It appears lawyers object to pretty much anything, and that includes out of court too, with the film industry’s common misrepresentation of the legal profession a topic that boils the supposed cold blood of those of a legal capacity. For an occupation that is sworn to a strict code of ethics, and whose adherence to regulation is of the utmost importance, one can certainly empathize with their case, and their not guilty plea that always seems to fall on deaf ears…
There are many false presuppositions about lawyers, whether it be the fact that being a lawyer is steeped in this misconception that they’re automatically rich (ask criminal attorneys and public defenders, they aren’t), that they’re sailing very close to the wind in terms of what side of the law they’re operating on, or simply the fact that lawyers are not allowed to pace up and down the courtroom like, well, they are in a courtroom drama.
MOVIEWEB VIDEO OF THE DAY
From surprise revelations that have not been disclosed prior, threatening and assaulting those in the witness box, and the fact that lawyers don’t actually say “objection!” every five seconds, the dismay projected on a lawyer’s face while watching a courtroom-based movie is understandable, even if they do ruin it by cross-examining every last piece of the film’s contents. With plenty of factually inaccurate portrayals of lawyers and the courtroom, let’s sift through the rather damning evidence…
Beyond a Reasonable Doubt
Anchor BayAfter Dark
Peter Hyams’ 2009 box office bomb and remake of the 1956 original, Beyond A Reasonable Doubt stars Michael Douglas as a prosecution lawyer, Mark Hunter who utilizes 11th-hour DNA evidence as a means of convicting the defendant.
The film tells the story of a curious reporter and an assistant district attorney who venture into depths beyond what is ethical to prove the corruption of a hotshot lawyer. In order to secure his 100% trial-win status, Mark Hunter brandishes undisclosed DNA evidence that, in the real world, would be grounds for a mistrial.
Primal Fear
Paramount Pictures
The silver-haired, eagle-eyed high-profile attorney, Martin Vail (played attentively by Richard Gere) takes center stage in Gregory Hoblit’s screen adaptation of William Diehl’s 1993 crime-thriller novel, Primal Fear. High-ranking Lawyer Martin Vail is ostensibly, the tricky, smarmy, legal representative type who has a penchant for attracting cases under the media’s scrutiny. After taking on a complex case whereby a young man, Aaron (Edward Norton), is accused of first-degree murder, Vail is left in a predicament having to choose between his professional integrity and his record as a hotshot legal genius.
In several instances throughout Primal Fear, from Vail illegally stealing a piece of invaluable VHS evidence from the crime scene to that same piece of evidence being withheld by both the defense and prosecution it is clear that Primal Fear’s depiction of the judiciary is both inaccurate and wholly misleading.
Double Jeopardy
Ashley Judd stars alongside Tommy Lee Jones in Bruce Beresford’s 1999 movie, Double Jeopardy. Libby Parsons (Judd) is accused of murdering her husband and subsequently jailed for six years. After it comes to light that he has faked his own death, Libby goes out to exact her revenge and murder her husband.
All this takes place under the incorrect belief that double jeopardy means if one is tried and convicted of a crime they did not commit, upon release they essentially have a free pass to carry out a crime they aren’t eligible to be prosecuted for. Of course, this is problematic, as double jeopardy prevents a person from being tried for the same crime twice, but not (as the film seems to convey) if the crimes are committed separately.
A Few Good Men
Columbia Pictures
In the 1992 naval courtroom drama A Few Good Men, Tom Cruise assumes the titular role of Lieutenant Daniel Kaffee, a judge advocate, who is responsible for arguing the defense of the accused, who is believed to have carried out an unauthorized code red.
In his defense of those in question, Kaffee is threatened with a court-martial for requesting Jessup and Kendrick, both higher-ranking officials take to the witness stand for cross-examination. Contrary to A Few Good Men’s representations, regardless of the status of a witness, judge advocates possess the same immunity as any other officer of the law.
The Untouchables
Brian De Palma’s 1987 classic, The Untouchables, may have acquired its name from the police force that famously hunted down Al Capone, but the courtroom scenes littered with factual discrepancies are far from untouchable. Set during the era of Prohibition in the States, FBI agent, Elliott Ness (a great Kevin Costner) enlists a crack team of experienced federal agents to relentlessly pursue the infamous Al Capone, the biggest organized crime boss of the early 20th century.
When De Niro’s Al Capone is eventually reprimanded by police, the faulty court scenes ensue, from the judge being persuaded by Ness to instate an entirely new jury, to Capone’s lawyer reversing his client’s not guilty plea to guilty without Capone’s consultation, two major instances of poetic license-gone mad. While based on a true story, the air of credibility is arguably brought into disrepute once the real-life trial of Capone is altered for dramatic effect.
