Vinny didn't really do anything
-
-
Heidi_Smiles — 10 years ago(January 12, 2016 06:47 PM)
I think the explanation is pretty simple:
Vinny approaches him with some note, saying "Please trace this." His immediate reaction is, "No, that's not my job."
When Vinny pleads, "I only have three minutes," Farley makes the decision to just look at the note. That's reasonable. Vinny scampers out of the room.
Farley sees that the note says "1963 Pontiac Tempest," which is surprising because that has not come up in the trial AT ALL. He's thinking, "WTF is up with this? Did Vinny figure something out?" and he wants to know what the deal is with the Pontiac. That's when he comes out and says, "Tell me why." At which point, Vinny would have said something like, "I think this is our suspect."
Farley DOES want to catch the real killers. He may or may not have had personal issues with Vinny, but there's no reason to think that he has any interest in convicting the wrong guys for murder. It's just that he thought he DID have the right guys. When he realizes that they were wrong, he wants to fix it.
Pobre de Dios que no sale en revistas, que no es modelo ni artista, o de familia real -
-
elena-28 — 10 years ago(January 20, 2016 01:03 PM)
But also take into account that by this time, Vinny has shown that he is smart, quick, and knows how to notice details. So, by this time, the sheriff, I believe, would pay attention to something that Vinny brings up. And agreed, once he sees the "Pontiac Tempest" note, and listens to whatever extremely quick explanation Vinny would have given, he would have been motivated to do the trace.
-
JohnSmythe — 9 years ago(June 27, 2016 07:07 PM)
Just to add, when we first see Sheriff Farley he's standing over Jimmy Willis' body with his hat in his hands, all silent and remorseful. I'm guessing he probably knew him fairly well. I doubt they had a close relationship or anything, but in a small town like that, he probably knows his family and that he's an honest, law-abiding citizen and genuinely feels sad that he's been murdered.
Now, with that in mind, I'm inclined to believe he wanted the true killers caught and when Vinny slowly started pulling apart the prosecution's case, he must have started wondering himself if he hadn't jumped the gun with the boys. That's why he comes back says to Vinny "Tell my why".
Vinny could well have told him that a Pontiac Tempest can look exactly like a Buick Skylark and come in the same colour and that this could prove the boys' innocence. I know there are loads of corrupt police officers the world over, but surely the majority of them don't have any reason to see two possibly innocent people put to death. -
JosephASpadaro — 9 years ago(June 27, 2016 08:50 PM)
I agree.
Farley was a good person at heart. Albeit, the stereotypical Southern sheriff.
He did want to see justice. He did not want to see two innocent kids fry.
And he knew in that jurisdiction the kids would indeed fry (if convicted).
It's been a while since I saw the film. You make some good points about Farley standing over the body of the deceased. The deceased being a good and honest, law-abiding citizen. And, in a small town, everyone knows everyone. Excellent points. -
Dust_Indotex — 9 years ago(July 05, 2016 07:19 PM)
After Vinny hands him the note and he does a 180, Vinny runs out if the courtroom to get Lisa to testify. After she leaves, the sheriff comes out and asks Vinny what it's about. Then the scene cuts to Vinny dragging Lisa back into the courthouse.
I imagine Vinny tells him something to the effect of: "Find that car, find the real murderers!" -
estcst-3 — 9 years ago(July 05, 2016 05:24 PM)
I don't know. I'm pretty sure in the case of the Beltway Sniper that there was never a ballistic match made until after the potential path of the killers was made after their arrest. This would mean that there isn't (or at least wasn't) a national ballistics database for unsolved cases. If the Beltway Snipers didn't get this kind of treatment with their high profile case I doubt a couple of NY hooligans who kill a store clerk in the boondocks would get much traction in a serious investigation.
-
JosephASpadaro — 9 years ago(July 07, 2016 05:58 AM)
Another point:
Just because you possess a murder weapon (after the fact of the murder) does not necessarily mean that you committed the murder.
The real murderer could have (and likely, would have) wanted to dispose of the weapon.
And, when the real murderer disposes of the weapon (after the murder), of course it will end up in the hands of some other person (i.e., who did not commit the murder). -
jzerba — 9 years ago(July 27, 2016 08:32 AM)
did you watch the movie? Vinny proved that it couldn't of been the defendants because the car they were driving couldn't of possibly made the tire marks. That alone was enough to get them off. Also if not for Vinny they never would of connected the gun to the crime.