After she recovers photographs of her spouse raping her, a respected lawyer battles for justice to transform South Carolina?s viewpoints on marital rape.

First of all, I second what dpg says: changing viewpoint is not what lawyers fight for. She needs to change the system. The law itself.

I don't understand the inciting incident. Recover from whom? If her husband has raped her once, recovering the photographs does not sound like a strong enough inciting incident. The rape itself sounds like an inciting incident.

On the other hand, if her husband has been raping her for years, what is it that pushes her into defending herself now? Again, recovering some evidence is not an inciting incident, but part of the defense.

Finally, why have the lawyer and the victim be the same person? Consider splitting them into two characters. I have a hunch that this would create a more interesting cast.

>>transform South Carolina's viewpoints on marital rape.

Shouldn't her objective goal be to change the state laws? ?

A logline should be specific. It should be laser focused on a specific objective goal.

>>transform South Carolina's viewpoints on marital rape.

Shouldn't her objective goal be to change the state laws? ?

A logline should be specific. It should be laser focused on a specific objective goal.