From the main line of the male protagonist of the police, the multi-character lines tell the story of this terrorist attack.
There are moving touches, and there are blunt statements about the triumph of love.
A month later, when I think about the film, it's blurred, and only one plot is clear in this blur - the arrested woman loses her rights under the law.
Indeed, after watching the plot of a murder, this woman could not be innocent, and she could not have been responsible for the incident. Even after her arrest, she refrained from revealing information about the attack because of her beliefs.
In this way, at the moment of her arrest, no public official read her rights.
"The Constitution requires me to inform you of the following rights: You have the right to remain silent, or everything you say may be given as evidence! If you cannot afford a lawyer, we will provide you with a lawyer for free. During the interrogation process, you can ask to exercise these rights at any time without answering questions or making any statements. If you wish to speak to a lawyer, you can Stop answering questions at any time, and you can have a lawyer with you all the time."
The protagonist has doubts about this.
This kind of policy of special practices in special times is actually understandable and acceptable.
When a person may cause great harm to the society, for the safety of the vast majority of people, the suspect's right to plead is temporarily deprived to ensure the stability and security of the society.
But who defines the criteria for when to deprive suspects of their rights? How long does deprivation take for the person to regain their rights? What if they are innocent suspects?
Maybe I'm being too idealistic.
The two were talking together, and neither could hear what each other was saying. One person speaking and one person listening can make the conversation go smoothly.
I won't go further.
View more about Patriots Day reviews
