colleen and Danny only gave them two seconds, but that's more than enough time to then shout the two words law enforcement are legally required to the instant a raid begins and before shots are fired so as to avoid entrapment — so that suspects know that the invaders are not criminals and they'll be in trouble if they fight back. This probably helps with Danny's Wrongful Accusation Insurance at the end of the episode — though, too, the "generous contribution to the DEA Widows and Children's Fund" was probably a lot more effective. The only legal exception is if they have reason to believe the suspects will destroy evidence upon hearing the police are at the door, and they need a special "no-knock" warrant to not announce their presence.
  • The board of directors cannot simply "oust" Danny, Ward, and Joy from the company, as they're the majority shareholders. For them to even be directors requires Danny's approval.
  • The chemical plant lawsuit that affects Rand Enterprises midway through season 1, wherein Rand is being sued by some Staten Island residents who claim to have come down with cancer as a result of chemicals being manufactured at the plant. The plaintiffs' case doesn't have a leg to stand on. There’s no proof that the chemical plant causes cancer. As Joy points out, Rand Enterprises have met all legal and environmental requirements, so they’re not really in the wrong. The issue would be with the lawmakers. Even if there is a correlation between the chemical plant and the cancer cases, it doesn’t necessarily prove causation. But then the plaintiffs' lawyer rather stupidly decides to have one of his clients try to coerce an admission of guilt from Danny, while he films it for blackmail purposes. The Meachums and the board are worried about it, when in reality it would be a slam-dunk for Rand Enterprises. The video wouldn’t stand up in court and this lawyer would be very lucky if he only got disbarred (because blackmail is illegal).
• Commander in Chief: In one episode, Mackenzie debates over whether to spare a mentally disabled Texan woman on death row for murdering a cab driver, and she eventually does so. However, the US President cannot grant pardons or reprieves to state prisoners, only federal ones. Some other episodes see her create a scholarship program through executive order (Congress would have to enact it) and federalizing law enforcement in a state county (which is completely illegal).
• Limitless: Discussed by Brian's father, who points out the FBI is essentially keeping him hostage and using him as a drug guinea pig. Brian doesn't want to actually push it though. Additionally, clearing the innocent man in "Stop Me Before I Hug Again" would be much harder with the evidence shown than they make out.
• You, Me and the Apocalypse: Hacking into the NSA is not treason. On the other hand, it could get you a much longer prison sentence than five to ten years, especially if you're also being made an example of.
• Gotham: It's a Police Procedural set in the universe that spawns Batman. Some instances can be disregarded as evidence of how crooked Gotham is, others less so.
  • Especially bad is its treatment of insanity. People aren't just declared insane, sent to a mental institution and get off completely. Rather, they have to make an insanity defense at trial, which is very difficult. In the US, most states that still have the insanity defense (some have abolished it) use the M'Naghten rule, which says a person is insane if they're unable to tell right from wrong, or can't comprehend the consequences of their actions (e.g. they harmed someone during a delusion which left them unaware of what was going on). So it's unlikely for most villains to be found insane and committed. There's also no such thing as a real "certificate of sanity".
  • Gordon is held due to "suspicion" that he helped a prisoner break out. In reality, there's no such thing—arrests need probable cause, which isn't presented here, otherwise they could be sued and possibly even hit with a civil rights violation. Captain Barnes, who ordered this, is a By-the-Book Cop who you'd think would know better than to try it.
  • There's no way the state and federal authorities simply would ignore Gotham city officials allowing Penguin to "license" criminals. Quite a lot of people should be facing RICO indictments.
  • You still have to read people their rights even if they know them, otherwise anything they say is not admissible.
• Better Call Saul:
  • The Philadelphia detectives who talk to Mike in "Five-O" describe Matt as working in a "precinct". For the purposes of policing, Philadelphia is broken up into "districts", not "precincts". Outside of the NYPD, the word "precinct" is rarely, if ever, used by either police officers or civilians.
  • It's what Jimmy himself practices, often committing ethically questionable (bribing a bus driver to stop so he can solicit passengers, for instance) or outright illegal acts (forging documents to gaslight Chuck; Squat Cobbler) to advance his lawyer goals. Unsurprisingly, he gets called out a lot.
  • Jimmy's hearing before the Bar in "Chicanery". As an adversarial hearing, both sides have rights to a fair hearing, so in real life, there is no way they could provide all the accommodations for Chuck with nothing said at all about Kim objecting to having the hearings in the dark and everyone being forced to turn over watches and phones. No sane judge would even entertain Chuck's requests absent a motion by Chuck's side to grant them, and an independent physical and mental exam required before granting them. It doesn't matter if everyone on that panel owed their careers to Chuck, they're on the panel because they've proven themselves to be objective jurists with a firm grasp of the law, so they're not going to subject a defendant to all of these accommodations unless Chuck could prove (backed by the testimony of an independent doctor) it was medically necessary. Justified in that Kim and Jimmy's plan was to discredit Chuck in court so they accepted the accommodations and without any parties objecting there was no reason to consider the hearing unfair.
  • Also from the Bar hearing, there is a big conflict of interest for Kim to be Jimmy's attorney of record since they're sleeping together and sharing office space. It continues to be a problem when they both represent opposite sides in the Everett Acker dispute, without telling anyone they're involved (living together, having sex and then married).
  • There are a number of problems with Chuck going in to work at HHM in season 2. Namely, that HHM is knowingly putting a mentally ill lawyer on cases (although it can be argued that as far as HHM knows his illness is physical and in their interest to believe it). But Chuck's illness actually makes him less of an asset and more of a liability: if a client catches wind of Chuck's illness, then every client that HHM has allowed Chuck to work for subsequent to the onset of his mental illness could have grounds to make a class action suit against HHM for malpractice, breach of contract, and anything else they can think of. Moreover, every lawyer with knowledge of Chuck's impairment (and there was a conference room of them who had to turn over their cell phones and cut the power to the building whenever he came by) would be subject to disciplinary proceedings. Lawyers have an ethical and moral duty to inform their state's Bar Association about an attorney who is obviously impaired. Chuck may be "brilliant" per se but it is highly unlikely that his illness, and all the limitations and delusions that come with it, does not compromise his ability to practice and render competent legal counsel.
    • This is lampshaded by Howard early in season 3, as he points out that while Jimmy is at fault for forging the Mesa Verde papers, it shouldn't have happened in the first place since HHM locks those documents in safer places to avoid these kind of problems.
    • Ultimately, Season 3 takes this case of Hollywood Law and ends up applying reality to it, when Jimmy tips off the insurance company about Chuck's mental illness. This causes them to raise malpractice premiums on all of HHM's practicing attorneys^note While Jimmy did this with malicious intentions, some fans have pointed out that even if he hadn't, the insurance company would have inevitably found out about the illness on their own, just much later; Jimmy just made the inevitable happen sooner. Howard's patience with Chuck was already growing thin, and the insurance premiums going up because of Chuck's illness proves to be the straw that breaks the camel's back between them.
  • In Season 5, Krazy-8 and Saul work out a deal with Hank and Gomez, allowing Krazy-8 his freedom in exchange for information that leads to arrests and the location of half a million dollars of Cartel money. During this negotiation, however, the prosecutor is not in the room. Like in the Daredevil example, the investigators are not in a position to offer what they claim to offer in their deal without the prosecutor's presence and consent.
  • In "Namaste," Saul swaps a defendant on the stand with a lookalike to injure the credibility of a witness. Although this sort of switch is doable, doing so without informing the judge beforehand should've gotten him held in contempt of court and fined.
• In Gilmore Girls, Luke tries suing for partial custody of his daughter, April. His lawyer informs him that he can't win, because the mother had custody up until then and the court won't want to upset the existing arrangement, for the good of the child. Luke points out that he didn't know April existed until she was 12, and the lawyer says that doesn't matter. In fact, it's down in Connecticut law that preference is to be given to existing custody arrangements reached by previous agreement or court decision, neither of which applies. So the situation is actually covered by the law, and it does matter that the mother didn't tell Luke about his daughter. But then, he won, so maybe his lawyer didn't know what he was talking about.
• Bull:
  • There is actually no real evidence for probable cause to secure an arrest or search warrant at the end of "The Necklace".
  • Averted in the third episode, as evidence is presented at trial that the murdered's teammates were using steroids.
  • Episode four is about a patent infringement suit in Texas. It takes place in a fictional town named Callisto. However, patent law in the US is a federal issue. Therefore it would be tried by one of the four federal district courts in Texas. All of these are in major cities. Callisto's reputation as a favorable jurisdiction for patent plaintiffs probably comes from the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, which also has this (where one in four patent suits is filed). It's located in the city of Tyler.
  • In "Kill Shot", the millionaire hires a hitman to kill him, because his life insurance won't pay out if he commits suicide. This isn't the case for most insurance, nearing Impossible Insurance — life insurance does usually have waiting period before they would cover a suicide (to prevent people simply buying it and then killing themselves so their beneficiary gets the money), but will pay out for suicide after enough time has passed.
  • Bull has to fire Cable after she breaks federal law in "Keep Your Friends Close". Except she almost constantly breaks federal law with her hacking in order to win cases for him, and it's never been a problem before.
  • In "Witness for the Prosecution" there's a female drug dealer who faked schizophrenia for years, meaning she's been released every time the police arrest her. In reality, even if she couldn't stand trial or win by the insanity defense, they could still commit her to a mental institution as she's accused of murder (even assuming her faking it didn't come out). Dangerous mentally ill criminals (real ones) don't just get "let go".
  • The suit in "Flying Carpet" likely wouldn't have gotten to trial, instead they could get it dismissed or win on summary judgment since the plaintiff's cause of action was very thin. Attractive nuisance doesn't apply, as the defense notes, while as a trespasser the plaintiff is fully liable for their action (even assuming that in fact the sign was unstable). However, then there would be no story, since winning the case in a single hearing isn't very interesting.
• Designated Survivor:
  • Kirkman has Governor Royce arrested for treason when he blocks his adviser from getting off a plane in Michigan, plus possibly having the National Guard refuse Kirkman's orders. These are crimes, but hardly treason. Under American law, this is defined solely as levying war against the USA or giving aid to its enemies. Kirkman must know treason is a rare charge to make that will not stand up in court. He could already have him arrested for violating the civil rights of Muslims by having them detained without charge (though the Governor, Smug Snake that he was, pretty much made it clear that as long as Kirkman was acting President he would disobey any order to a point short of actual secession, so there is that). It's possibly a subversion as Governor Royce's actions could be considered sedition, and therefore a treasonous act.
  • In Real Life, only the Vice-President can actually become President through succession; anyone stepping up from further down the line would be the Acting President until the end of the term they succeeded to. That said, In-Universe there is nobody else constitutionally eligible to occupy the office for the remainder of the term so long as Kirkman remains eligible, so the distinction in this case is semantic only.
  • When the Vice-President and Cabinet threaten to invoke the 25th Amendment in episode "Kirkman Agonistes," the outcome is presented as an immediate and permanent removal from office. However, the amendment expressly gives the President the right to challenge the removal and retain the office. If the VP and Cabinet invoke the Amendment again in response, then the VP is made Acting President in the interim and the case is adjudicated in Congress right away to resolve the dispute. Even if the President is found by Congress to be incapacitated, at no point does the President cease to be the President; only the "powers and duties" of the office would devolve onto the VP as Acting President, not the office itself. Also, the President can theoretically issue an unlimited number challenges to regain the powers and duties of the office for the remainder of the term, as the Amendment does not specifically limit how many times the President can do so.
  • One episode involves around Kirkman's attempts to work Congress to pass a gun control bill. However the bill is stated to actually be proposed by a staunch opponent of gun control, who brought up the bill to appear as if he was willing to work with the President, however the bill is stated to be intentionally poorly worded and full of loopholes. This is dealt with by having the Speaker of the House promise to fix the bill via amendments in the House if the bill passes the Senate, which is the main hurdle to passage. The problem is that both the House and Senate must pass the same bill to get it to the President's desk, and if the law is significantly edited, it would have to be sent back to the Senate for repassage^note A frequent method to deal with this, never mentioned in the show, is to establish a "conference committee" that works to compromise between the House and Senate bills and create a new bill based on that compromise that would have to be passed again by both houses. This option is never even mentioned. before the President can sign it. This is never touched on, and it's implied after the bill narrowly passes the Senate that all hurdles have been breached and the House-edited bill is soon signed by Kirkman.
• House of Cards (US):
  • As President, Frank Underwood would never be able to appoint Claire as a US Ambassador in season 3 or later put her on the ticket for VP in season 4 because in response to the controversy that resulted when John F. Kennedy appointed his brother Bobby Kennedy as Attorney General, Congress passed the Postal Revenue and Federal Salary Act of 1967, also known as the "Bobby Kennedy Act". This anti-nepotism act made it illegal under 5 U.S. Code § 3110 for a sitting president to "employ, promote, advance, or advocate for appointment, employment, promotion, or advancement" a relative to any political or bureaucratic office.
    • It could be debated whether or not the selection of a relative as a running-mate violates or undermines anti-nepotism law, particularly since in the show it was the Democratic National Convention that (technically) made the selection, not the president himself (as Frank would have been acting in his capacity as a candidate, and not president anyway).
  • If Heather Dunbar had been a long-shot candidate for the presidency, Claire Underwood being on the presidential ticket as her husband's choice for VP is simply unbelievable, as in, political suicide. On the one hand, you have the huge legal problems that comes from the obvious conflict of interest, not to mention that, as with Claire's ambassadorship above, Frank would be forbidden from making a spouse or family member his running mate. Furthermore, every pundit should be asking, what does Claire offer for the ticket? She has no political experience that comes from an elected office. She has no military or business service. Her brief stint as UN ambassador was a disaster (to put it nicely) and a black eye for Frank's presidency. She might help with the women's vote, but Catherine Durant could have done that and still brought her experience from her time as a senator and Secretary of State. Claire has a good public image, but only as a First Lady. The focus groups even point out that no one trusts or believes in her abilities beyond that role.
  • One subplot in season 3 involves Russia's internationally criticized ban on materials promoting "non-traditional sexual relations" among minors, also known as Russia's "gay propaganda" law. In Chapter 32, the Underwoods go to Moscow to try to negotiate the release of Michael Corrigan, an American LGBT activist who is among several detained for violating the "gay propaganda" ban by participating in a rally in support of gay rights. Corrigan tells Claire that a fellow Russian gay rights activist died in custody after a 28-day hunger strike. In real life, though, the penalty isn't as severe as the show makes it seem to be: violations of the "gay propaganda" law in Russia are punishable by a fine, while foreigners like Corrigan may also face up to a 15-day "administrative arrest," followed by deportation. So, in real life, there probably would be no need of any kind for the Underwoods to travel to Russia to negotiate Corrigan's release. This is probably explained by the fact that although Viktor Petrov is obviously based on Vladimir Putin, he is not meant to be Vladimir Putin. Therefore it is perfectly plausible that this alternate Russian president would pass a harsher law.
  • The flashback in "Chapter 46" going back to the New Year's party in season 1 establishes that Will Conway was elected Governor in 2012, the same year Garrett Walker was elected President. New York elects Governors on the midterm cycles (2010, 2014, 2018, etc), not the Presidential election cycles. In reality, Conway would have been halfway through his first term when that scene happened, and the same would be true if he wins the 2016 race, in which case, he'd be resigning his post and his lieutenant governor would fill the position until the next election.^note Such a scenario played out in 1992 when Bill Clinton, then Governor of Arkansas, was elected to his first term as President; his lieutenant governor Jim Guy Tucker became governor in December 1992 when Clinton officially resigned from the governorship.
  • Peter Russo's storyline in Season 1 revolves around running in a special election for governor of Pennsylvania, triggered by the election of Jim Matthews as Vice President. In real life, Pennsylvania and most other states elect the governor and lieutenant governor on the same gubernational ticket, with the lieutenant governor becoming governor in case of a vacancy (as happened in 2001, when Pennsylvania's then-Governor Tom Ridge was appointed Homeland Security Advisor ^note If you didn't live in Pennsylvania at the time, you might remember Ridge better as the guy who invented the color-coded-terrorism-alerts system.). There would not be an election until the next regularly scheduled one. It's possible that what we're seeing is a recall election (which requires proponents to file a petition, then gather a certain number of signatures from registered voters within a certain time period), but there's no mention of that.
• Eli Stone:
  • A particularly bad example in the episode "Sonoma" which not only has half the lawyers thrown in jail because the Hanging Judge used to date one of them, it forces two sets of lawyers from opposing firms to ALL be working for the same woman. Conflict of interest much? Also has Surprise Witness and Smoking Painting With Matching Necklace.
  • While the "Chinese wall" is a real legal concept, the use of it in the US is generally not allowed. Not to mention, having two lawyers from the same firm represent opposing parties in a dispute is the very definition of the term "conflict of interest."
• Conviction (2016): Part of Tess's backstory, mistakenly saying that an innocent man murdered her aunt, makes no legal sense. She had identified him in a line up and testified against him, yet somehow he doesn't know her name or face, so she's able to come up and buy food from him each day for months before finally revealing it? Defendants have the right to confront (i.e. face) witnesses against them, so he would have been sitting in court when she testified. Only in a few cases can a witness be allowed to not face the defendant—mostly sex offenses, which doesn't apply here, and he would still know her name. Tess implies she may have been a minor at the time of the crime and subsequent trial, which may affect whether her identity was protected.
• Faking It: Season 2's code of conduct. According to law minors aren't bound by any contract they may sign so Principle Turner can't actually hold them to anything written therein. Then again, most minors don't actually know that, so he may just have been playing on their lack of knowledge.
• Frequency: Satch's loyalty to Stan is revealed to be because he helped Satch cover up his killing a perp early in his career, claiming it was in self-defense. Trouble is, the flashback of the event clearly shows that it really was due to self-defense by any reasonable measure, making every single viewer question what the point of the conspiracy was. Some fans speculated that, given the massive increase in attention to police brutality in the previous couple years, the crew had decided the audience would instantly lose all sympathy for Satch if he really had wrongfully killed someone, but it was too late to alter the story in a way that made any sense.
• Parks and Recreation had a storyline in early season seven about the company that provides the city's internet openly performing mass data mining on the populace. We're told that this is technically legal because of a bit of fine print buried in a appendix of the agreement signed by the city manager. Not only are such contractual tricks completely invalid, but the personal data privacy of the citizens aren't the city's to sign away.
• Timeless: Lucy convinces James Capone to come with them to Chicago and arrest Al Capone. The problem with the plan is that they have nothing to back up that arrest. Al just had the tax evasion charges against him dismissed and they do not have any evidence tying him to other crimes. If James arrests Al, Al will be out of jail within an hour or two. Al Capone was not an outlaw that had to tracked down and apprehended. The police could have arrested him at any time but did not have the evidence to make the arrest stick.
• Chicago Justice: The pilot, "Fake", has the prosecution's victory hinge on a particularly egregious example. Prosecutor Stone claims the defendant's outburst in court is "testimony" so he can call him as a witness for "cross-examination". Naturally the defense lawyer objects, but the judge rejects his entirely valid argument and allows it, though also noting she'd "probably be overturned on appeal". Make that definitely. No way would this fly—the defendant wasn't sworn and on the stand, so it isn't testimony, thus they can't "cross-examine" him about this. The entire case is won due to all the information that he reveals during questioning, so the conviction would be vacated and then they would have to try him again (doubtless at great cost). It's also unnecessary, since they discover evidence which incriminated him that could be used. Olinsky would also not have been allowed to investigate the case since his daughter was a victim. The judge also lets the defense attorney get into why the defendant's confession was suppressed, which wouldn't happen.
• Time After Time: New York City actually has numerous restrictions on buying or possessing guns, contrary to what Dr. Stevenson says.
• Homeland: When Saul asks Carrie if she's going to appeal the judge's order removing her daughter to foster care, she says it can't be appealed, and they both act surprised. This isn't true—all orders of the New York City family courts can be appealed, provided proper notice is given, procedures obeyed, etc.
• A Series of Unfortunate Events (2017):
  • The Marvelous Marriage, a play by Al Funcoot, which is all Count Olaf's ridiculous plan to marry Violet to gain the Baudelaire fortune, has massive gaping holes in it. Starting with the fact that she was being illegally coerced into signing, and thus the contract should have been void. Not to mention that marrying one's legal guardian even after one has come of age tends to be illegal in most jurisdictions, specifically to avoid circumstances such as these. And finally, a judge must have the deliberate intent of performing a marriage, not just going through the motions on stage, no matter how accurate, for the ceremony to be valid. No one noticed any of this, and instead they went with the equally ridiculous solution of it not being valid due to Violet signing with her non-dominant hand.
  • After Count Olaf is arrested, the Baudelaires hope to live with a good family they had found, but the executor of their parents' will won't let them, on the grounds that the will stated that they had to live with family until Violet was an adult. Everyone takes it as a given that this is absolutely factual, despite...
    • The executor was a banker, and as such would not know much about probate law. The woman offering to take the Baudelaires in was a judge. Even if she wasn't a probate judge, she'd undoubtedly still know enough about the subject to dispute such an arbitrary ruling from a totally unqualified individual.
    • It's rather unlikely that a probate court would rule to disinherit a family because the deceased's first choice of guardian was proven to be criminally unacceptable.
    • Rather than actually name a guardian for their children, the Baudelaires' will simply stated that they live with a relative. Given such an vague and open-ended instruction, a probate court could just throw that clause out, especially since Count Olaf's relationship to the family was so distant (the siblings had never even heard of him until the day before he became their guardian) that one could make a good argument that giving the guardianship to him in the first place was a violation of the clause.
    • Given that his choice of guardian for the three children ended up getting arrested for child abuse, Mr Poe could very easily be stripped of the position of executor of the Baudelaire estate for such a blatant failure to choose an appropriate guardian (and deliberately ignoring the children when they tried to tell him about earlier counts of abuse). Especially since the sole reason he picked Count Olaf to be the children's guardian was the fact that his house was on the way to the train station, so Mr Poe could drop them off without deviating from his daily routine.
• True Blood:
  • The entire arc of Sookie Stackhouse having killed Debbie Pelt. Louisiana is a strong "castle doctrine" state (see 4a), making it very unlikely Sookie would be in any legal trouble for killing an armed intruder inside of her own home. Which wouldn't help her with the werewolf pack any, but does make all her worries about being arrested totally unnecessary.
  • The state of Louisiana apparently has the power to levy war in this particular vision of the United States.
  • The Bill of Rights are incorporated as federal laws, and the governor of any state cannot unilaterally suspend them, especially the rights of any individual group of citizens. However, it's clear that, even though his legal standing is highly dubious, Governor Burrell is getting away with it due to massive public approval, though why the feds don't stop him isn't shown (though at this point they may not care).
• Preacher: After he arrests Cassidy, Root discovers he's a vampire on running his prints, which turn up arrest records going back to the 1920s. However, records have not been digitized nearly so far back, and even then not all of them are in a central database.
• Minority Report (2015):
  • Unlike most psychic detective shows, precogs like Dash do not exist in a legal gray area. Their powers are well-known, and exploiting them is extremely illegal. Vega and Dash must struggle to keep his involvement hidden, until she gets the idea to bring him in on Hawk-Eye.
  • The episode "The American Dream" has Akeela stating that the price of granting illegal immigrants amnesty was the repeal of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which requires ignoring the amendment process's requirement of three-quarters of state legislatures approving it after two-thirds of Congress does.
• A subtle one in Sense8's second season finale. The whole cluster is shown flying to London within a day's notice to rescue Wolfgang, but no explanation is given of how Third World characters like Lito and Kala were able to obtain a UK visa overnight, or why Capheus would even have a passport.
• American Gods (2017): The detective in "Lemon Scented You" keeps asking Shadow questions even after he repeatedly asks for a lawyer, which means anything which he tells her can't be used as evidence. However, she does make it clear that she's more interested in finding out who tipped her off than prosecuting two small-time swindlers.
• Criminal Minds: "Collision Course." The judge denies bail/bond for Reid on the basis of "actions speak louder than words" ^note Spending his off-duty time sneaking across the Mexican border to get unlicensed medicine for his mother.... despite so many more factors in his favor (his decade-long track record, his mental illness history, his schizophrenic mother at home, his willingness to surrender his passport and submit to monitoring, and the support of several high-profile FBI figures). In Real Life, said judge might as well have committed career suicide. Being an FBI agent, Reid would also be put in protective custody assuming they did jail him like here, for protection against fellow prisoners if they found out (which happens, with him only being narrowly rescued).
• Star Trek: Discovery:
  • In "Context Is for Kings", Burnham suspects Captain Lorca is developing biological weapons aboard Discovery and cites the Geneva Conventions' ban on them to him. There's a couple of problems with this:
  • In real life, the Geneva Conventions actually don't outlaw bioweapons; those are covered by a different set of treaties (the 1925 Geneva Protocol prohibits their use but not their creation, while the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention outlaws them altogether). However, in addition to citing the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention as above, Burnham also cites a fictional 22nd-century version of the Conventions under which these are covered.
  • In "The Battle at the Binary Stars", Burnham and Captain Georgiou attach a torpedo warhead to a corpse so T'Kuvma's ship will collect the body and allow the warhead to go off within their ship. This directly violates Article 6 of 1980 Protocol II of the Geneva Conventions, which pertains to attaching booby-traps to wounded or dead persons. This makes her complaint to Lorca rather hypocritical.
• Breaking Bad: Saul asks Walt and Jesse each put a dollar in his pocket to officially hire him as their attorney and be protected by attorney-client privilege. Exchanging money isn't necessary before getting attorney-client privilege. Otherwise, attorneys working pro-bono and public defenders would certainly confuse the issue. People just need to have reasonable cause to believe that they are the attorney's client.
• M*A*S*H: Many of the stunts and hijinks pulled were incredibly illegal under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and would have brought serious consequences. Remarkably, accounts from real M*A*S*H staff suggest they and their colleagues often got away with worse.
  • Any time Frank brings charges against Hawkeye and crew, when Hawkeye is found "not guilty" of whatever it is Frank was setting him up for, Frank is never brought up on any charges for falsifying statements even when his actions could have led to Hawkeye's death.
  • When Flagg visits the camp in "Officer of the Day," he insists that Hawkeye prepare his patient so Flagg can take him to Seoul, where he intends to execute him for being a spy. Although spies may have been executed, it wouldn't have been for Flagg to do on his own.
• The Good Place:
  • In the third season, a police officer announces that Jason has "admitted to the robbery." However, a "robbery" means stealing something directly from a victim by force, threats or intimidation, such as holding up a bank or mugging someone. Given Jason's personality and the fact that he's free within a year, the show obviously meant "larceny," which is stealing things without these means.
  • In a flashback scene showing how Jason had died in a failed robbery, a police officer is seen explaining to Pillboi that he would likely get off with probation. In fact, because Jason died in the commission of a felony, Pillboi would likely be charged with felony murder and potentially face the death penalty.
• For the People:
  • The attorneys that had just started working at the US Attorney's Office and Public Defender's Office would not be sent to deal with big cases on their own straight off. Instead, they would then work under supervision of a more experienced attorney, as simply one part of a team. Of course, this would not be so dramatic. They would also not be starting with cases that go to the mattresses for trial, but rather taking lots of minor cases that usually will end in guilty pleas to lesser sentences (and again, not as dramatic).
  • A lot of the questions witnesses get asked are things which they couldn't know, and would thus be objected to. Inappropriate arguments are allowed in closing too. Cases also take far more time until they get to trial.
  • Only $9,000 of fraud from insider trading in the pilot is also not something a US Attorney would bring to trial. Lampshaded by Chief Judge Nicholas Byrne, who takes off his glasses and asks, "This is what Roger Gunn is prioritizing in the US Attorney's office nowadays?" The insider trading case actually gets a lot of the other matters of law correct, such as having the lawyers argue from behind counsel table instead of pacing inside of the well (the area between counsel tables and the judge's bench), and the arguments for why exactly the defendant is being prosecuted are also sound (some people need to be reminded that there are consequences to breaking the law).
  • The question about whether any crime that was committed in Yellowstone National Park could be tried has been raised. It isn't, however, because of the small area which is in Idaho lacks a local population. Rather, it's because it falls in three states, so which Federal District Court should have jurisdiction is a problem then under the Vicinage Clause of the Sixth Amendment. The part in Idaho actually falls in the Wyoming District Court's jurisdiction, rather than Idaho's as well.
  • As pointed out in this video by Legal Eagle, the pilot episode, which is portrayed as a case of entrapment and general miscarriage of justice, was anything but, as the defendant in question had already made the decision to attempt to destroy the Statue of Liberty, and taken the predicate acts to do so. Undercover FBI agents helped him after he decided, though since they didn't trick, persuade or coerce him into doing so it's not entrapment.
• Crossing Lines: The International Criminal Court does not have any authority to set up a police team akin to the one that's shown in the series, nor does their jurisdiction cover cross-border offenses in the EU.
• Finding Carter: Elizabeth gets Crash a deal to avoid prison by talking with the DA and his lawyer. She tells him about this after he arrives in the courthouse. However, he would have to agree on this beforehand. Not that he wouldn't, of course, but it isn't the first time he'd be hearing about it in reality.
• Proven Innocent: In "A CinderHella Story" after Violet records Adela and Kaufman talking of how they got the former off, she says they can't use it because of attorney-client privilege. However, that only applies to legal communications between attorneys and clients, but the pair agree with her even so. She is not a lawyer in any case, so the evidence could be delivered to the police regardless. However, eavesdropping like she did is illegal under Illinois law, so there could be some repercussions for it. Bellows likely would be happy to get it though and decline to prosecute (Violet could be sued for this however).
• 2 Broke Girls: In "And The High Holiday" Max mentions a bunch of states that have legalized marijuana with only Colorado and Washington recently allowing recreational pot use. The rest are either decriminalized or allow medical marijuana or both or neither. The big baggie of pot that Max has is more than enough to get arrested, even in states where it's decriminalized. They only allow possession under a certain amount to not be criminalized and instead subject to fines.
• ER. February 2000, Carter and Lucy are stabbed by a schizophrenic patient. 2 years later, the man is brought into the hospital with a head injury, with a few throwaway lines from him and his wife indicating he's "doing fine, taking his medication", and out of prison/the mental hospital. There is no way that someone who murdered someone and almost killed someone else would be released from a mental hospital in as little as 2 years—as has been repeatedly stated regarding similar situations on other TV shows, they'd be institutionalized for as long as a prison sentence, if not longer (which assumes that the insanity defense would even work-most don't).^note Being mentally ill isn't the same thing as legally insane. Depending on the jurisdiction and the defendant's state of mind, they're often still convicted (they'd receive treatment in prison or an institution for criminally insane patients over their sentence).
• Babylon Berlin: A judge is at one point addressed as "Euer Ehren", which is largely an an anglicism deriving from "Your Honor". The proper way to address a judge in German is "Herr Vorsitzender" ("Mr. President" or "Mr. Chairman").
• Dark (2017):
  • By German gun laws, only the military and the police are allowed to possess and carry automatic firearms. The Winden nuclear power plant is privately owned, and if you had your private security wield submachine guns in plain view of a bunch of cops, their search warrant for your power plant would be the least of your worries, but the cops in the show don't bat an eyelid.
  • It is highly unlikely that Ulrich, a man with a rape charge on his rap sheet, would ever be allowed to join the police force regardless of whether the charge was later dropped or not.
• Orange Is the New Black: A number of inmates are in Litchfield despite not committing federal crimes.
  • Watson was arrested for armed robbery in New York City of an ordinary store (not say a bank, which is indeed a federal crime).
  • Maritza is a con artist who committed grand theft auto.
  • Lolly assaulted a police officer...in Seattle. Not only should she not be in federal prison, there also isn't even a reason to send her to New York - there are many federal prisons much closer to Seattle they could send her to.
  • Further, the "Department of Corrections" is repeatedly referred to. In fact, it's the Bureau of Prisons which controls federal ones (which is also referred to, inconsistently, as well).
  • The New York state governor would have no control over the situation, as this is a federal prison. It would be the US President instead, with federal agencies like the US Marshals used to storm the prison.
  • There's also mention of parole for federal prisoners. Since 1984, there's no parole (although they can still get their sentences reduced by good behavior) so only inmates convicted before 1987 are eligible for it, but they say this in regards to ones convicted long after that too.
• Innocent (UK) has DI Cathy Hudson investigating a case that her boyfriend DI William Beech originally did. This would not be allowed, as it's an obvious conflict of interest (even though she's honest enough to conclude he messed up). It's unclear if her superior knows they're in a relationship, but if not then she should have turned this down herself because of the conflict.
• Sleepy Hollow: In "Ragnarok" Ezra gives Ichabod a centuries-old letter of marque and reprisal from George Washington establishing The Men in Black for combating all supernatural threats and placing Ichabod in command of it. Since Article I Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress and not the President the sole authority in issuing letters of marque and reprisal—and even then they were for authorizing civilian ships to engage in privateering, while Washington explicitly mentions Ichabod's Continental Army rank in it—this is probably the closest 18th-century equivalent to an executive order the writers could come up with.
• Bluff City Law is mostly accurate while portraying legal matters. Ave Maria though greatly errs in showing the lawsuit of a Catholic teacher who's sued the Church because they fired her over getting IVF. Though she loses, it would not go to trial regardless of whether her contract forbade this, because churches are exempt from anti-discrimination laws already in the US (they can basically fire people at will, even without a specific religious reason). The US Supreme Court even ruled a disabled teacher could be fired by a church simply because they didn't want her anymore (with no other reason), something otherwise completely illegal. Good or not, this is the state of things, so in such a case the church could get it dismissed or receive summary judgment from the outset.
• Almost Family: Subverted. Though at first neither Edie nor Amanda notes that their affair could get them both sanctioned or even disbarred, as they're working on the opposite sides of a case, it's later explicitly brought up. During the trial, it gets disclosed and used in trying to coerce a plea deal out of Amanda (not by Edie, but her boss).
• Prodigal Son: Martin's defense lawyer boasts how he saved Martin from an end in the electric chair. New York did not use the electric chair when Martin's case occurred, and no one was actually executed since 1963 even after the death penalty had been reinstated (before its abolition), making it very questionable just how much danger he was even in. Of course, as he's boasting that may well be the point-it's hyperbole.
• The Twilight Zone (1959): In "I Am the Night - Color Me Black", Jagger is publicly executed on May 25, 1964. The last person to be publicly executed in the United States was Rainey Bethea in Owensboro, Kentucky on August 14, 1936. Note, however, that May 25, 1964 was actually two months in the future when this episode originally aired, thereby placing the customary Twilight Zone change in societal norms not in the usual alternate reality but a very near future US.
• The Twilight Zone (1985): In "Special Service", after John Selig discovers that he has been secretly filmed for five years and is the subject of a hit cable TV show, he demands that it be taken off the air as he has rights. The JSTV executive Arthur Spence gives John a copy of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights and sarcastically asks him to point out where it says that they can't put his life on TV. John counters that this is a technicality. John's right though — he has rights, and they can't film him secretly nor make use of his name/image without permission; most laws, in fact, aren't enshrined in the Constitution/Bill of Rights, but that doesn't make it okay to disregard them. He could get an injunction forcing them to stop. (They do ultimately stop after he insists, and give him a million dollars for the profit they'd made off him.)
• The Twilight Zone (2002): "How Much Do You Love Your Kid?" revolves around an Immoral Reality Show that kidnaps children and forces their loved ones to solve puzzles to recover them (and earn the prize money) or else they will never be seen again, and something this insane can be allowed by a single parent without any knowledge (let alone consent) from the other. Even the closest approximation to the Trope in Real Life still requires the consent of both parents if children are involved and cannot put them in the kind of danger an adult can consent to (read: potentially lethal).
• The Twilight Zone (2019): In "The Wunderkind", numerous liberties are taken with regards to American law.
  • Raff convinces Oliver to run for president even though he is only eleven years old. They get around the presidential age requirement by having Oliver's mother serve as his proxy — but then that would make her the President of the United States and render Oliver's presidential demands impotent.
  • Oliver's first act after being sworn in as President is to give free video games to everyone, and he plans to get the Video Game Companies to comply by threatening a surcharge tax of one million dollars per console "and put them out of business in a day." Unfortunately, the annual budget isn't created until October of the next fiscal year...
  • President Oliver tells his staff to pass a law: "no old doctors." This comes to pass somehow, even though legislation begins with Congress, not the White House.
• In the Dark:
  • A busted taillight isn't enough to warrant searching a vehicle. While the reason to stop them was faked, Gene already called in the excuse for dispatch, which would make it difficult assuming he'd actually found drugs by his search of the back.
  • "The Trial of Murphy Mason, Part One/Part Two" sees the prosecution mostly present negative character witnesses (i.e. everybody whom Murphy's ever wronged, basically), something that's not allowed except in quite narrow circumstances (e.g. to show a pattern of misbehavior that isn't evident here since they don't relate to her murder charge or if the defense cited character first) and very little evidence Murphy actually murdered the victim quite possibly not enough for them to put her on trial at all.
• Cold Case:
  • The headmistress of the school for the deaf is used as an interpreter in "Andy in C Minor". Leaving aside the fact that the Philadelphia Police Department probably either has one on staff already or could easily enlist a sign language interpreter, is it really advisable to use a possible suspect as an interpreter?
  • The gang leader in "Knuckle Up" is not arrested for running away from the scene of a murder, despite doing so making him an Accomplice by Inaction. Same goes for the girls in the "The Promise".
  • As noted below, at the end of "World's End" the squad arrests the nonagenarian, Alzheimer's-afflicted Felton Metz as the man's son is begging them to let him live out his final days in peace. In reality, the fellow would be out of custody before the cops finished filing the paperwork, because the lawyer the son would call would invoke the defense principle that an individual with dementia as advanced as Metz's is in no wise competent to give a legally-admissible confession.
  • Detectives usually need a solid reason for reopening a cold case, such as the discovery of new evidence or eyewitness testimony. The show usually gets this right, but there are a few episodes where in reality the reason presented would not be enough. For example, in "It's Raining Men", Rush reopens a twenty-one year old case simply because a man wants his long-dead lover's murder solved as a wedding present.
  • The detectives will occasionally badger a suspect into not calling their lawyer, something very much not allowed in real life.
• Perry Mason (2020): In the final episode of the first season, Mason delivers his closing arguments for the defense, and then the district attorney gives his closing arguments for the prosecution. In real life, the prosecution always speaks first.
• Alien Nation: Buck gets probation for killing someone in self-defense, as part of a deal where he pleads guilty to involuntary manslaughter. However, the judge's voiceover states the prosecution presented evidence he'd acted in self-defense. If that was the case, they shouldn't have pressed charges at all, since it's an affirmative defense (i.e. one which shows the alleged act was not criminal) and if they still did the court should've dismissed the case or refused to accept the deal.
• Big Sky: Legarski's attorney says that positive lie detector test results could be introduced and then help his defense. In fact, American courts don't allow them because of their unproven reliability, which she would know. Also, it's not true that his memory loss in regards to the crimes he's charged with could make him incompetent to stand trial. It relates only to the state of mind during legal proceedings. So long as you still understand and can help your defense, you're legally competent. This may be an In-Universe misunderstanding though, since it's Jenny and Cassie who fear he'll get Off on a Technicality due to it, but they aren't lawyers (though as ex-cops in reality they might know this).
• Law & Order: Organized Crime: In real life, the NYPD disbanded the Organized Crime Control Bureau in 2016. The detectives of OCCB now report to the office of the Chief of Detectives.
• Century City: In the first episode, the US Attorney opposes Lucas' replevin action by citing Livengood vs. Markusson, where the court of first instance claimed that domestic animals were not property. But Livengood won the case when this ruling was reversed after she appealed.
• Batwoman (2019): As goes with the territory of Arkham being the quintessential Bedlam House, the experiments Alice describes being conducted on the inmates at Arkham would be very illegal in reality in this century. Also, it's illegal to commit someone to a mental institution against their will without a court order, which Jacob and Kate can't have gotten because they're keeping the fact Alice is related to them secret and she had no trial.
• Agent X: When the President is incapacitated, the VP takes over his duties, per the 25th Amendment. That much is accurate. However, the Speaker of the House, despite being next in line of succession, does not automatically take over the duties of the VP. In fact, it's against the law for any public official to serve in two branches of government (executive and legislative in this case) at the same time. When the VP temporarily takes over for the President, they don't stop being the VP, they simply assume the presidential duties. If the VP position needs to be permanently filled outside an election, someone has to be nominated and ratified by the Senate like any other executive branch appointee.
• The Handmaid's Tale: In "Progress" Mark Tuello would have no authority to release the Waterfords in return for their intelligence. They were being tried in the International Criminal Court, not in an American one, and Tuello is a representative of the American Government. There is also the fact that June's testimony is now a matter of court record, as is Fred's outburst where he admitted that he raped her. June should still therefore be able to press charges against both of the Waterfords. Even with this, it is possible that the ICC is more involved in trying to help the Americans and it is possible that the plea deal is between the Waterfords and them, with Tuello having made the deal which the prosecutor agreed with. For instance, the ICC may realize that with a new source of intelligence like Waterford, they can possibly help bring down the Gilead regime and do far more than just the conviction of one Commander.
• Kung Fu (2021): In Sacrifice, Nicky decides to travel to China "tonight" to try to find the Forge. In real life, an American citizen can't just hop the next plane to China (or many other foreign countries) on a whim; they need a visa from the foreign country's government first, a process that typically takes weeks.
• The White Lotus: No matter how clear a case of self-defense Shane might've had, there is no way in hell that the fallout of Armond's death would be resolved in less than 24 hours, and both Shane and Armond's body ready to leave the island in that timeframe.
• Transplant: Mags tells Bash that he will be blamed if Bishop dies; however, Ontario's Good Samaritan Act should protect him from liability, given that he is a trained, if not licensed, professional, not someone that could be reasonably accused of negligence.
• Dexter: New Blood: Even if Angela could prove Dexter killed Matt and Jasper, it does not prove he killed anyone in Florida, so in reality, he could not be extradited. As Dexter left behind no physical evidence in Florida that he was the Bay Harbor Butcher, it's unlikely Laguerta's fIle contains anything definitive.
• Ms. Marvel (2022): In "Generation Why" Kamala is shown taking her Driving Test on a public road. In real life, New Jersey requires all driving tests take place at an official Motor Vehicle Commission testing site. Weirdly, this is lampshaded, with Muneeba accusing the instructor of "setting her up to fail" by holding the test on a public road.
• For Life:
  • Even if Aaron applied to the bar in Vermont where convicts can do this, it's highly improbable they would admit him since bar members must satisfy good character requirements-even a former New York state senator's endorsement likely wouldn't stretch that to include anyone serving life without parole. The real man this is based on had to wait for nine years before he was admitted even after being exonerated. Aaron wouldn't be admitted then in New York for the same reasons, plus he would lack the legal experience out-of-state lawyers need.
  • ADA Reilly would not only learn at the last minute Aaron's opposing him in court. The name of the opposing lawyer is always on the briefing their opponent gets ahead of time.
  • In the Jose Rodriguez appeal, it's said he was convicted of statutory rape for having sex with his fifteen year old girlfriend at age eighteen. However, in New York (like most US states) they have what's called a "Romeo clause" which exempts consenting sex partners between ages fifteen and twenty one from the statutory rape law. Jose therefore couldn't have been legally convicted of the crime. At worst, it would be a misdemeanor (even in New York, consent is a defense when the participants are those ages).
  • In the same case, the attempted murder conviction gets reversed when the witness who'd testified indicated he was recanting. You'd need a sworn affidavit minimally, probably testimony in open court subject to cross-examination, or else the judge certaintly wouldn't do this (and probably not even this, if there's other evidence, like this case had). It also comes out that the original attorney didn't put on an exculpatory witness-that alone might have been enough to get the conviction overturned for ineffective assistance of counsel, though no one mentions this.
• The King of Queens:
  • The plot of "Clothes Encounter," where Carrie was returning expensive clothing articles after wearing them for a while, was played entirely for laughs and was seen in-universe as morally grey but ultimately harmless. In real life this is called "wardrobing," and it is legally considered a type of shoplifting. At the very least this kind of scheme would probably destroy your credit score, and at worse may land you in prison for fraud.
  • It is quite unlikely that the water leak in the Heffernans' home that caused the toxic mold would have been brushed aside with a fleeting comment and then buried in the fine print of the paperwork. Something like that would be a pretty major deal, and would probably require both Doug and Carrie to sign a waiver that they were buying the house "as is" and thereby absolving the realtor of any responsibility. As it happened in the show, Carrie would have a pretty good case against the realtor that she was never informed of this severe defect and signed off on the house under false pretenses.
  • Later in the same story arc, Mr. Kaplan's explanation to Doug and Carrie that there was nothing they could do about the mold company's poor business practices was fairly specious as well. If the company accepted payment for the job up front and signed a contract that they would complete it, they can absolutely be held to those terms and they can certainly be sued or possibly even arrested for absconding with the Heffernans' money.
• All Rise: "Fire and Rain" sees stolen property excluded as evidence because it was obtained through a search warrant with an error (the wrong witness' name). However, this is covered by the "good faith exception" to the exclusionary rule, as the police didn't know there was a problem with the search warrant, so they didn't commit intentional misconduct. Further, Lola also meets ex parte with the defense attorney, a huge no-no since both sides must be privy to any discussions during the case. Admittedly it was about personal matters, though given how involved emotionally they still are this brings up another issue, that Lola might not be impartial toward his client and should recuse herself (this applies to other cases too-for instance her close friend Mark is a prosecutor who frequently appears before her, including in the case here, which wouldn't be allowed in reality to avoid accusations of bias toward him).
• Primeval: Episode 3 of Season 1 has an incident where a lifeguard is swallowed whole by a Mosasaur in a swimming pool. The lifeguard's girlfriend reports the incident to the police, telling them she saw a "sea monster." They refuse to believe her claim and decide to have her not only arrested, but charged with murder, deciding that it's "obvious she killed her boyfriend." There are many problems with this. Firstly, as the police admit themselves, there was no body, and therefore, no proof he was even dead without other evidence (like blood left behind). At this point, the lifeguard would be declared missing, not dead. The only "evidence" they have of his demise is the girlfriend reporting him dead, except she specifically said he was EATEN BY A SEA MONSTER, not that she killed him. Granted, the idea of sea monsters coming out of swimming pools and then disappearing is a hard thing to believe, but if that's the case, then her entire report, including the part where she said her boyfriend is dead, should be considered unreliable. There is also the fact that the police have zero evidence she committed the murder, despite how "obvious" they say it is, meaning she should not have been charged, and would still just be a suspect.
• She-Hulk: Attorney at Law: In "Rip It", Matt Murdock makes his highly-anticipated guest appearance and faces off against Jen in court. This ignores the fact that in the United States, law licenses are state-level. Every state and territory has its own bar exam that an attorney must pass in order to practice law there, and there is no mention that the New York-based Matt is licensed to practice in California. It's possible to be admitted temporarily so they can work on a particular case (called pro hac vice) but that isn't mentioned here, and regardless it seems odd that he'd do this going from New York out of the blue (while representing the plaintiff in a civil case when he's a criminal defense attorney too).
• Accused (2023):
  • "Ava's Story" has the judge dismiss all the charges when the parents of Lucie, the baby Ava kidnapped, don't want to go on, as the prosecutor agrees to. In reality, though she might dismiss a reckless endangerment charge in this case (though almost certaintly before the trial began) the kidnapping charge would stand and it's very unlikely the prosecutor wouldn't proceed as it's a very serious crime, no matter what the victim's family wanted (it's not up to them).
  • "Brenda's Story": It's quite unlikely that Brenda really would be charged with the evidence presented in reality, as it's not enough to show that she was involved with the crime. Most probably, the case would be dismissed assuming she was actually charged before getting to trial.
  • "Jack's Story": It's unlikely Jack would be charged with statutory rape solely on the basis of Clara claiming they had sex, especially as there are many witnesses in his favor testifying he was never once inappropriate with her. Many rape cases even with more evidence don't get to trial if the prosecution doesn't think they can win.
• The Company You Keep: Emma is a CIA agent who investigates international crime. However, the CIA's remit is gathering intelligence about threats abroad to the US. What she does is something the FBI would do. Further, the CIA has no legal right to surveil people in the US, which she and other agents are shown as doing (not that this has never happened, but this is portrayed as above board).
• Gotham Knights (2023):
  • While some prisoners have spent a long time awaiting execution in the US, fifty years (as Joe Chill does) is pretty unlikely without either being executed or having his sentence commuted. Here, it's ascribed to the Court of Owls' influence, keeping him alive for their purposes until he's deemed useless at last.
  • If any real child was born in a mental institution like Duela, there's no way she'd also be raised there to adulthood. She's be put in the custody of relatives outside or foster care assuming that she had none.
• Class of '09: A lot of the things in place by 2034, such as surveillance everywhere or arresting people for what they might do beforehand, would be massively unconstitutional. There's no mention of any constitutional changes in the US however.
• The Rookie (2018): Multiple times the DA's office is described as representing the City of Los Angeles, when they actually represent the entire Los Angeles county overall. At one point a suspect dies in custody and we see prosecutors investigate to head off any lawsuits against the city, but those would fall to the City Attorney.

---