This paper analyzes the character of Saul Goodman (a.k.a. Jimmy McGill) from Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul as a case of moral disengagement, neutralization, and ethical drift in a professional role. Drawing on Bandura’s theory of moral disengagement and Sykes and Matza’s techniques of neutralization, it examines how Saul justifies, reframes, and compartmentalizes unethical behavior while constructing a deviant professional identity. The analysis highlights mechanisms such as moral justification, euphemistic labeling, displacement of responsibility, and advantageous comparison, and traces their evolution as Jimmy McGill becomes Saul Goodman and, eventually, Gene Takovic. The paper offers a criminologically informed synthesis of disengagement, neutralization, and identity transformation as an interpretive lens for understanding the cognitive scaffolding of white-collar deviance on screen. It also considers the analytical and secondary pedagogical value of fictional antiheroes for exploring legal ethics, moral ambiguity, and professional misconduct. Saul’s eventual confession is read as a hybrid moment of legal accountability and moral re-engagement rather than a simple redemption arc.
Madsen et al. (Thu,) studied this question.