The Practice, 讲一帮刑事辩护律师的故事。里面有大量的法庭辩论。以交叉询问为主，精彩的美国法庭戏。此剧是完全仿真的以法律调查为主题的系列剧。这是一家充满激情的律师事务所。对他们来说，每一个案子都是重要的，也会为每一个客户的利益争取到底。运用合法的策略是他们的工作方式，他们更依靠科学，把最受质疑的论点变得具有说服性。并且仍把追求正义放在首位，直到最终的结果被宣布……有时也会在宣判之后。然而追求正义，也常常使他们要面对伦理道德的是非问题。
来自网友【豆瓣酱】的评论 DA指控的罪名04:21.99,04:23.76,A如果最后认定罪名成立 If you're convicted,04:23.76,04:27.01,A那就是持有并意图贩卖200克以上over 200 grams and intent to distribute is automatic.警察证言15:13.17,0:15:18.60,顺便问一句 有没有什么物证 证言 \N或其它旁证证明ds在说谎15:18.60,0:15:19.63,没有DA结案陈词29:59.47,301.57,A手里拿着毒品被抓个正着caught with the drugs right in her hand,301.66,304.26,A价值高达10万元straight value of a hundred thousand dollars,304.27,306.00,A当时她正把已经打开的caught stuffing cut off baggie306.00,307.57,A一袋可卡因塞进枕套of cocain into a pillow case,307.78,310.04,A如果这样都还不能定罪if we can't even convict here...317.16,319.96,ADonnell先生说 检方只有这一点证据Mr. Donnell says that's all they have,320.03,322.57,A我可怜的当事人之所以被拘捕 my poor client was arrested322.57,324.30,A仅仅是因为 just because324.30,326.73,A她手里拿着毒品she had the drugs in her hand,326.74,327.57,A多冤枉how awful.基于此：Donnell 在交叉询问警察的时候看起来很精彩，完全是基于控方没有证据随便把控方按在地上摩擦打的组合拳在相同的环境下，如果警察信任他儿子的话，他不相信他毒品是他儿子的（注意，这里印证了DA控告的罪名至少是持有毒品或者共谋）如果警察不信任他儿子，要以事实为根据来判断，那么本案中，没有其他证据，不可能证明毒品是少女的,最多证明少女在窝藏毒品，但是DA并不是以这个罪名控告的至此，警察证言已经不被陪审团信任，再无其他任何证据，胜负已定另外，Donnell在结案陈词中的一段话属于诡辩，也只有在没有证据的情况下能够发挥：34:30.16,34:32.58,A律师在辩护的过程中 but lawyers have to...34:32.58,34:34.76,A必须遵循特定的规则have to play by certain rules when they try a case.34:34.79,34:36.66,A你要是违反了这些规则 You violate one of these rules34:36.66,34:37.69,A砰 无效审判and boom, mistrial.34:37.73,34:39.63,A律师甚至会因此进监狱A lawyer could even be thrown into jail.34:42.27,34:44.90,A其中一条规则是这样的One such rule says34:44.90,34:47.65,A律师不能故意提供虚假证据a lawyer can't knowingly put up false evidence.34:47.73,34:50.83,A他不能向陪审团陈述明知虚假的事实He can't something to the jury he knows to be untrue,34:50.83,34:51.73,A这意味着 不管你们相不相信which means, believe it or not,34:51.82,34:54.32,A如果我明知我的当事人有罪I can't stand here before you,34:54.41,34:56.91,A我就不能站在你们面前and say that my client is innocent of the crime charge34:56.97,34:58.67,A宣称她是清白的if I know otherwise.34:58.67,35:00.27,A我可以说其它的问题Oh I can say other things.35:00.27,35:02.80,A我可以说控方没有完成举证责任I can say the State didn't meet it's burden.35:02.88,35:04.42,A没有证明被告有罪 It didn't prove guilt.35:04.42,35:07.00,A没有达到排除所有合理怀疑的标准It didn't satisfy the standard of beyond all reasonable doubt.35:07.00,35:08.48,A这些是我可以说的I can say those things.35:08.52,35:10.37,A但是 如果我明知But I can't stand here before your both faces35:10.37,35:13.91,A她实施了某个行为and say she didn't commit the act35:13.91,35:16.22,A我不能站在你们面前说她没有if I know that statement to be false.35:16.22,35:17.63,A这就是规则That's the rules.被告有没有罪不是根据律师的看法，所以以上这段话没有任何证明力，陪审团真的是些傻子？如果每次都能弄些新花样来是不是会把他们绕晕？综上，本案中DA拉人垫背，以为会遇到个软柿子，结果被donnell轻松化解
