MovieChat Forums > The Practice (1997) Discussion > Rebecca Washington--super lawyer?

Rebecca Washington--super lawyer?


So I've seen every episode since Rebecca became a lawyer through season 7 when she argues at the appeal for Lindsey's murder trial , and she has never lost a case on the show where she was first chair. Not a single case. Even cases where there's no chance in hell she should win it, she ends up with a W. Like the guy in 'This Pud's for you' who had no chance at all of getting acquitted, she still managed to not lose--granted it was because he was murdered, but still. Not a loss for super lawyer.

Am I forgetting anything? I know she once lost a case but she was second chair to Eugene, so I don't count that one. Other than that, she's been perfect. I don't even question when she's first chair--it's a win.

reply

Well, you'd better hope that you can afford her retainer if you're ever arrest or sued for anything. It would be nice going into court knowing that your attorny doesn't lose.

_______
"She flattened a Dear John with a John Deere." - Douglas Wambaugh

reply

You bring up a pretty interesting argument - what are the win-loss records for the Practice?

reply

[deleted]

They won more than they lost, but there were some losses mixed in.

For instance, I don't remember what they were suing for, but they got that $175 million dollar settlement for some family, and then the judge threw it out.

They initially lost the Scott Wallace (Bruce Davison) case, they lost Lindsay's murder case--both were later overturned, but they DID lose at first.

I'm blanking on any others, but there were some big ones in there every now and then. Pretty sure Bay and Walsh both beat the firm once, but if I'm correct the case Walsh won was against Lindsay. I don't remember who Richard beat.

And you're probably right about Rebecca, she would have lost cases like anyone else, they just never had a show about her losing a case. Because on TV she won every one.

reply

[deleted]

It was not "ruled justified" that Lindsay shot O'Malley at all. It's called getting off on a technicality, in this case prosecutorial misconduct. It was implied that the guy who thought O'Malley was moving forward was wrong and all other experts disagreed with him - yet, the prosecution still needed to have presented ALL evidence and they didn't.

Personally, I thought the shooting was morally justified on self-defense even if the law says the threat has to be immediate. The restraining order was not working and O'Malley could very well have killed Lindsay at some point.

It's true, the few times the firm loses are always when the client is innocent - not necessarily b/c they try harder, in my opinion, just because that's what the writers like to do. Kinda f'd up, in my opinion. Sheds a very negative light on the system to render sort of justice in the world.

reply

[deleted]

I don't certainly don't support adultery, but do you really think the penalty for adultery should be life in prison?

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Bobby lose the Dr. Jeffrey Winslow case, the murder trial Helen prosecuted while she and Bobby were dating?
(even though this maybe one of those "framed by the wife" things mentioned earlier.)


Rooster Cogburn is my hero.

reply

[deleted]

Yes. Bobby et al sometimes lose when the client is innocent. They never lose when the client is guilty - unless it's a mercy killer or other sympathetic/petty criminal doing serious time.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Washington is just another run of the mill lawyer. Nothing special about her.

reply