Look at Making a Murderer. In the fourth episode, the public defender does not defend the innocence of his 16-year-old prisoner with a lower IQ than ordinary people. He just wants him to quickly plead guilty. This reminds me of the 1957 version of Twelve Angry Men. There are also public defense lawyers who believe that their prisoners are guilty and have not played their due role. Fortunately, I met Juror No. 8 who admitted to death. The moon in foreign countries and China is not round. Think about the Inner Mongolian youth Hugjiltu who could not live to see his innocence. He was convicted in a hurry and sent to the gallows!
The construction of the legal system is a perpetual process. Pessimistically speaking, it will never be perfect. However, once the system becomes rigid and judicial injustice, countless innocents will be swallowed up in the stagnant gears, and there will be nowhere to assert fairness and justice. Therefore, this is also the meaning of making a documentary about murderers. The backlight that drives people's attention to justice is so filthy that it becomes the driving force and lubricant for the constant rotation of the gears.
Also the documentary making a murderer, episode 6. This is the lawyer hired by the suspect SA with a lot of money. Compared with yesterday's public lawyers, it turns out that cheap products are not good, and good products are not cheap. I used to watch American TV dramas or American movies, the kind of lawyers with a powerful IQ score and a strict logic, thought it was too exaggerated for the film creation, but after watching the two lawyers Dean and Perry, I realized that Lao Mei is very realistic! Although I know that these two lawyers do not seem to be able to turn the tide in the end, the professionalism and ingenuity reflected in the entire litigation process make people have to throw themselves on the ground! The feeling of slapping the face of the control party all the time can't be too wonderful!
Also, the documentary is not absolutely objective and fair, what we see is what the director wants to present, although I believe they should try their best to be objective, but that is completely impossible. So, is SA guilty or innocent? It can only be said that there are too many reasonable doubts in the case. For example, neither the tin house nor the garage found the body fluids or blood of the deceased, SA and his nephew. Did they change their clothes that day? If there is a lot of blood splattering, you should change your clothes. If you don't change it, doesn't it mean that you may not have committed the crime? all kinds.
As the lawyer said in the last episode, I would rather he is really guilty, at least everyone can sleep at ease, otherwise, a person who is innocent twice is framed twice and his life is ruined, this is a terrible thing thing!
View more about Making a Murderer reviews
