The film The Thin Blue Line is about the murder of a Dallas Police officer Robert Wood, the trial and appeals involved in the entire case. This film investigates the trial and the man accused of murder Randall Dale Adams and the man who accused him David Ray Harris. It consists of interviews of the prosecution, defense, investigators, the judge, witnesses and the two prime suspects Randall Dale Adams and David Ray Harris, also a re-enactment of the murder.
The statement in the film where Melvyn Carson Bruder states “that a great prosecutor could convict an innocent man and any prosecutor can convict a guilty man.” I found very memorable and brought different thoughts to mind. I think when certain evidence is presented to a prosecutor there are certain judgements that bring out results. In this specific case, David Ray Harris was 16. He used his age to his advantage and was persuasive character. Additionally, he could not be convicted with the death penalty.
There are other aspects of how the police force wanted to prosecute the killer, there was a whole month without the police even being close to having a lead in this murder. It’s not just how to prosecution proceeds in a trial that determines the entire outcome, its dependent upon a myriad of details that take place within the trial itself. I think some of the information on the justice system was left out of this documentary because the focus of it was proving an innocent man innocent.
It seems strange that a prosecutor would be identified as great for wrongfully convicting someone, it was not done purposely, they are just trying to uphold the law and make decisions based on the evidence presented. The perception is skewed whichever way you look at it, it’s hard to sit here and blame one specific entity dealing with the entire justice system.
This quote brought to mind in how the film portrayed the judge specifically to me, “In The Thin Blue Line (1988) Errol Morris mocks the credibility of Judge Metcalfe and Mrs. Miller a witness against Randall Adams, by cutting away to silly low-budget Hollywood films to discredit their testimony.” I think most preconceived ideas of judges is that they bring their own background, experiences, beliefs, political views to the bench which is entirely wrong. They are impartial to all of these things while their are in a court of law. They are there to uphold the law and make decisions objectively. I’m not saying that every judge is perfect and every judgement that is made is objective. That is what their oath of office states and that is their role in the justice system.
It is interesting that Errol Morris seems to offers up the opinion of the judges’ role in the trial because of glaring flaws his in other cases involving police officers. This trial was a jury trial so the outcome of the sentence was solely based on the votes of the citizens. Which offers up thoughts on the roles of judges in society and how they are perceived and sometimes targeted for their beliefs outside of the courtroom. I guess my opinion of judges is a bit different because my mom is a judge and it offers a different perspective.
I find it to be an extremely difficult thing when the wrong person is convicted. This brings a negative view of the whole justice system. It brings up the question of how can you begin to re-pay them? How can you get years of your life back? They usually get a sum of money but is that really equal to years of your life?
Michael Randell, one of the witnesses, claimed: "They already decided what to do with you in the hall. That's why they call it the Hall of Justice --- the scales are not balanced. The scales are in the hall, and they go up and down. They might go up for you in favor one way and they might go down against you. So if the DA wants you to hang 15 or 20 years, you hung." This film may cause many people to become skeptical of the American justice system.
This is an interesting concept considering after watching this film our discussions about the justice system were questioned. It’s difficult to say that there is a system of government that is functioning without any errors. There is always something to improve upon and I think the justice system is trying to keep up with so many things that there will be errors in the system. Such as crime scene analysis and science becoming integral into the justice system. It is difficult to keep up with technology and have scientific research and have a 100 % accuracy. This deals with expectations of jury’s in trials dealing with criminal cases asking for research that the court cannot afford.
Why effective visual narrative often adversely influence attempts by lawyers and other legal actors to tell their clients’ stores? Their are expectations as jurors and lawyers to have paralleling stories conveying criminals as good or bad but that does not add up to the complex stories surrounding real life criminal prosecutions.
I think its important to always make the distinction that film produces images that represent and are similar to reality but in fact are not reality in relation to the various techniques used in constructing a film.
The re-enactment of the murder was what classified the film as non-fiction therefore exempting the film from being considered for a nomination from the Academy. This still is being brought up today in debates about the category of documentary films at the Oscars. “ The academy began requiring all documentary makers whose works are submitted for Oscar consideration to identify, in writing, all parts of their films that are staged re-enactments. In the decades before the rule was implemented, controversies had erupted around a handful of critically acclaimed films that didn't get Oscar nominations, such as Errol Morris' "The Thin Blue Line" (1988).” The article discusses the current crossover between narrative and documentary films that they are starting to play similarly.
Similar films:
After Innocence
Directed by Jessica Sanders, this is a film about victims that were accused of crimes that have been let off by DNA tests. It deals with the wrongfully convicted prisoners dealing with being back into society.
Murder on a Sunday Morning
Directed by Jean-Xavier de Lestrade, this documentary offers a candid look at the U.S. justice system at work and exposes the racial bias and abuse of power through telling the story of Brenton Butler, a 15-year-old African American boy arrested and charged with murder.
The Trials of Darryl Hunt
This film is directed by Annie Sundberg. Darryl Hunt is a man from Winston-Salem, N.C. who was wrongly convicted of the rape and murder of a young white woman in 1984. A shocking indictment of the criminal justice system in the U.S., the film shows how a lack of physical evidence, faulty eyewitness testimony, and racism can overcome the search for actual truth.
Related Articles:
No comments:
Post a Comment