A fair episode. Bull should have listened to Benny in this case. One episode that I was all red especially the outcome. The defendant would be perfect for American Greed, only she got away. The only plus was for Bull admits he was wrong and Benny was right.
5 Reviews
Martin Tsien guest stars as the ADA 2nd Chair
safenoe17 June 2021
Warning: Spoilers
The ending was a bit of a twist with one of the jurors coming forward to save the client, but still the episode raised questions about visionary people and how they seem unrealistic at the time.
Martin Tsien guest stars as the ADA 2nd Chair.
Martin Tsien guest stars as the ADA 2nd Chair.
Intent
ric-boyd7 October 2019
Warning: Spoilers
I generally enjoy the series and this episode did not disappoint. I liked the way they stepped out of their typical ending to let you see the difference between fraud and intent. The client believed in the technology and it DID work. Just not at the capacity they wanted. Or at least that's what they said.....
Interesting that the writers made an obvious error in the episode. They stated the technology was good at 470 gallons per second but not at higher levels where it degraded. At that level, they can filter over 40 million gallons in 24 hours. Much higher than the earlier stated target of "25 million gallons per day".
Yes, if you want people to relate to the story, you'd better get the math right.
I think it was an inspired ending to allow her to continue her work. That's how you can achieve greatness. State a goal and press through it. Kudos to the one juror who saw the value.
Might quit watching this
steven-jay-stewart1 October 2019
It's terrible to see a con artist get away with a crime and then get to do more crime and not only that but also defending them. This is what's wrong in this country, the episode should have ended with her given a big fine and lengthy prison sentence
The epitome of sociopath
incubus-091416 February 2020
"The end justifies the means " was the phrase I was thinking while watching this episode. People who tend to quote this phrase are sociopaths.
The defendant doesn't even flinch before she lies to crowds of people to fulfil her fantasy. She doesn't think about the negative impact that she can cause to investors, future customers and her employees. She can rationalize her choices and behaviours for her gains. The prosecutor in this episode called out defendant's BS out loud and yet she got away with being sentenced.
Bull mentions several times that this ambitious inventor truly believes what she does, thus she's not guilty. Is it though? What about Jean of Arc? What about Reverent Jones? Hitler? Stalin? To name a few? They seemed sincerely believed their "visions", does it make them innocent? NO! This logic which Bull supports is the biggest BS in this episode. What happened to Bull?
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
