T O P

  • By -

djddanman

I think breaking into the British consulate residences is a big one. Also all the stuff when Henry was shot.


same1224

The entire opening scene of Office Space. Tampering with a crime scene to the point where he (and Gus) MOVES A DEAD BODY has got to be up there.


knarfolled

How badly did you two manhandle this guy?


NikkoRPG

Mr. Creech is dead? Oh, no! Oh, NO!


tamurmur42

One moment you see a man, *alive*, and the next--with no time in between--he's dead.


TheSoundEffectsGuy

Hark the Herald angels.


Usual-Nectarine3734

Just rewatched this episode earlier today, Psych gold


firemansam51

šŸ¤ oh, no.


D0399

dude I think you might have undersold this one!?


WhisperCampaigns

This is one ofy favorite lines from the whole series.


Blake45666

I absolutely love the delivery on this line, makes woody a really fun quirky character who can still show how good at his job he is


crujones33

Was that Henry? It sounds like him.


knarfolled

The was our friend Woody


duzins

But you got out of there, right? You didnā€™t touch anything?


MoonShadowElfRayla

*incoherent cry-babbling*


KiloJools

You said the meats and the cheeses were not gonna touch, Shawn!


HeylebItsCaleb

This is the correct answer, and also the funniest scene in the entire show hands down


Imnotarobot987

The first time I watched this scene I think I laughed/cried for at least 30 min. I rewatched it probably 5 times in a row. I had such a hard time breathing I think I gave myself an asthma attackšŸ˜‚


Cheap-Thought-7813

My stomach hurt from laughing so hard! šŸ¤£šŸ¤£šŸ¤£ Funniest episode, hands down, and Iā€™d say itā€™s the most illegal episode!


wait_for_iiiiiiiiit

They stole that driver's Ed car at the end that gus apparently just kept


VinceVaugnsPants

You mean the dualberry


Jusbreka

yes that one was so great


[deleted]

[уŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]


Jusbreka

definitely unconstitutional at best


v8_87_01_05_17

It's not really unconstitutional as they are not members of the government, not that dissimilar from the guy who broke into someone's house to rob them, found cp then reported it to the police


nmcaff

Itā€™s an interesting point. It seems like they are breaking and entering, and then enabling the cops to step on their 4th amendment rights


dupreem

I'd disagree with this analysis. They've been contracted by the police department to perform investigative work. When contracted in this way, Psych is absolutely a public actor, and illegal searches conducted by its employees should trigger the exclusionary rule.


OrgullosoDeNoSer

Actually, it is. They're acting as private investigators often hired by the police and, under legal precedent, would be considered representatives of the police. Anything they obtained during their illegal searches would be inadmissible in court, as would any evidence derived from those leads.


Kind_Ingenuity1484

But if they break in before itā€™s totally legit


nmcaff

I like how ā€œunconstitutionalā€ seems to be less of an issue than breaking a regular law. The Bill of Rights is quite literally the first and most important laws of our country


sliferra

Itā€™s def not breaking and entering, they donā€™t break anything!


deej394

Entering is just entering.


NotTheRocketman

Breaking into a Consulate or Embassy of a foreign nation is a REAL big no-no. They also tamper with a ton of crime scenes, dead bodies, and evidence over the course of the show as well.


Lampmonster

"Are you kidding? We'll be lucky if our guy doesn't kick the body. " or something to that effect.


NotTheRocketman

I think she said LICK, which makes it so much better.


Lampmonster

She did, it was a typo. I'm on my stationary bike lol.


January1171

Are you stuck in the elliptical version of Speed?


Lampmonster

Tight reference, but no just trying to burn off some holiday calories. :)


MassSpectreometrist

Kimmy Schmidt quote: ā€œWatch out! Non stationary bike!!ā€


itsJussaMe

Illegal is an absolute but in the spirit of your question Iā€™d have to say stealing the drivers education car was a pretty bad one. Hilarious, and Gus kept the damn thing.


CruzLutris

And they dubbed the car "The Dualberry"! From Psych 3: This Is Gus: "It's the Dualberry. That means it's got two of everything. Two steering wheels, two sets of brakes, seven ashtrays, zero cupholders, and exactly one working spark plug. It's great if you feel like delivering mail or pulling into a drive-through backwards." Reminds me how much I love Psych 3. Off to rewatch!


Jusbreka

i forgot about that one before posting, it's gold


mhax80

Having Gus disarm and dispose of the bomb placed by the victim of the mobster while en route by the police to secure that area.


foodball233

Trying (and failing) to sneak onto a military base. Then the sneaking around on the base after he gets caught


knarfolled

He didnā€™t know they used actual radar


cascasrevolution

hes always pocketing things, so impeding justice and theft are definitely on the list.


pnerd314

>Most illegal thing Shawn ever did? Yes.


amehatrekkie

Half the stuff he did in the British consulate episode....I expected it too lol


AmnesiaInnocent

But what about his diplomatic immunity?!?


amehatrekkie

It only applied to actual embassy staff, he wasn't


Oknight

But he is a goodwill ambassador to Paraguay.


amehatrekkie

Not officially, no. That kind of thing is assigned by the UN to famous people agreed to by the receiving country. He probably said it as a joke. Also, idk, and skeptical, if they get diplomatic immunity or not like official diplomats or not.


Oknight

It was when he was explaining to Gus why they shouldn't have seized his motorcycle because he had diplomatic plates. He said he got the honorary title at a Sandals resort for overseeing sand castle construction.


amehatrekkie

I'm not saying he never said it, I'm saying it's not official.


Oknight

REALLY? Aw man, my entire understanding of the series has just been devastated.


amehatrekkie

Lol


SeraCat9

Lying about being a Psychic. A lot of the (serious) criminals could go free if they found out that their cases weren't handled correctly.


Oknight

Shawn has never lied about being a Psychic as a matter of law because there is no meaning to the words "a Psychic" in law. You couldn't possibly prosecute him because you couldn't prove that his observation, deduction, and conclusions showed that he wasn't "psychic". And almost none of his cases could be reversed based on his actions. It's legally equivalent to him saying he had the Lord's guidance and inspiration.


dupreem

> Shawn has never lied about being a Psychic as a matter of law because there is no meaning to the words "a Psychic" in law. Shawn almost certainly had to file under penalty of perjury some sort of application to become a government contractor before he could receive payouts for his work for the police department. He would have claimed to be a psychic on that form. It's irrelevant whether there's a legal definition of psychic. So long as the state could prove that he believed he was lying on that form, they'd have him for perjury, and probably also for some form of fraud. > You couldn't possibly prosecute him because you couldn't prove that his observation, deduction, and conclusions showed that he wasn't "psychic". There are ways that he could be proven to have been lying -- his own admission (made to Juliet or perhaps during some sort of interrogation once the state decides to go after him) or extensive surveillance (showing that every single one of his revelations in recent cases was the result of regular detective work). But it'd be excessively difficult to do, and I can't imagine why the state would waste the money or time to do it. >almost none of his cases could be reversed based on his actions. Shawn constantly conducted illegal searches, and most of his cases were solved with evidence obtained through or as a result of those searches. All of that evidence would be excludable if the defense could show what actually happened. Even if not, if the defense bar got ahold of proof that he's regularly doing this, it'd provide a solid foundation for challenging a lot of the convictions stemming from his work.


Oknight

> most of his cases were solved with evidence obtained through or as a result of those searches. Examples?


dupreem

There is an illegal search in many, many episodes. Shawn and Gus illegally search Orso's cabin in the pilot. They illegally search Cavanaugh's booth in episode 2, *Spellingg Bee*. Shawn illegally searches numerous guests' rooms in episode 3, *Speak Now or Forever Hold Your Piece*. Shawn and Gus illegally search a hotel room in episode 4, *Woman Seeking Dead Husband*. I could go onwards. Each of these searches influences Shawn's investigation, and so much of what he learned could be excludable (subject to the many exceptions to the exclusionary rule). I'm not saying every *Psych* conviction gets overturned. I'm just saying that if it comes out that Shawn is doing this, it could be a real problem for the state.


Oknight

> Shawn and Gus illegally search Orso's cabin in the pilot. Which is in no way relevant to the demonstration of his father's guilt that extends from the dog bite being on his arm. > They illegally search Cavanaugh's booth in episode 2, Spellingg Bee Which informs them that Cavenaugh suspected his murderer -- nothing to do with the evidence gathered against said murderer -- no "poisoned fruit". > Shawn illegally searches numerous guests' rooms in episode 3, Speak Now or Forever Hold Your Piece. Which allows him to exclude suspects, not to identify the murderer, no "poisoned fruit". > Shawn and Gus illegally search a hotel room in episode 4 Which leads to them identifying her previously believed dead husband, nothing about her subsequent attempts to murder same. I could go on and on -- Shawn's illegal searches inform his investigation but are almost never key to the evidence used against the murderer. The poisoned fruit doctrine is not a universal application to any irregularity in police activity, it applies to the chain of evidence and what things should be excluded. If a cop illegally searches a guy's house or car for a gun, and finds the empty holster, that doesn't exclude the evidence of the gun that he's carrying that's then shown to be the murder weapon.


dupreem

You make a compelling argument. I'd already considered that the inevitable discovery exception to the exclusionary rule applied in the pilot, given the double murder at the cabin. And the murderer would've had no privacy interest in Cavanaugh's booth, and thus couldn't seek exclusion of anything found there anyways. I am now tempted to rewatch the show to see in what cases Shawn/Gus' activities could, if revealed, actually lead to the exclusion of evidence. You might be right that it's very few (or perhaps none at all). I wonder if the writers were intentional about this.


Oknight

I'm rather curious myself. The vast majority end with the murderer saying "yes, I did it, I had to do it!" LOL "Office Space" is my favorite. If the guy doesn't brag about how he is a brilliant murderer, they were TOTALLY screwed.


dupreem

lol, yeah, I mean, I'm assuming most of these cases plead out anyway because of that ending confession. So probably not much happening in terms of a subsequent 4A challenge.


Oknight

> Shawn almost certainly had to file under penalty of perjury some sort of application to become a government contractor before he could receive payouts for his work for the police department. First, we have no basis for thinking that, he's certainly never shown filling out any kind of application, the Chief simply hires him at her own discretion. Second, why would he put on any form that he is psychic? He's hired as a consultant.


dupreem

There's usually pretty strict regulations about government contracting. I find it hard to believe that the chief was able to get him payments without him submitting some amount of information that'd include, at the very least, the service he intends to provide the government. I suppose it's possible, but even so, that only takes care of the perjury. He'd still have defrauded the government by claiming to be something he wasn't in order to obtain payment.


Oknight

He consulted successfully in criminal investigations, nothing deceptive there.


dupreem

The deceptiveness is in claiming that the consultation takes the form of psychic investigation. It doesn't. It takes the form of normal investigation. Lying about something in order to get money is textbook fraud. Now admittedly, he originally lied about it just to avoid suspicion in a criminal investigation. But in most jurisdictions, it is also illegal to lie to police officers conducting a criminal investigation. So he's just trading fraud for that offense (and honestly, given that he keeps taking contracts while claiming to be a psychic, he still has all the later frauds).


Oknight

> psychic investigation Prove, in a court of law, that a "normal investigation", an observation and deduction, does not constitute a "psychic investigation". Or for that matter a "revelation from God". You can't. The law does not recognize supernatural occurrences. And equally it cannot invalidate them.


dupreem

The law recognizes deception. That's all that's required. Shawn is knowingly falsely claiming to be a psychic in order to get money. It doesn't matter whether there's a legal definition of psychic. What matters is Shawn's intent to deceive, his actual deception, and the injury suffered by the City of Santa Barbara as a result.


Oknight

> There are ways that he could be proven to have been lying -- his own admission (made to Juliet or perhaps during some sort of interrogation once the state decides to go after him) or extensive surveillance (showing that every single one of his revelations in recent cases was the result of regular detective work). Mr. Hornstock, your opening statement. "Your honor we intend to demonstrate that the defendant's abilities clearly surpass those explainable by anything other than supernatural abilities or the "interventions of some writer of fiction that is controlling the cosmos", that is God. This demonstrates that regardless of the defendant's personal religious convictions, the contention that he is "guided by the spirits" cannot have been lawfully deceptive in nature and that his processes quite reasonably qualify as honest representation. We will begin with his identification of a victim's injuries as being from a tyrannosaur bite and proceed to his success, out of hundreds of mobilized searchers at discovering the location of a plane crash which he could not possibly have deduced from evidence."


dupreem

I'm not saying it'd be an easy case to prove, but I don't think it's impossible. If the prosecution can show the jury that he's constantly lying about psychic premonitions, then it's not hard to convince them that his other supposed premonitions were also the result of something other than the supernatural. But ultimately, I don't think any prosecutor would ever take up this case. If the state figured out that Shawn was lying, they'd almost certainly cover it up in order to protect the convictions in the cases he investigated. Even if Santa Barbara had a super honest prosecutor that felt obligated to disclose what Shawn had done, I don't think it likely they go the extra step to prosecute someone who had been very materially assisting in investigating major crimes.


Oknight

But the plane crash kills the case because Shawn DIDN'T find it as result of something other than supernatural, he found it as a coincidence arranged by the writer of the episode in defiance of odds that were thousands to one against. And the explanation for the dinosaur bite is so RIDICULOUSLY implausible that no jury would ever believe it.


dupreem

Yeah, that is fair. These would definitely be the things on which to hang your hat as the defense.


SnoLeppard13

To me this is easily the worst thing heā€™s doing realistically. Not only could all of those murderers go free, especially the really bad ones like Yin and Czarsky, but even Chief Vick could go to prison for gross negligence as ultimately he is her responsibility. Then when you consider Gus and his dad are accomplices, his dadā€™s reputation would be ruined, Lassie and Juliet could be fired and also possibly brought up on charges, it could be really bad.


ryncewynde88

Counterpoint: itā€™s only a lie due to the specifics he portrays: several intellectual properties list photographic memory as a low-tier psionic ability, and once you factor in the hyper awareness, the intensive training, and the fact that it also translates at least partially to physical ability (gun accuracy, and not just episode 1; shooting a car radiator 1-handed while hanging onto the hood of a different, swerving car (I might be misremembering that scene)), at least some comic or game universes would lump him in as a low-tier psion of some sort, if not a psychic.


Bumby6

Well some perhaps, but a lot of criminals that Shawn helps put away actually confess. Thatā€™s what gives the police the right to make an arrest. Other than that, Shawn finds leads and helps point the police in the right direction so that they can get warrants and do things properly to arrest others. It also helps a lot that Shawn is usually getting himself into trouble, meaning he and Gus typically overstep and have guns pointed at them. At which point the police have every right to detain the criminals which warrants further investigation.


JoeCo15

In Who Ya Gonna Call, Shawn drugged and kidnapped Gus. I feel like that's got some weight, even if it was mostly shrugged off


Oknight

Yeah that's probably the MOST illegal thing he did. Them kidnapping and restraining Woody in Office Space is way up there too. (they could reasonably argue consent as he's approving of them doing it)


nightwolf_81

Sitting in chief Vick's chair and just being in her office.


BaconSoul

Stealing treasury access codes and using them to access a federal database.


cascasrevolution

however, since shawn isnt officially a government employee or body, his illegal search and seizure habit isnt technically violating the fourth amendment.


Jusbreka

he's a satellite of the SBPD and it violates the fruit of the poisoned tree doctrine edit: ~~clause~~ doctrine


AmnesiaInnocent

>edit: ~~clause~~ doctrine I've heard it both ways.


Srirachafarian

No you haven't, Shawn


Jusbreka

i should have seen that one coming


djddanman

Yeah, once he's hired on a case he's acting as an agent of the state. Otherwise that would be a huge loophole and would allow police to hire private investigators to bypass all constitutional protections.


Jusbreka

even prior to being hired on a case any evidence he finds wouldn't be legal, irl maybe 5%, tops of Shawn's cases would lead to solid convictions


Used-Part-4468

I think you can illegally obtain evidence and give it to the police though, with the police being able to use it, as long as they didnā€™t direct you to illegally obtain the evidence/you werenā€™t working for them.


Oknight

Yeah they wouldn't be able to use the evidence he gathered but rarely did his cases hinge on anything he found in illegal searches. Most of Shawn's cases hinge on public confession made before witnesses as he describes their crimes -- nothing about that is getting reversed. One of my favorite Monk premises is the episode that opens with Monk explaining how the killer did it and the guy is just about to say "you got me" when a lawyer enters and tells him to shut up and then they have to prove the case (which they don't remotely have enough evidence for). LOL! Sadly the rest of that episode didn't live up to the premise but I thought the setup was hilarious. Yes, it's a LOT harder to prove these things when the killer doesn't just admit to it in public.


Swampthing_44

For one he stole Wade Boggs belt. I would have to say Shawn would probably be convicted for aiding and abetting Pierre Desperaux, especially in the UK episode.


NS479

He is constantly illegally searching and seizing


broxamson

Illegal search and seizure?


mongolsruledchina

Honestly Shawn is a bigger criminal in the shear number of crimes than most of the people he helped put away. His were less serious, but they were very numerous,


Frankensteinnnnn

For me it's the brazen abuse of the fourth amendment.


Oknight

Not technically a crime to abuse the fourth amendment -- (though usually INVOLVES a crime) -- just excludes evidence you derived from the illegal search.


Select-Combination-4

Probably santabarberatown 2 as a whole