This thing always bugged me about this movie. One major plot point established in the case was that Downey wasn't in the
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — A Few Good Men
shchen81 — 10 years ago(January 22, 2016 05:14 PM)
This thing always bugged me about this movie. One major plot point established in the case was that Downey wasn't in the barracks when Kendrick ordered the code red.
But why was only Downey questioned about it? Why was Dawson not cross examined at all? Especially why didn't Kaffee put Dawson on the stand?
While the prosecution can prove that Downey wasn't in his room during the time of the order, it seemed crucial that Dawson's statement will prove that the code red ordered by Kendrick did in fact occur.
The prosecution also focused on Dawson's intent of murdering Santiago to cover up the fence line shooting. You would think that Dawson's testimony in court was of particular importance to explain the circumstances of what happened.
Plot hole? -
courtey8400 — 9 years ago(December 30, 2016 06:57 AM)
The movie makes it clear that not all testimony is shown. For example, only the tail end of Downey's direct testimony is shown before the cross examination by Ross. After Ross slam dunked him, they certainly would have followed up to do damage control, but that wasn't shown either.