I completed the second half today, but this time I feel: this is a legal film, and it is still a relatively rare subject of criminal investigation experiments.
Investigative experiment is a kind of investigative activity that reenacts or tests an event or fact according to the original conditions in order to prove whether or how an event or fact can occur in the process of criminal case investigation.
There are often many unexpected details that "jump out" in the experiment. For example, in a joint crime, there is a witness who can clearly see someone with a knife and hurt someone, but through the distance, the location of the two sides, the witness's vision, the weather conditions of the day (well, the haze must have reduced the detection rate) Re-rehearsal, Perhaps we will find that the testimony of this witness is not true or has low probative force.
There is a similar plot in Lincoln's Armstrong defense case. The witness swore that at 11 o'clock in the evening on October 18, the defendant Armstrong's face was clearly seen in the moonlight, but the almanac proved that that night was the first quarter moon, and the moon had set at 11 o'clock. Without the moonlight, it is impossible for the witness to see the defendant's face clearly from the haystack twenty or thirty meters away. Lincoln further pointed out: Even if the time is slightly earlier, the moon is still in the west, but the haystacks are in the east, the trees are in the west, and the moonlight comes from the west. The position is behind the haystack to the east of the tree, so he can't see the defendant's face at all; if the defendant's face is facing the haystack, that is, to the east, even if there is moonlight, it can only shine on the back of his head, and the witnesses can't see it. Clear the defendant's face.
Looking back at the movie, the more interesting investigation experiment in the movie is the lottery murder case. Why did the murderer give the victim nine hammers after a period of time after the victim had been stabbed? Is it the takeaway delivery, or did the murderer feel sick and have diarrhea? Zhuang Sir replied: "What's more important than killing? It's killing another person!" So he did an experiment and came to the conclusion that the time period for harming the first victim is just right after killing another person. Of course, there are many loopholes here, for example: the injury identification of the corpse is basically unable to distinguish the time of different injuries, because the interval is too short; from the landing shape and distribution of the blood, it may not necessarily be analyzed that the injury is formed in two time periods ; it is impossible for another person to be killed without leaving any traces at the scene, at least there will be bodily fluids hair etc.
But I still like these reenactments and reasoning, like sometimes guessing details in criminal cases. Confessions about what happened in Chinese criminal files are often very simple, basically less than half a page, and then N confessions are repeated, sometimes exactly the same. As a defendant's lawyer, you will know more in detail, but sometimes the defendant doesn't tell you, and sometimes they don't know the details themselves, especially in joint crimes and short-term crimes.
I couldn't help but think of the first murder case I defended, which was a legal aid case. The procuratorial case charged the defendant with helping to kill. The defendant confessed to helping the killing, but the court reversed her confession. The court finally sentenced her to intentional killing and did not have the circumstances of helping to kill. This case is still a mystery to me. The male deceased died of suffocation. There was a very shallow, not-so-thin red mark on his neck, but there was no sign of struggle. The deceased's height, weight, and strength far exceeded that of the female defendant. Generally speaking, I tend to believe that it was helping to kill, and the defendant covered the mouth of the deceased with a quilt and caused his death, but what I don't understand is: the deceased should have struggled when suffocated to death, but why there is no trace? Is this the case in forensic science?
Well, birthdays are a bit overdue thinking about these murders, so stop it.
Overall, it is worth recommending.
View more about Blind Detective reviews
