Saul Goodman vs Matt Murdock: Lawyer Battle

Saul Goodman is the defendant, Matt Murdock is the prosecutor.

In character

Saul is defending a guilty client.

They are involved in the full trial proceeding, including statements, discovery, ect all the way up to the final trial.

They can use dirty tricks, manipulation, or the Daredevil persona to gain advantages is the courtroom. The only rule is that it must be settled in court. Matt cannot use Daredevil directly on Saul, and Saul cant have Matt assassinated.

If they are given free reign to finagle the legal system, who would win the legal case?

Saul Goodman

Matt Murdock

Saul wins, hands down. He'll obstruct justice, bribe, steal, forge documents...basicslly anything to win the trial, using the syatem against itself.

Matt plays by the rules in the court room which is a massive disadvantage.

If anything I think Matt woukd know what he's up against, take the loss and then take a win as DD in a week or 3.

Jimmy McGill

Im not sure why daredevil wouldnt just intimidate saul and use his abilities to figure out saul is trying to cheat the system and put him away too

@diydeath: lol I was thinking the same thing. Matt can't win the case but Daredevil would certainly help him

Matt cant use Daredevil directly on Jimmy. Thats what i was trying to get across in the OP but ill edit to make it more clear

Saul wins. Matt has prosecuted before but it's generally out of his field of expertise so that's advantage one for Saul. Not to mention that Daredevilling would be less advantageous to the prosecution unless it was some kind of far-flung attempt to get evidence. But Matt certainly wouldn't fabricate evidence or illegally compel a testimony so I don't think it's a big factor.

Saul could potentially slip up though. If he tried to break the rules too much I think Matt would catch him.

@undeadbantha: Based on Matt and Saul's histories I'm assuming the client in question is guilty of what they're being charged for?

@amendment50: I'd like to keep the specifics of the case vague because it could quickly become circumstantial, but yes. Saul's client is guilty.

@undeadbantha: Right, well the #1 biggest factor would really be how objectively strong the case against Saul's client is so that makes sense. But if the client was not guilty that would stack the deck hugely in Saul's favor. Since Saul actively seeks out guilty/criminal clients I figured it made the most sense that the client would be guilty but still I thought it'd be best to ask :P

Nobody beats Saul

Matt just won a case in the Supreme Court in the comics. I'm confident he would take this case.

@jacthripper: I think there is some context to that situation that should be addressed though. Matt had public opinion on his side when he argued that case and I don't think it's really all that representative of especially advanced legal skill/knowledge. There is even a panel from that arc where he tries to argue constitutional law and immediately gets his ass handed to him by the justices. His whole success basically hinges on him throwing out the constitutional argument and making a flat appeal to emotion which apparently works because so many people are already pro-superhero. Matt argues a lot of superhero-related cases and honestly that kind of thing happens a lot. I feel that part of the point of that arc is that Matt wins the case more because his heart is in the right place than because he is the better lawyer. Even though making emotional appeals is certainly a valuable skill for a lawyer I would also argue it's also one of Saul's particular strong points too.

That said Matt's opponent in Supreme is almost certainly a better lawyer just based on experience alone than anyone from the Breaking Bad verse so that is a strong feat in and of itself. Even if the majority of the case happens off panel. But I think Saul probably has better quantifiable feats of actually deftly using evidence and legal strategies for his case, like drafting a demand letter for the Sandpiper people in their bathroom on toilet paper. Or negotiating for Jesse's house in Breaking Bad.

I'm bumping this cuz I'm dumb and this kind of debate is my jam

Sounds like a bad crossover episode lol

Matt solves the crime

bump

Gus solos :)

It'd be interesting if the person being prosecuted was given an identity.

@undeadbantha: i guess im imagining it simillar to the netflix show where he senses the jury was paid off, then can investigate further. He can use daredevil on the people saul paid right? He could get evidence that way and turn saul in without ever talking to him directly as dd

Saul Goodman. He'll find some underhanded way of getting the case thrown out, like he did to Huell.

I don't see how Daredevil really helps Matt Murdock. Evidence collected by an anonymous vigilante would be inadmissible in court.

@mrmonster: Well Matt wouldn't have to try to admit evidence collected as Daredevil. He could investigate as Daredevil, beat information out of people and get a direction for how to investigate/who to talk to as Matt Murdock. Theoretically he could also do the sort of thing that Elektra did in S2 of the Netflix show and threaten someone into testifying. Potentially even perjuring themselves to help his case. But that's not the kind of tactic he would use.

On the subject of Supreme by the way, the jurisdiction that this is being tried under could make a huge difference. Daredevilling could possibly be really useful for Matt's case if he were allowed to testify as Daredevil on the stand which is constitutional in Earth-616's federal courts. Obviously wouldn't be a factor in the Breaking Bad/real world court system though.

I would love to do a CaV on this by the way if anyone is interested.