Rate The Last Movie You Saw

[Groggy]

It's not an issue of Sunny "deserving" anything. She may have overdosed on something and died, or deliberately killed herself. Tragic, but it happened. No reason Claus should go to jail, if that's the case. (Big if, I realize.)

I have no strong opinion on the narration. I guess the filmmakers wanted it to remind viewers that the case wasn't exclusively about Claus, and to give Sunny a "voice" in the story. Possibly she didn't know what happened anymore than we do.

[drinkanddestroy]

btw, if you are the type of person who dislikes rich people, or if you believe that von Bulow only won cuz he was very rich , remember that, as Dershowitz emphasized in the interview, the prosecution was taken over by private lawyers for the other side (usually, a prosecution is not handled by private lawyers, but by the government prosecutor); Sunny had far more money than did Claud, so the prosecution had access to whatever the defense had access to, if not more. This was not a case of some millionaire defendant against a poor overworked underpaid understaffed prosecutor. (btw, even in cases where it is a gov't prosecutor, I have no problem with a rich defendant hiring top lawyers; the gov't, if it wants to, can throw any amount of money at a particular prosecution, it's not their own money but the taxpayers', and prosecutors have insane amounts of power that can be abused at great detriment to defendants'. For further illustration of that, check out another really good legal movie Absence of Malice -- this one is fictional but still depicts the potentially insane abuses that an unethical prosecutor can commit. Defendants are often at the mercy of the prosecutor's personal ethics, morals, and honesty -- the very same prosecutor who may be eying advancement in his office or a political career -- advancement achieved through "victories," ie. locking people away. It is a  very scary  prospect. Ensuring ethical prosecutors is a vital duty for a free society. Look at the case of Senator Ted Stevens for a recent real life example. But I digress...........  

[Groggy]

I have no problem with rich people so long as they don't abuse the system. That's my position.

[drinkanddestroy]

I have no strong opinion on the narration. I guess the filmmakers wanted it to remind viewers that the case wasn't exclusively about Claus, and to give Sunny a "voice" in the story. Possibly she didn't know what happened anymore than we do.

I don't know if the issue over narration is unrelated to whether Sunny "knew" what happened

[drinkanddestroy]

I have no problem with rich people so long as they don't abuse the system. That's my position.

but how do you define "abuse the system"? is it "abusing the system" to hire the best attorneys to find any possible way to put reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury? After all, isn't that what poor defendants would try to do as well, to the best of their means?

[drinkanddestroy]

This brings up a question for you if you are interested in this stuff:

Supposing we knew for certain that Claus had indeed attempted to kill Sunny that night in 1980. Now, it's December 2008, and Sunny dies -- and doctors say there's no doubt whatsoever that she died due to Claus's injecting her with insulin 28 years earlier. Could Claus be brought to trial in 2008 for murder, for an action he committed in 1980?



at common law, there was a "year and a day" rule if the death happened within a year and a day of the crime, it was presumed to be a result of the crime, and the defendant could be charged with murder.

But now, states are moving away from the year and a day rule, largely because advances in medical sceince now allow doctors to determine whether or not the cause of death is the crime in question. The "year and a day" common law rule was enacted who knows how many years ago in England, before there was any medical expertise to determine cause of death. Now that we have that sort of medical expertise, jurisdictions are moving away from the "year and a day" rule

In a very brief nutshell http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_and_a_day_rule

[Groggy]

but how do you define "abuse the system"? is it "abusing the system" to hire the best attorneys to find any possible way to put reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury? After all, isn't that what poor defendants would try to do as well, to the best of their means?

Using the system to commit or cover-up crimes, etc.

[Senza]

Death Rides A Horse (1967) - 4/5 stars. LVC once again proving he is a badass!

[Groggy]

Drink, you may also enjoy this video. Jeremy Irons discusses the Bulow case with Eliot Spitzer, another of Dershowitz's assistants on the case.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGePmogxMyo

I checked the book out from the library today. Will comment once I've finished.

[drinkanddestroy]

Drink, you may also enjoy this video. Jeremy Irons discusses the Bulow case with Eliot Spitzer, another of Dershowitz's assistants on the case.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGePmogxMyo

I checked the book out from the library today. Will comment once I've finished.

haha Nice

But seeing Joy Behar ruined everything

[Senza]

The Big Gundown (1966) - 4/5 stars.

[Groggy]

haha Nice

But seeing Joy Behar ruined everything

Reading the book I also see Susan Estrich was an assistant on the prosecution side and John Kerry was one of the Appellate Judges. I guess everyone in New England wanted a crack at this case.

[dave jenkins]

Boomerang! (1947) 7/10. After a popular Episcopal priest is murdered, Lee J. Cobb and Karl Malden--under community pressure--attempt to railroad witless Arthur Kennedy into the gas chamber. State's Attorney Dana Andrews is all set to prosecute, but something doesn't quite sit right. His dilemna then: go along with what's been set in motion (and please his Party masters), or hold out for justice? This being a film from '47 (and an Elia Kazan at that), there is, of course, no dilemna at all. This film is one of the few to expose the unreliability of eye witnesses (7 erroneously finger Kennedy). Set in a nameless Connecticut town, and based on a true event, the street scenes (according to IMDb) were shot in Stamford; interestingly, the interior courtroom scenes were filmed right here in White Plains. (This was a Louis de Rochemont "sets?-we-don't-need-no-stinking-sets!" production).

[Senza]

The Good, The Bad, And The Weird (2008) - 3/5. It has nothing on TGTBTU!

[drinkanddestroy]

Kramer vs. Kramer (1979) 8/10

Very solid movie, but IMO it should not have won the Best Picture of 1979, Norma Rae was a better movie. (And I haven't yet seen Apocalypse Now). Hoffman and Streep were amazing, their Oscars were well-deserved.