The story takes place in Philadelphia, USA in the 1990s. Andrew and Miller are young and promising lawyers, each with their own masters. Andrew is actually a homosexual and an AIDS patient, and he has not made it public in the company because of his boss's discrimination against homosexuals and AIDS patients. At that time, American society still held a discriminatory attitude towards people with AIDS, and even more disgusted attitude towards homosexuals. So when Andrew's bosses found the scar on his forehead caused by AIDS, they were disgusted, they framed Andrew and fired him for his poor work. Andrew was the most highly valued able-bodied person by his boss, and he was responsible for all the major cases in the firm, but he was fired for an unwarranted reason. fair treatment. Even though he knew that there were not many days left, Andrew resolutely decided to find a lawyer to sue the boss of the law firm.
Faced with Andrew's pleas, Miller was initially reluctant to take up the case because he also hated gays. But after hearing his wife say that many of his relatives and friends are gay and seeing Andrew being scorned by librarians and readers when he inquired about "AIDS discrimination" in the library, he decided to help Andrew overcome discrimination. Miller was an excellent lawyer, and he finally won the case with a lawsuit that makes all those who value equality and fairness proud and excited. The movie fully shows the US court system, and the success of the lawsuit is not only related to the trial system, but also to the US principle of equality and justice.
First of all, a major feature of the American court system is the jury system. The jury is selected from the community, has legal knowledge, and can maintain a neutral and objective attitude. The defendant in the case can choose to be decided by a judge or by a jury to try the case involving itself. The first scene of the trial in The Philadelphia Story is Miller's statement to the jury about the defendant's indictment and the associated statement of evidence: "The moral and humane fact is that they fired Andrew Beckett because he had AIDS. They broke the law." The defendant's lawyer then presented a defense statement to the jury. Evidence provided in court depends on jurors to identify its authenticity, so lawyers for both the prosecution and defense try their best to make all jurors agree with their own evidence and opinions. Because the final verdict is made by a jury, persuading the jury is the key to winning the case. Since jurors are drawn and selected among citizens, they represent the society's ideas to a certain extent, and the jury's verdict is trustworthy and credible most of the time. The role of the judge in the jury system is generally the role of the presiding officer, that is, presiding over the conduct of the court proceedings. In the movie, when one lawyer asks unreasonable questions to the witness, the other lawyer will raise an objection request, and the judge should decide whether the objection is valid. During the trial, Miller's lawyer was emotional many times, and the judge questioned and warned him about his behavior. In the end, the jurors discussed in the discussion room. Most of them believed that the boss of the law firm fired Andrew because of homosexuality and AIDS discrimination. This behavior violated the laws of the United States. The jury ended up with 11. A ratio of 1 to 1 passed the indemnity clause.
Another major feature of the American court system is the adversarial system. The principle is that to find out the truth of a criminal or civil system, the best way is for lawyers representing both parties to do their best to defend their respective parties, and the truth will naturally come out. Presented in the challenges and doubts of lawyers on both sides. In "Philadelphia Story", Andrew, several of his bosses and colleagues have to act as witnesses to accept questions from lawyers on both sides. Word games in the courtroom are undoubtedly a very attractive place for the trial, both for the prosecution and the defense as well as for the witnesses. Lawyers try to obtain evidence that is beneficial to their own side by changing their words, so the most commonly used language for lawyers is to answer yes or no to me. However, witnesses usually try to avoid falling into the trap of lawyers. The confrontation between lawyers is not only reflected in the verbal statement, but also in the high vigilance and active opposition of the opposing lawyer's unreasonable questions. Of course, it is also reflected in the diametrically opposed interpretation of the evidence. In the film, the defendant's lawyer tried to prove that Andrew had no scars on his face, but Miller immediately suggested that Andrew take off his shirt so that the jury could see the scars caused by AIDS. It strongly supports the fact that the boss of the firm fired Andrew after discovering the scar on Andrew's face and suspecting that he was infected with AIDS.
In addition, the United States is a country that adopts the common law system. The most distinctive feature of the common law system is that judges have the right and power to interpret the law. In addition to direct rules, judges also use the principle of following precedents. Miller was willing to take Andrew's case because he had heard case law making it illegal to discriminate against people with AIDS: "The Federal Rehabilitation Act, 1973, prohibits discrimination against persons with disabilities as long as they can take a job, although the statute does not mention it. Discrimination against AIDS.... But the subsequent resolution stipulated that AIDS is also a disability, not only because of the patient's physical limitations, but also because of the discrimination by the society, which is regarded as dead in the society, and this discrimination exceeds the physical pain. "According to this law, the owner of the law firm is illegal and needs to compensate the victim for huge losses (the final sentence was $4.782 million). Out of the professional lawyer's sense of justice, Miller is obliged to act as the prosecution lawyer.
The United States has a stable and long modern legal history, but society and the times are constantly changing, and a law cannot be applied permanently. And development. On the issue of discrimination, Mrs. Parks bravely said no to the segregation system. Martin Luther King's nonviolent resistance movement eventually led the court to rule that the segregation system in Tennessee was unconstitutional. The pioneers fought again and again in exchange for a ban Discrimination case law, when discrimination or other prejudice occurs, as long as someone dares to stand up and fight for their rights, it can eventually be supported according to case law, and gradually be understood and tolerated by the society. Racism is like this, homosexuality is like this, AIDS is like this.
Finally, it is still necessary to reaffirm the spirit of pursuing freedom and equality in the trial process. The confrontation between lawyers and firm bosses in court itself embodies the precious principle of equality before the law. The judge has a line in the film: "In the courtroom, justice has nothing to do with race, creed, color, or sexual orientation!" And Miller replies, "Shouldn't that be the case outside of the courtroom?" The answer is, of course, yes, because I The spirit of freedom and equality has long been deeply rooted in the hearts of every American and even the people of every country in the world. No one can shake its status. All reasonable demands for freedom and equality will surely be realized through hard work!
View more about Philadelphia reviews
