This movie can be described as a surprise masterpiece at the end of 2022, and I rate it as the best suspense of 2022. Different people see issues from different perspectives. As an undergraduate legal dog, I intend to analyze several major issues in this case (this drama) from the perspective of jurisprudence and criminal procedure law, so as to be worthy of this drama.
The outline of the story is that a soldier who served in the Afghan war was indicted in court on the charge of intentional killing of civilians. A smart lawyer seized the main evidence of the case, the videotape, and invited an expert in photography and videography as a witness to conduct cross-examination. In the process, they discovered a problem with the military headset: the sound and picture were out of sync, there was a delay of about 5 seconds, so it could not be used as evidence.
But on the night the soldier was released, the lawyer disappeared. CCTV showed that the soldier attacked the lawyer and took him away. During the investigation, a female police officer found that there was a problem with CCTV, which was synthesized by technical means (correction, commonly known as AI face-changing technology), and replaced another person's face with the soldier's face. The policewoman took a stab at it and finally set the target at the anti-terrorist technology department, because the anti-terrorist technology department often uses AI to change faces to create evidence and arrest people suspected of terrorist crimes. It turns out that this AI face-changing is the lawyer team wanting to use the popularity of the military to create a case: during the military court trial, the main evidence CCTV will be forged by the lawyer, in order to expose the illegal means of forging evidence and framing citizens by the anti-terrorism technical department. Unexpectedly, the anti-terrorist department decided to do whatever it took, and would rather kill the female lawyer than expose her technical means.
The show has constant twists and turns, ups and downs, and at the same time cuts to the theme and satirizes Trump in a very clever way. What impressed me the most was the dialogue between the head of the counter-terrorism technology department and the female police officer: "Correction is not fake evidence, it's truth, re-enacted." This involves a basic legal issue: procedural justice and entity Which is the more important question of justice? In the UK, evidence obtained by special technical means, such as telephone monitoring and tracking, is illegal and cannot be used in court. , nor can immediate arrest and action be taken. But if no action is taken, there could be terrorist attacks on civilians. Therefore, the attitude of the person in charge of the anti-terrorism technology department is: anyway, these people also have de facto criminal preparations, but the evidence cannot be used in court. Therefore, it is in line with substantive justice to convict them with the evidence made by changing their faces with AI.
Her legal values are substantive justice over procedural justice.
But modern legal values should give priority to procedural justice. Because theoretically, we can never know whether the "truth" we find is the truth, after all, we are not God. Therefore, we must use procedurally legitimate means to discover the "truth" to the greatest extent, and this truth is the truth in the legal sense. The value concept pursued in modern society should be to transform the basic truth into the truth in the legal sense through a series of due process. This is also the basic requirement of a society ruled by law, and it is also the basic belief that no legal person should have. In this film, the female lawyer sacrificed herself for this belief.
There is also a thought-provoking topic. With the development of modern technology, is public power expanded or limited? The countless cameras on the show gather information on every citizen, making it easier and easier to frame a person. If we wantonly trample on citizens' rights for the sake of national security and preventing terrorist attacks, we will also give reasons for the expansion of the administrative organs. In the long run, the country can arbitrarily frame any innocent citizen on the grounds of national security. Seriously terrified. Big data analyzes a person who may be guilty. In order to prevent him from actually committing a crime, we weave a piece of evidence to put him in jail in advance and eliminate the danger. However, my country's criminal law expressly stipulates four requirements. Only when a criminal act is committed and the legal interest is endangered can a person be convicted and sentenced.
The principle of presumption of innocence and doubtful guilt are the crystallization of the legal wisdom of all mankind. Just like Mr. Luo Xiang once said: A crime just pollutes the water, but a wrong judgment pollutes the water.
View more about The Capture reviews
