Question #6

[Jonetta]

6. The judge seemed to be annoyed with Rodney Belk, the attorney defending Harry. What do you think was the source of his discontent? Do you think he was biased towards Honey Chandler and his outrage with her orchestrated as Harry alluded?

[Tracey]

I just wanted to give Belk a kick up the backside!! He was very frustrating. I'm not sure on the source of his discontent. I did think the judge was biased towards Chandler but was that because Belk was not great and Chandler was slick?

[Jonetta]

I think Belk was influenced by two things: the police department's lukewarm support of Harry and his bedazzlement by Chandler a la Marcia Clark with the Dream Team in the O. J. Simpson case. He just wasn't working hard for his client.

I think the judge was definitely biased towards Chandler, primarily because he didn't like Belk. Judges have little tolerance for attorneys who seem unprepared and incompetent. And, his "outrage" at Chandler definitely seemed contrived.

[❆ Crystal ❆]

I don't think the judge liked Belk because he wasn't a good lawyer... Frustrated with him for not doing a good job.

[Jonetta]

Yeah, that was my strongest leaning.

[Lauren]

Bell was incompetent and the judge sensed this. Also, Belk's comments that Chandler was exchanging sexual favors with the judge were not that quiet and the judge might have heard.

Belk was an asshole of the first water. Of course, a female lawyer couldn't run rings around him because she was smart and better at her job. She must be sleeping with the judge. Typical male misogynist, argh!

[Jonetta]

Belk was a mess.

[Charlene]

At the point toward the very end of the trial, when Honey (money) went way over the line of acceptable language in addressing the jury, I thought the judge expected Belk to move for a mistrial, or something like that.

[Robin]

❆ Crystal ❆ wrote: "I don't think the judge liked Belk because he wasn't a good lawyer... Frustrated with him for not doing a good job."

That is exactly what I was thinking. He's not a good lawyer and he does just enough to get by. The judge knows that and doesn't like it.

[Robin]

Charlene wrote: "At the point toward the very end of the trial, when Honey (money) went way over the line of acceptable language in addressing the jury, I thought the judge expected Belk to move for a mistrial, or ..."

I thought the judge was waiting for Belk to ask for a mistrial too. I'm pretty sure the judge would have granted it at the time. He was really mad.

[Lauren]

I wonder if the judge really was as angry as he seemed. At one point after that scene, Harry mused that it was all an act and that despite the judge's apparent anger, Chandler wouldn't actually be sanctioned - she would get a slap on the wrist.

Would the judge really have granted a mistrial over an offhand comment by the Plaintiff's lawyer? I don't think so.

[Jonetta]

I thought he might have been posturing with a little tinge of disgust for Belk.