"Manhunter" at SoD

I posted an obscenely long legal review of Manhunter #7 over at Suspension of Disbelief. When I started, I expected it to be relatively short, like silogamsam's review I linked to: Kate's tactics were bad, and there was a significant objectionable question. Nothing big jumped out at me at first, like having the prosecutor call the defendant as a witness.

But as I started writing my thoughts down, and paying closer attention and double-checking my copy of the Federal Rules of Evidence, I began realizing that virtually everything in this issue was wrong. Not a lot of questions were asked, but nearly every one was objectionable on some grounds. I could've saved a lot of space by skipping background info and simply saying things like "This question violates FRE 404" or "Federal jurisdiction doesn't exist," but like Mr. Ingersoll's column, I think it's more helpful to the reader to explain potentially new terms and concepts. I know I learn better that way.

I'd be hard-pressed to point to anything in this issue as a truly good portrayal of the law. For a "star prosecutor," Kate Spencer doesn't seem to do much of anything right.