An Analysis of Legal Procedures in the Movie My Cousin Vinny - Essay Example

An Analysis of Legal Procedures in the Movie My Cousin Vinny My Cousin Vinny is a funny courtroom comedy about an inexperienced Brooklyn attorney, Vincent Gambini, who take on the case of William and Stanley. The boys have been accused of murder and accessory to murder of a store clerk in Beecher County in Alabama. Interesting points can be made about legal procedures in this movie and how they really play out in real-life courtroom dramas. For purposes of brevity the focus will be placed on the arrest, the incarceration, and the trial. Once you are arrested you have the right to be read your Miranda rights. In the movie, the boys admitted their guilt and then recanted their confessions. Surely this was mainly due to the police officer who kept harassing them, prodding them with questions such as, “At what point did you shoot the clerk?”, for example. One must realize that, if arrested, one has the right to have representation with one when answering questions, and one need not answer any questions one doesn’t want to, as it can and will be used against a person in a court of law. In the incarceration phase, you have the ability to place one phone call from jail. At trial, there were several errors of procedure and general blunders which would probably not happen in a real courtroom situation. “Vinny’s pre-trial research” was interesting.1 “Before the trial, Vinny interview[ed] key witnesses in person and trie[d] to envision how each one saw the crime.”2 At the arraignment, Vinny tries to argue the case instead of simply entering the plea of “not guilty,” a major mistake.3 Regarding opening statements, there is much to be said. “In District Attorney Trotters opening statement he asks the jury to convict William Gambini of murder in the first degree and Stan Rothenstein of accessory to murder in the first degree. There is no such crime in the Alabama criminal statutes. It has to be either Capital Murder or just Murder. Alabama does not have different "degrees" of murder. Also the arraignment and trial are both conducted by the same judge. In the Alabama court system a District judge would have conducted the arraignment, while a different Circuit judge would have conducted the jury trial. Its ironic since the director brags about his attention to detail in the DVD directors commentary. He obviously didnt check it too closely.”4 This is a factual error. However, there were other things wrong with the opening statements. For example, Vincent came to court dressed appropriately (in a suit), but it was a red bellhop suit from a second-hand store that looked ridiculous. He wore this because the suit he usually would wear was unavailable, and he couldn’t wear his leather jacket to court. Although this might be a minor point, it is common for lawyers to dress professionally in a nice black or grey suit that has slacks and a jacket, with an appropriate knee-length or below skirt for women if it applies and they wish to wear one. Vincent’s opening statement, for his part, was very poor. Worse, when Vincent was challenged by the judge for his use of foul language in the courtroom, he said, “What?” and the judge found him in contempt of court for speaking rudely. Vincent also did not address the court by the term “Your Honor,” either, which was highly disrespectful. But that is just the tip of the iceberg here. Vincent used foul language regularly in the courtroom, getting him into all kinds of trouble with the judge, which is not appropriate in a courtroom setting. Additionally, regarding Mr. Gambini’s status as a lawyer, he had never passed the bar although he had graduated law school. His lawyering experience was limited to doing some legal representation but had never had a court appearance before, so he was unschooled to the ways of courtroom procedure. Not only this, but Mr. Gambini was from New York representing these boys in Alabama. “As an out-of-state attorney, Vinny would have had to file documents for admission to the state bar association "pro hac vice" ("for this case"), and the boys would have been assigned a local attorney to ensure compliance with the rules of procedure, which Vinny kept violating.”5 Further, “[w]hen asked by Judge Haller about previous law cases, Vinny fail[ed] to give any specific examples, and thus makes the judge question who he says he is.”6 During the trial, Vincent has poor diction, in which he says “two Utes” instead of saying “two youths.” Vinny does not realize the prosecution is obligated to disclose any information to him.7 The prosecution’s case is circumstantial, and when Vinny does do a cross-examination of the witnesses,8 he does have some major procedural gaffes before doing some things right. For instance, Vinny makes irrelevant comments (like about [his girlfriend] Lisa’s attractiveness [who is testifying on the stand]), which would obviously be a bad move in a real-life courtroom setting.9 Anything a lawyer says which is not salient to making the point should be eliminated. Comments that are inappropriate for the courtroom include jokes, innuendo, or chicanery of any kind. Another mistake Mr. Gambini makes is his practice of “calling witnesses left and right (pulling them out of nowhere).” However, in his cross-examination, there are some things that Mr. Gambini was able to do correctly and well. He shot down three witnesses’ testimonies, one by one, by finding problems with each of their testimonies. Summarily and subsequently, Vinny: contradicted the testimony of the first witness; made one witness admit that he identified the defendant through stained windows and trees; and finally, last but not least, he found one witness to have heavily under-prescribed eyeglasses.10 There are many problems with My Cousin Vinny as a true portrayal of courtroom action. They deal with appropriate procedures in arrest, incarceration, and the trial. While in the courtroom in this movie much of the proper courtroom procedure was ignored, this would most likely not happen in a real-life scenario. There were several things wrong with what went on in the movie, that would almost certainly never happen in a courtroom in real life. For one thing, any instructions from the bench should be followed immediately. When the judge in My Cousin Vinny was not listened to, this undermined the credibility of the judge’s credentials. Secondly, the lawyer will always begin with the phrase “May it please the court.” Obviously, in My Cousin Vinny, Vincent Gambini didn’t know this at all. He addressed the judge inappropriately and used language which was inappropriate for the courtroom. Third, another thing that was an interesting point about My Cousin Vinny was that the judge used the term “counselor” for the lawyer, when in actuality he should have probably said “counsel” instead. In addition, neither lawyer asked time for rebuttal if the movie is recalled correctly. They just went ahead and rebutted each other. In real-life courtrooms, one must ask permission to have time for a rebuttal. Many procedural formalities and legal language was left out of the movie, it is assumed, because it would probably not be as entertaining. My Cousin Vinny is a great case study, mainly, in how not to act in court. REFERENCES Chaffin, Luke. My Cousin Vinny Response. https://www.student.gsu.edu/~lchaffin1/mycousinvinny.htm. Retrieved 25 April 2009. Movie Mistakes Web Site. http://www.moviemistakes.com/film868. Retrieved 25 April 2009. Su, Danny. My Cousin Vinny’s Courtroom is Funny, But Unrealistic. The Tech, Vol. 112, Issue 13: 1992. http://tech.mit.edu/V112/N13/vinny.13a.html. Retrieved 25 April 2009. Tooher, Nora L. ‘My Cousin Vinny’ Still the Winner Among Defense Lawyers. Daily Record and the Kansas City Daily News-Press, Sept. 13, 2006. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4181/is_20060913/ai_n16720748/. Retrieved 25 April 2009. Read More