Show191
Hard to sympathize with ANYONE in this episode. First young "Timmy" Balfour. One of the most unlikable defendants Perry ever represented. Maybe it was just the actor's lack of skill, but he kept pouting his lips and whining to everyone about everything. It came off totally insincere. "My mom and dad would still be alive if it wasn't for you. I wish I had the courage to leave. Poor me!" He said this as he hugged the wall and kicked the ground. It's not just courage you lack Timmy. It's money and a job. For a kid who claimed his parents didn't have enough to eat or a place to stay, he was awfully careless with other people's money. He had only lived in LA for 3 months and already had a sports car, fancy house, and money for the asking. I couldn't help thinking that this kid NEEDED a stay in jail to show him how the world works. Then when he fired a gun and dropped it next to the "body," I started to wonder whether the script wrote the character as much younger than the actor actually was. When Timmy says, "what kind of person do you think I am," I wish Perry had answered him honestly. Timmy was irresponsible, stupid, unaccountable, and completely without street smarts. Totally unsympathetic character. It seemed like even Raymond Burr was disgusted by him. He wore a permanent angry face every time he shared space with "Timmy."
For the first time, we had someone complain that Perry took a call in their house. Luke Balfour was another one of the most unlikable characters we've seen on the show. He was downright rude to Perry (and everyone else.) He ordered Perry to watch Timmy, but then refused to tell him why. How did he expect Paul to know what to look for if he didn't know why he was there? On top of everything else he was a hypocrite. He called Timmy a juvenile delinquent for speeding tickets when he was one DUI away from losing his license for good. A person who gets behind the wheel drunk is far more of a menace than a leadfoot kid.
Even the housekeeper's "good intentions" were idiotic. Her solution to Timmy's problem was to steal money from her employer. She claimed this was to prevent him being upset by another family problem. But how did she think he would react when he found his money had been stolen? Incidentally, why should it kill the grandfather to hear the kid got into a fender bender? He already knew about the kid's speeding tickets and didn't seem to mind. Knowing what we know about her future plans, it wasn't clear why she even went through the charade of helping Timmy. Very few sympathetic characters in this episode.
The character name “Greasy Neal” must be a play on the name of the famous football coach, Alfred Earle “Greasy” Neale. Submitted by Ed Zoerner, 5/11/2009.
I guess things were different back in the 60's. But it's tough to see a guy who robs a liquor store wearing a coat and tie as much of a thug! Submitted by Paul's Operative. 3/31/2024.
The Summary exaggerates a bit. As Mason points out to Luke Balfour, the sum total of young Tim’s police record is two speeding tickets and one charge of reckless driving. Submitted by gracenote, 2/26/2011.
Dollar Bill: Notice the Silver Certificate bill that Luke offered to Tim. This show was made just about the time the government started to issue the Federal Reserve Note in $1 denominations. Submitted by H. Mason 3/11/15 - revised 4/1/15
Unless I missed something, Della has no lines in this episode!
What was that opening bit all about? Did Chick and Greasy rob the store? Did they harm the owner? Why was the character of Greasy even introduced - he only appears again as a courtroom spectator.
It seems odd that just after blowing up in Mason’s office, Luke Balfour should call Mason to arrange for a detective to follow Tim. DODay 12/29/17
+ The opening gambit served to show the characters of those involved, and to implicate Tim in illegal activity in order to give Chick initial/additional leverage over Tim. jfh 23Jan2020.
"The Case of the Lucky Loser, Episode 2.0." This episode seems to revive plot elements from Episode #41, "The Case of the Lucky Loser." We are introduced again to a dysfunctional family named Balfour that includes a bed-ridden wealthy old man, his young ne'er-do-well relative and potential heir, and the possibility of the latter's involvement in a "hit-and-run accident" that winds up being a hoax. Submitted by BobH, 15 November 2017.
The conclusion is really frustrating. How in the world did Mason come up with all of Edith’s machinations? How did she alienate all those people? How would anyone, especially Mason figure that out? Too many questions are left unanswered. It feels a little phony. Submitted by gracenote, 2/26/2011.
Agree. The basic premise is intriguing, though, and really needed more time to flesh out. DOD 01/23/20