I find myself addicted to this show and its storylines, and of course i generally like the main characters. But I do get frustrated by the overwhelming pattern of outcomes on the cases, and find myself often sympathizing with Helen Gamble more than anyone else - the cases where she vehemently prosecutes mercy killers and petty criminals notwithstanding.
a) Donnell et al. ALWAYS, with no exceptions I can think of, gets the win in cases where their client is guilty "scum".
b) When there's a very sympathetic but technically guilty defendant - or when the defendant is straight up innocent - THAT's when the prosecution occasionally wins. For example, Guilty murder verdicts came down against several Assisted Suicide defendants (doctors and family members of extremely ill, suffering patients) as well as the deaf mother who killed the rapist, murderer and torturer of her young daughter.
c) Occasionally I get to fully root for Donnell et al when they're defending innocent clients or technically guilty but very sympathetic ones. But I would occasionally like to get to be satisfied with a prosecutorial win and the fact that the clients of Donnell et al can't just get away with murder every time at will.
When have EVER gotten a Guilty verdict we can be satisfied with on a justice was served level?
Does anyone agree or disagree?