in the era of wanton intrusion by the Republican Army, Gerry, a gangster in Belfast, was arrested on "unwarranted" charges.
When interrogating
"Why are you showing me these people?" when some unknown photos are placed in front of him, the protagonist can only ask this question.
When the interrogator pinched Gerry's ear and sang "Happy birthday to you" to him, what a personal insult to a person, and a great irony to the judicial system! Here, there is no humanity, no dignity, and no legal system, and some are only tortured to extract confessions, just twisted! The powerful palm behind his head left Gerry with nowhere to hide, so he could only habitually turn his head away. With the sheriff's "Why are you getting narky again? Are we touching a sore spot?" At this point, where is dignity, let alone justice.
"Did Annie make the bomb, Gerry?" and "Is Annie Marian, Gerry?" The interrogation used such leading questions, and the characters involved did not commit any crimes.
"He will do what he's told" is so confident when they don't get the answers they want, because they believe that with their omnipotent interrogation methods, the criminals in their eyes will definitely confess. "I'm gonna keep on asking until you giving me a fucking answer!" The so-called "answer" here is not the crime committed by Gerry, but the crime they think it is. All they do is not to get you to admit that you have committed it, but to admit that the crime they are alleging is yours.
"Tell'em to stop hurting me" Gerry was so helpless under the repeated injuries of the interrogators that he made his own voice to a new sheriff. After hearing Paul Hill's words, I can only use helpless crying to express my innocence and inner sorrow. This is a cry with nowhere to complain and nowhere to complain!
"There's you statement" When there was no substantial progress in the interrogation, there was already a formed confession, just waiting for the "prisoner" to be detained. "I didn't do this" "Please believe me" But, who will believe you, they really know you are innocent, but will they let you go easily? "Why are you doing to me" They do it for no other reason than to find a scapegoat to quell the anger of the people at the very moment, as a sheriff said "Our job is to stop the bombing". But how do they know that in order to maintain what they call "social order", they are doing this to ruin a person's reputation and his life and his entire family. This kind of "changing small for big" that goes against human rights is inappropriate, and it cannot harm personal interests under the banner of "social interests".
"I'm gonna shoot your da" "I'm goona shoot Giuseppe" Gerry's countryman faces Gerry with a pistol to his head while walking slowly out the door, hinting at the time when it will be fulfilled on Gerry's father , how unacceptable it was for a son who hated his father so ostensibly.
"Come on, let it all out" "Let it all out all that hatred" "You hate us, don't you?" "You hate us enough to bomb and maim" Sheriff induces sex again after series of intimidation Trying to get him to confess, Gerry didn't want to see them doing anything unfavorable to his father, and finally had no choice but to say "Give me the statement", and wasn't this result exactly what the interrogators wanted.
"They stuck a fucking gun in my mouth", "So I told'em a lot of bullshit" This is what Paul said to Gerry why he framed Gerry, not just to Gerry, they to anyone, just to get their To achieve this goal, all means can be used, especially intimidation.
Evidence
appraisers say "The results may not be good enough for court", but the police officer says "Your word will be good enough for the court" such dialogue makes us unable to believe the validity of the evidence, according to the "law of exclusion of illegal evidence", such Evidence is not admissible. But judicial officials ignored "procedural justice" and "valid evidence".
Pierce's lawyer found an amazing secret "Not to be shown to the defenee" in a search for information, which contained a strong proof of innocence, but the prosecution kept it secret.
Public opinion When
Gerry was taken to the South District of London, many people outside the prison shouted "Kill him, kill that fucker". Even the inmates in the prison scoffed at Gerry. Could this be the so-called "public opinion". Whether the "public opinion" under the wrong guidance of the judicial system is considered public opinion is debatable.
On the way Gerry and others were taken to the courthouse, "Public Opinion" appeared again, "Kill the bastards! Kill'em!" "Shoot the bastards! We have to believe that "Public Opinion" may sometimes be a momentary moment for the deceived people Indignation, "public opinion" is not always the real public opinion. The
court finally ruled "Guilty as charged". The people in the back row stood up excitedly, applauded and cheered, and the public opinion was once again reflected. Faced with such public opinion, we can't help feeling that judicial The power and darkness of the system, without the knowledge of the public, they can use public opinion to guide public opinion and make more people believe that they are right. But only these people really want to know, we as the public are being Blinded, the ultimate victim is the spearhead of the judicial system.
With the great efforts of Pierce lawyer, many people stood by her side and shouted "Free the four" for the aggrieved person. Public opinion reappeared, different Yes, this time it was taken advantage of by the forces of justice. With the support of public opinion, public opinion developed in the direction of Gerry and others, and after the news media exaggeration, Guildford Four finally received the attention of the high level of the country. And all these seem to be Good omen. The most ironic scene of the
phenomenon
happened first above the courthouse. The judge held his glass leisurely, his feet were recklessly on the table in front of him, which was a great insult to the legal system. Believe in the fairness of legal judgment. At this time and here, the legal system has been completely destroyed. How real is reflected in the two feet. And in the seat, there are people walking the dog, in what a sacred place, in a place where justice should be manifested, However, it has become a place for some people to have fun. How can we expect these people to do justice, how can we expect justice to be served, and how can we expect unjust cases to be rehabilitated. These two scenes fully reflect the corruption of the judicial system at that time. .
In court, "All of the defendants claim that they were subjected to physical and mental abuse while in police custody", and the sheriff denied all the torture used in the trial. In the prosecution, "I'm bound to say I don't find you very convincing", just because one side is a person who has committed theft, and the other side is ten police officers who are reputable and sworn testimony. Although this argument seems reasonable and reasonable on the surface, in essence, it uses a moral level to cover up the prosecution's violation of "procedural justice". Even if the police are on the side of justice, and everything they have done before is not illegal, how can they guarantee that they will be right this time.
When the defense lawyer said "You should find these young people not guilty", someone in the gallery immediately protested against "Bollocks", which once again verified what the defense lawyer said, people are caught in the whirlpool of passion, they only know how to use emotions, but No evidence, so he called "not to get caught up in this tide of mass hysteria". When the case has not been finally heard and the charges have not yet been determined, the prosecution's lawyer guided everyone to "The four people you see in the front are one of the most cunning and cruel criminal conspiracies ever to set foot on English soil".
real murderer
The real criminal shows up and he says something like "You have innocent people in jail for that" and even though he admits that Guildford pub bombing was what he did, the judiciary didn't do anything, they didn't do anything for the mistakes they made They would rather do a wrongful case than admit to wrongful accusations and judgments they have made without any correction. This is just for the face of the judicial system, and let innocent people take the place of their mistakes.
Five years after the conclusion of the Guildford Four case, similar cases, similar circumstances, and similar results have appeared in my country again. The "Nie Shubin case" that most people know about. More than ten years after Nie Shubin was executed, the real murderer appeared. The murderer admitted that he committed the crime at the time, but Hebei did not respond, nor did he do what he should have done to Wang Shujin. The verdict did not rehabilitate Nie Shubin. The reason is only because of the interests behind the case. Once the Hebei High Court admits that the case is unjust, someone must be held responsible for it. Certain position sacrifices are inevitable, and they know the result, so they refuse to overturn the case. In addition, Nie Shubin is dead, and he will inevitably suffer huge censure after the case is overturned. But what shocks us is that to this day, the case has not been properly handled. What is the occasional high efficiency of the judicial system? Where is fairness? Where is justice? How this convinces us of today's judicial system!
Humanity
When the inmates knew of Giuseppe's death, they spontaneously lit the paper. As a tribute to the deceased, the falling flames shone with a lot of humanity. Although these people have made big mistakes, they have not lost their humanity or lost their conscience. They still know the love between people. What a stark contrast to the sympathy of the inmates for their fellow men and the hypocrisy of the judicial officials is another scourge and ruthless irony of the judicial system.
family Education
"Don't hurt my father" is the minimum expectation of a person in a cage, as long as it doesn't hurt my father. No matter how disharmonious the father and son may seem, there is actually a deep love for each other between father and son. But the plot took another turn. Although the son loved his father, when the father was locked up with him, the two began to quarrel again. “The only fucking medal that was ever in our house. That fucking medal. The medal I won at football” “and you could only see what I was doing wrong. I could never do anything good enough for you” “Gerry, did you "foul the ball" In the son's statement of some things, we can briefly see the son's growth line, and in this and the son's current situation, we see how important the father plays, and the father plays a role in the son's later also bear unshirkable responsibility for what they do. From the dialogue below, we have a deeper understanding that the reason why Gerry has come to this point has a great connection with his father, just because his father is not sure about him and even skeptical.
"And that's when I started to rob, to prove that I was no good" When the son needed his father's encouragement most in the process of growing up, the father always gave it a blow, so that the young and ignorant son embarked on the same path as his father's expectations. divergent paths. "I've been like this since I was seven" 7 years old, an age that needs love and support, a child who needs love and support, but has embarked on a road of no return under the repeated doubts of his father. "I started to tell lies..." "I've been telling all my gobshite fucking life", Gerry's stealing and lying are not in his nature, but out of a kind of rebellion, when he can't fully distinguish right from wrong a kind of resistance.
No matter how much a father loves his son, we can clearly see that the father's education is a failure. Not only did he not let his son develop in the direction he expected, but he was getting farther and farther from his vision. This is the failure of family education. When a person makes a mistake, we should not blame ourselves too much, and we should not be too eager for the society, but should reflect on the responsibility of the family at the same time. We should pay attention to the role of the family in crime prevention. As the so-called "parents are the best teachers for children", in order to cultivate people who are harmless to society, the family must first make great efforts, and parents must truly care for themselves children, and cannot always teach them the way they think is right.
As a result,
at the end of the film, Guildford Four, who should have been acquitted, only got the Queen's pardon. "In the name of my father and of the truth", fight against the injustice of justice in the name of truth!
Summarize
this true story, although passed, but all the plot is worthy of our deep reflection: how to establish an effective mechanism to prevent such things from happening again. In the judicial process, "procedural fairness" should be unswervingly adhered to; the "principle of exclusion of unreasonable evidence" should be adhered to; the judiciary should be independent, and the judiciary should not be influenced by public opinion or under the leadership of party and government organs; criterion".
Guildford Four has been rehabilitated, when will my country's "Nie Shubin" be rehabilitated?
View more about In the Name of the Father reviews
