Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Dotsthavesp I wanted to but couldn't!

Ava-Grace Willis Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

Zlatica One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

SnoopyStyle Kathryn Peale (Maura Tierney) is the prosecutor, and Jimmy Brogan (Rob Morrow) is the defense. It's a pretty standard legal drama procedural. There is a lot of quick banter between the leads. Rob Morror is playing a fast talking guy. They're both very high stress characters. The gimmick is in the last part of the show after the case is done. They show what really happened. They show 'The Whole Truth'. While I appreciate the attempt at something new, I don't think the gimmick works. It feels very arbitrary as if it could work either way. They may as well film two 'The Whole Truth' and flip a coin.

cratthe I concur with florinmax's review, I saw 4 episode, and EACH time the defence dig out serious flaws and doubt in the prosecutor case, and in a proper justice system that should prevent a guilty verdict.Full of circumstantial evidence and lousy job. This series is like an apologetic argument for the prosecution to win at any price, even against an innocent. A Right-wing dream, the final "confession" is just a way to reinforce lousy logic for the quick to judge. Without it many would still wonder if the verdict was right.Not surprising from a country that still love the death penalty even after having executed innocent (verified post-mortem with DNA testing).Seeing the appreciation from other viewer, I think I would restrain myself to travel through the USA, in fear of being mistaken for a criminal and finish my innocent life in prison due to a lousy job by the police and prosecution.

coffeeparty I love a good courtroom drama and was looking forward to this show after seeing the ads. The concept, in which only the audience knows the true guilt or innocence of the defendant, is an excellent one. I also have really liked Rob Morrow in other TV shows and films and thought he and Maura Tierney would be terrific. Then I watched the show and I could barely get through the pilot. I found the writing to be extremely contrived and overly slick. I was disappointed in Rob Morrow's acting and the character he plays. The character is smarmy and unlikable and Morrow's acting is way over the top. The banter between Morrow and Tierny's characters is embarrassing. These two sound more like bratty high school rivals than professional lawyers. Real lawyers don't act like this--they strategize and focus on how to win their cases, rather than engage in a childish game of "gotcha," constantly trying to get the better of one another.

florinmax Usually in this type of shows there is presented just one side of the legal coin: prosecution or defense. And the star character is so brilliant that he/she wins the cases in spite of the evidence (or lack of- depending on the side). In this show we have both sides presented and both are very good at what they do. Therefor the amount of evidence should be balanced. In the first episode unfortunately there was very little evidence against the defendant: a witness who may or may not have seen the defendant, phone calls which may or may not have been a build up to the crime and Chinese symbols on the victims body for which the prosecution provided no evidence that the defendant had done them. That was it! And he was found guilty. How come?! The answer is because he was guilty, as it is shown at the end. That's not good enough for me. The first episode contains the underlining message that the justice system will work even though the police does a lousy job of searching for evidence or potential suspects. And that is a LIE! I like the format of the show and I will watch the second episode to see if there is an improvement on how justice is served but if it will be with the same idea that justice will work in spite of the evidence I will not watch it again.