In And Justice for All’s final courtroom scene, the use of mid close ups and close ups were able to capture the viewers emotion. Close ups are able to catch the viewers’ attention since the screen is solely focused on one person. Since there is only one person on the screen they are able to convey all their emotions to the viewer. In this scene Al Pacionos expressions should be award winning since he does a great job showing raw emotion to the jury and everyone in the courtroom that the judge he is defending is guilty. Not only Al Pacionos close ups were great but close ups were used to capture everyone in the courtrooms emotion. Close ups are used to show exactly what the actor is trying to convey to you. In this scene close ups were used for Mr. Kirkland, Judge Henry T. Fleming, the jury, Judge Francis, the other lawyers and the defendant. Throughout the scene close ups are used to switch to each person and show how they are reacting to what …show more content…
When Arthur is being kicked out of the courtroom a close up of Gail is shown cheering for Arthur. Her and Arthur had intimate ties and shared emotions with each other. They both came from a similar background with failed relationships due to being lawyers. Both had discussion of how they defend people who didn’t do the right thing and are guilty. This is especially hard for Arthur, due to the fact that his grandfather sent him to law school and wants him to always be doing the right thing. Gail was pleased with what Arthur did and that was shown with the close up. The close up displayed Gails’ face overwhelmed with joy cheering Arthur on. Another great close up in this scene is when Arthur yells at the judge that he is out of order. The judges’ jaw is completely dropped and doesn’t know what to say. Arthur is trying to show that the whole judicial system is corrupt and that it needs to be fixed so it is fair for
This event overall was very quality. They loaded the auditorium with people as a judge sat on the top of the stage. They escorted in a :criminal” in. Later we would learn he was a drunk driver. He had killed an innocent teen, and injured two others. The girls parents are testifying against him for the murder of their daughter.
In light of the most recent election results I find myself worrying about the countless social and economic injustices that will perpetuate to occur in our country. I dwell on our history, of how our social welfare system created and continues to reinforce discrimination, privilege and oppression. How did we end up like this and where is that “American dream” promised to those within our boarders? Literary works $2.00 a Day: Living on Almost Nothing in America by Kathryn Edin and Luke Shaefer, Nobody: Casualties of America’s War on the Vulnerable, from Ferguson to Flint and Beyond by Marc Lamont Hill, and Bryan Stevenson’s book, Just Mercy: A story of justice and redemption, seek to describe how social injustices and economic issues manifest
This movie goes to show how such crucial facts and minuet evidence if not processed fully and clearly can change the outcome in such a big way. In this jury you have 12 men from all different walks of life, 12 different times, and 12 different personalities. Who have an obligation to come to one conclusion and that's whether or not the young man on trial is guilty of murdering his father or is innocent beyond a reasonable doubt. Under much frustration and lack of patience these 12 men began to get unruly and unfocused. Throughout this distraction key terms get misused, facts get turned around and more importantly emotions start to cross making it hard for these men to produce a verdict.
In the movie Crash, directed by Paul Haggis, John Stuart Mill's theories on Social Justice and Utility are depicted within the context of the 20th century. Haggis' representation of a multicultural society is one built on racism and inequality, which limits the social justice people can acquire. In this film prejudice and stereotyping are prevalent when discussing legal rights and moral rights. The social situation has profound impacts on the choices people make. This society's foundation is based on injustice, although in the end, justice is served through the concept of `justice of desert'.
Another extreme close-up of a judge is used closer to the beginning of the film. The judge seems disgusting, hideous and atrocious. We can see warts and lumps in his face. Looking at this shot, it is impossible to like this character. To make him look physically ugly in this shot was definitely a decision of the filmmaker. He wanted us to agree with him on his perception of the man: he is an ugly man, inside and out. Joan is the
Not able to remember much about this particular part of the movie, I believe this introductory scene's purpose was to either enhance the realism of the setting by emphasizing the court building's efficient, business like manner or to provide a timeslot in which to roll the credits for producer, director, stars, etc. The settings aren't only built upon through the use of scenery and extras in the movie. Invisible and distant in the play, we see in the movie the judge, bailiff, those witnessing the trial and most importantly of all- the defendant. This is an important change because in the case, we are free to come up with our own unbiased conclusions as to the nature and identity of the defendant, whom we only know to be a 19 year boy from the slums. Seeing his haggard and worn face in the movie changes all of that, yet for better or worse, it engages the audience deeper into the trial as they surely will sympathize with him and can gain some insight into why, later, Juror 8 does so as well.
Albert Camus’ The Stranger offers one man’s incite into the justice of society. Monsieur Meursault, the main protagonist in the novel, believes that morals and the concept of right and wrong possess no importance. This idea influences him to act distinctively in situations that require emotion and just decision, including feeling sadness over his mother’s death, the abuse of a woman, and his killing of an innocent man. In these situations Meursault apathetically devoids himself of all emotion and abstains from dealing with the reality in front of him. When confronted by the court over his murder, he reiterates his habitual motto on life that nothing matters anyways, so why care? His uncaring response inflames the people working within the
Juror number eight is the main protagonist, he also a reserved with his thoughts, yet very strategic with them. He is the defender of the down trodden victim. He has a calm rational approach to everything and he reveals the gaps in the testimonies placed against the defendant. These examples would be; that the old man couldn’t have seen the boy run out of the house, as the old man had a limp and therefore could not make it to the door in time. The old lady across the road could have never saw the boy stab his father, due to she wasn’t wearing her glasses and it was pitch black. Number eight is a man that s...
In the essay, Death and Justice, by Edward I. Koch makes his argument of why he supports capital punishment by the examination of his opposition’s arguments that are most frequently heard. Koch claims the death penalty is just and supports his claims by rebutting the arguments. Koch believes that capital punishment is a mean to uphold justice, until another form of punishments are found as a better solution. Other punishment would be inadequate and therefore unjust for the crimes that deprive someone else life.. Robert Lee Willie and Joseph Carl Shaw committed murders before the murder, they were executed for. If theses individuals had received the death penalty in the beginning, than maybe an 18 year old woman, and two teenagers could still
“they all had the same face. All of them!.... They all gave orders, they all shot! All of them!”(Fink, page 1265) Nearing the end of her testimony, it can be gathered that the first woman is falling apart. Her sentences become shorter, more direct, and she loses focus on the specific details asked by the prosecutor in favor of focusing on her self determined fact that all of them had shot during the liquidation. “I was afraid…. terribly afraid”(page 1264), the same fear that coursed through her that day was showing its face once again, causing this crack in her testimony. Typically if one’s manner of speaking falls apart like so then their body movements also become more rigid as their voice becomes both louder and shattered. Though Fink did not paint the picture of the scene to us directly, she has done so through the characters speech, and from this picture a young woman is seen. A young woman who, though at first had maintained a semblance of composure, had fallen apart into a fit of panic. Another character who shows us a break in composure is the second man. “tried to
How could she, his wife, betray him and kill him with no remorse? The article, “Trial Lawyers Cater to Jurors’ Demands for Visual Evidence,” written by Sylvia Hsieh, stresses the importance of visual evidence. Hsieh writes in a formal tone as she delves into a pool of various example trials used to explain visual evidence, along with specific quotes obtained from well-known lawyers and workers in the industry. This simply states the recurring idea that visual evidence is important.
In the film, A Civil Action, Trial Procedure was shown throughout the entire movie. There are many steps that need to be completed before a verdict and judgment can be reached. These steps are the pleadings, methods of discovery, pretrial hearings, jury selection, opening statements, introduction of evidence, cross examinations, closing arguments, instructions to the jury, and the verdict and judgment. The case in this movie was actually called Anderson v. Cryovac. The plaintiffs are the Anderson family, the Gamache family, the Kane family, the Robbins family, the Toomey family, and the Zona family. The plaintiffs’ attorneys are Jan Schlichtmann, Joe Mulligan, Anthony Roisman, Charlie Nesson, and Kevin Conway. The two co- defendants are W.R. Grace and Beatrice Foods. The two co-defendants’ attorneys are William Cheeseman, Jerome Facher, Neil Jacobs, and Michael Keating.
Some people say that by watching the court system in action, what once was very unknown and unfamiliar, has now become familiar and useful in helping people become more knowledgeable of what happens inside courtrooms. Most people have not been in a courtrooms and only have the perspective that T.V. gives to them. Now they are able to see what really goes on and now can better understand and relate.
At 1:30 p.m. on a Monday afternoon, I entered the San Bernardino Justice Center in Downtown San Bernardino for my first court visit. After passing through the metal screen detectors and making my way up to courtroom number 19, I opened the courtroom doors plated “Judge Harold Wilson” and nervously checked in with the bailiff and the court clerk. The judge, judicial clerk and two attorneys were already in the room chatting. I was surprised to hear the friendliness in their tone and conversation they all were having regarding their personal lives. The attorneys from opposing sides were chatting like they were best friends. I asked the bailiff, “If this is normal?”, he said, “Yes it is! and whatever they show on TV is not reality.” Soon after our conversation, the bailiff brought in the defendant. He was well dressed, black male, probably around the age of 35. He sat down next to the defense lawyer and the chit-chatting resumed. After 20 minutes of laughter and constant bantering, the judge asked the bailiff to bring the jury inside. As the bailiff walked outside to call the jury in, the judge went to his chambers.
At the expiration of this term, twelve of the boys were brought into court at one time, and the scene formed a striking and highly pleasing contrast with their appearance when first arraigned. The judge expressed much pleasure as well as surprise at their appearance, and remarked, that the object of law had been accomplished and expressed his cordial approval of my plan to save and reform" (Martin, 2005).