Re: 8/14/07 - Damages


"Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1b_nospam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:MICdnaeEGNi4bl_bnZ2dnUVZ_hqdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"DonnaB shallotpeel" <shallotpeel@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:ji75c3945v2qdmlg9heo44dn7u6jm9p2om@xxxxxxxxxx
In rec.arts.tv on Tue, 14 Aug 2007 23:29:57 -0700 in Msg.#
<4I6dnSAI24zuAF_bnZ2dnUVZ_jCdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Arthur Lipscomb"
<arthur@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

So first Patty wants Kate because she can get the witness but the it turns
out she only wanted the witness so the witness would be discredited and the
settlement withdrawn but the client's weren't going to accept the settlement
(which Patty then needed to get withdrawn) until after Kate was hired. What
am I missing?

I'm not sure what or that, etc.

Patty didn't know INITIALLY what Kate knew nor did Patty have the evidence she had by the time Kate was deposed. However between those two times, the clients accepted a settlement and Patty improvised by pretending to fire Tom much as she improvised to get Ellen to bring in Kate after Ellen figured out that was the real reason Patty hired her in the first place.

Also, why did the witness lie and how did Patty know the witness was going
to lie? And who was that mysterious guy?

The witness went by Gregory's identification to her of one of the broker's
assistants. Gregory lied. We don't know who the mysterious guy is.

Kate was being set up to lie in deposition to discredit her by Frobisher. Patty and Tom found out the truth between first getting Kate to testify and when Kate was deposed, but let Kate be discredited in order for Frobisher to withdraw the settlement. Altho I gotta think the clients are gonna be furious at Patty for that.

And while I'm asking for clarification, why did she pretend to fire her
friend again?

She has never stopped pretending that he is fired.

Agreed. Notice Tom hasn't returned to Kate's office.


Yes, but why did she originally pretend to fire him? Just to trick Kate into trusting him more? And now we're supposed to believe that despite being in on the plan from the start (or maybe he wasn't) he's going to between Patty to get his kid into a good school.



I hope the rest of you get what's going on because I'm totally lost.

I'm not lost at all. There are simply still mysteries.

It's understandable to be a little lost--tho compared to most tv, especially broadcast tv, where shows practically beat you over the head telegraphing the plot, it does demand you pay attention.

-- Ken from Chicago (who usually reads, surfs or games online while watching tv)


Me too. And until last night's episode I was following along nicely. But last night had one (or four) twist too many.

Thanks

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: 8/14/07 - Damages
    ... settlement withdrawn but the client's weren't going to accept the ... Patty didn't know INITIALLY what Kate knew nor did Patty have the ...
    (rec.arts.tv)
  • Re: 8/14/07 - Damages
    ... settlement withdrawn but the client's weren't going to accept the settlement ... Patty didn't know INITIALLY what Kate knew nor did Patty have the evidence she had by the time Kate was deposed. ...
    (rec.arts.tv)
  • Re: 8/14/07 - Damages
    ... settlement withdrawn but the client's weren't going to accept the ... Patty didn't know INITIALLY what Kate knew nor did Patty have the evidence ...
    (rec.arts.tv)
  • Re: 8/14/07 - Damages
    ... settlement withdrawn but the client's weren't going to accept the ... Patty didn't know INITIALLY what Kate knew nor did Patty have the ... Patty and Tom found out the truth between first getting Kate to testify ...
    (rec.arts.tv)
  • Re: 8/14/07 - Damages
    ... jayembee wrote: ... testify and when Kate was deposed, ... I'm curious about why more isn't made of the insulting settlement ... There are something like 5000 employees to split that offer, ...
    (rec.arts.tv)