The conflict between the two is that Clyer believes that Nick did not try his best to prosecute the murderer at the time, and reached a plea bargain. Of course, this kind of transaction in the United States is legal, and my country seems to be preparing to introduce such a mechanism.
However, since the victim has clearly requested to sue, and this matter is related to whether he can give an account to the victim's dead wife and children, and it is related to the victim's next life, whether from the perspective of caring for the victim or from the perspective of social stability , Nick should respect the opinions of the victims. Although this may not be rational, although it may lead to the acquittal of the murderer, or to reduce the rate of solving the case, but in the face of life, what are these?
Of course, Nick has done a lot of cases, so he's numb to these kinds of things, thinking it's no big deal. But this is not the case for Clyer. No one will forget to see his wife and daughter being brutally murdered. Nick can't understand this, because he hasn't experienced it himself, and he doesn't empathize with it. For this reason, Clyer has to let him experience something.
When we make some decisions, especially in the case of important matters related to others, think more about it, although some decisions are not the most rational, but it is the most in line with the feelings of others. This is what we often say, humanistic care.
View more about Law Abiding Citizen reviews
