The police are so dumb it's not even believable
-
fstopkennedy — 14 years ago(July 03, 2011 05:41 PM)
The police are dumb or are they busy? Do people really believe in CSI?
The police had usual suspects, they had evidence that some criminal killed the girl, she wasn't such a great celebrity in London, she had no relatives, she had no midia/journalists around the police. So why those policemen would bother?
The case was closed. They had other cases to go through (that is, after some coffee). End of story. -
GuyOnTheLeft — 13 years ago(August 08, 2012 08:15 AM)
Bingo. And let's face it: an upper class guy with no criminal history is not going to be hounded relentlessly by the police especially with the old lady getting killed across the hallit's just too bizarre to think he'd be so diabolical (doubt it's ever happened IRL).
Many murders are never solved, unlike what's portrayed on TV. And many innocent people have been convicted of murder as well. -
sillyhat — 14 years ago(July 10, 2011 12:55 PM)
Presumably, they would have investigated Chris further had they not suddenly found the body of another burglar with the old lady's wedding ring in his possession. That's a pretty major bit of circumstantial evidence there.
-
screwtape2713 — 14 years ago(July 13, 2011 02:10 PM)
Uhmm, no it wouldn't. A ballistics test matches a bullet to a particular firearm by matching the rifling in the barrel to the rifling marks indented into the bullet during firing. Even in the same make/model of firearm, minute differences in manufacturing tolerances on the barrel plus individual wear patterns make the rifling marks unique, like a fingerprint.
A shotgun is a smoothbore - it doesn't HAVE rifling. Anything fired from it, even single-round slugs, just goes wobbling down the barrel without being touched by anything. This means a shotgun firing slugs has an accurate range of 100 m or less, like an old-fashioned musket, but it also means that even a shotgun slug cannot be matched positively to a single gun. As for shot pellets - forget it. They go flying down the barrel in a clump.
Your CSI ballisticians will be able to tell you what size shot the woman was hit with, and from the number of pellets and size of the entry wound can probably tell you what gauge shotgun was likely used and from how far away, but that's about it. They might also be able to match the pellets to a specific brand of ammunition if they are very good and/or very lucky, which would help if a suspect has both a shotgun and that make of ammo in his possession. But it's never going to be an exact match. -
shoobe01-1 — 12 years ago(February 02, 2014 02:47 PM)
This. And note they showed him keeping the shells, so he did some traceable stuff right.
They /might/ have been able to recover a pellet or get some grooves off the wad that indicated the choke installed, but that's dependent on things not being destroyed on impact so is pretty hit or miss for this range.
CSI-ballisticians: Shotguns spread out VERY slowly. A sawed-off shotgun would have essentially the same pattern as a full choke at inside-a-room ranges we're talking about here.
I thought the sawed-off fixation was perfect. They know that's common with criminals and decided that's the best way to sneak one in the house, so were even looking to things like a /missing/ gun from the estate because sawing is destructive. They were still on the wrong track for a borrowed and broken down gun, returned.
All believable. -
MrNobody685 — 14 years ago(July 17, 2011 07:10 PM)
An autopsy of Nola would of revealed that the she was pregnant. The police knew that Chris, had an affair with her. In reality the police would then of taken Chris's DNA to check for paternety, hence providing a strong motive for Chris to be the main suspect.
-
alzanden-1 — 14 years ago(November 18, 2011 08:45 PM)
I think the way they think it happened was totally feasible. Nola comes home, she walks past Mrs. Eastby's apartment to her own door, as she is fumbling for the keys the "burglar" comes running out of the old lady's apartment. Nola hears the commotion so she turns around, sees the burglar, he panics at being seen and shoots her.
-
pjbrown1978 — 14 years ago(March 18, 2012 11:18 PM)
I think you may have an inaccurate impression of police methods from watching too many cop shows. The police were writing out the obvious scenario when they first arrived on the scene - another drug related crime. At close range, the shotgun pellets are not going to spread significantly, so there would be little to indicate it was not a sawn off shotgun, even if they bothered looking. No holes here - move along now.
-
jeevanravi-1 — 13 years ago(May 10, 2012 07:18 AM)
I was thinking about the phone records. I mean the police would check into that and find out that Chris has made calls to Nola before the murder.
Nola also seems to have told her friend from the work place about meeting her lover that day.
And after the murder, he walked out of her apartment in broad daylight without a mask or anything. Surely with all the cctvs in london, some camera must have picked up his picture.
His alibi is weak because he could have still made the opera after the murder..
So many loopholes. But i still was rooting for Chris to getaway with it.
I don't know why and i love this movie for it. -
LightningLad — 13 years ago(September 06, 2012 11:51 PM)
I think it would have been completely plausible that, having just killed someone, the burglar comes out of the apartment, sees someone standing there, and shoots them as well. He wouldn't have worried about where or how the person was standing. It's fairly certain she turned to him before he shot.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Mortal-Creeps-ebook/dp/B006LO3TCA -
rediguana — 13 years ago(October 03, 2012 03:21 PM)
Did the people posting here not see the same film I did? The police were opening an investigation on him. They found the diary, brought him in to the station for questioning and had a few leads that they seemed to want to pursue further. It will take the police months and sometimes even years to gather enough evidence to charge a person in a crime like this and the film implied that all of this occurred after just a few days. It was only after the ring was found on a criminal who was killed while committing a drug robbery that they were satisfied and dropped him as a suspect. When police investigate, everything doesnt happen instantaneously.
-
rociobelindamendez — 12 years ago(July 09, 2013 07:07 AM)
It is all very plausible, keep in mind todays society, how many innocent are behind bars, and how many criminals are roaming free that is life unfortunately, it is unjust, or maybe, as this film heavily suggests, unlucky.
There are answers to all questions on this thread that I've read, since it is a film, it is open to interpretation. Here are mine :
1-The crime itself not being believable as a robbery: easily believable there was a burglar and he left the apartment and saw someone who witnessed him coming out with a gun/ who could possibly jeopardise his innocence, shouted out "hey !" they turn, then bang, he did what he had to doover.
2-Autopsy showing Nola was pregnant: High possibility that she was never pregnant, it never came up afterwards, and the way she was acting is very similar to a lot of women, wanting to keep a man by their side, no matter at what cost. It was all an elaborate scheme.
3-Why would he kill someone he loved?: There are a few answers for this one, take your pick
-He is a sociopath (he shows very little emotion throughout, except passion for getting what HE wants)
-He never loved Nola, he wanted to F*&ck, was in lust with her, nothing more.
-He did love her, but wasn't man enough to own up to his decisions, so he made an even greater one.
-Once he had her, he stopped giving a sh*t, and the way she was acting put him off, the baby situation even more so, he was willing to get rid of the baby, why not get rid of them both? ect..
4-Police were stupid in their investigations : Police do what they have to, they often spend too much time on the wrong things, after all they are human and many are fooled by great crimes daily. They are not all characters in a movie or show, living their life merely to solve one case that means F&*k all to them, they go into work, do what they can, and go home and live their life. They were going to pursue the case further, the guy was onto him BOOM there was MUCH stronger evidence after the man was found with the ring, all of this of course, to do again, with the theme of the movie, luck. Luck is usually unbelievable anyway, it is something that merits a "oh wow, that was lucky" not something that happens to everyone or else it would be normal so the fact that he got away with it was luck, he still has to live with the guilt and knowledge of what he has done, and that is that, the end of the chapter.
5- They should have investigated the shotgun : apart from what i stated above, the guns were not his, although he did have access to them, they were legitimately owned and such a wealthy family quite commonly owns such firearms, it wouldn't have been enough to solve the case anyway.
All in all a beautiful film, it has a certain rawness to it, that is refreshing, the fact that you don't want him to get caught, and root for him while he does unspeakable things, is the mark of a fantastic crafted piece of work. Great film, I love the way the opera music accentuates the actual operatic plot happening, it is all very reminiscent of an opera, a dramatic act that deals with love, lies, passion, luck, fate etc.. Great movie, second time around I liked it even more ! and it is very sexy as well.
Rocio Belinda Mendez -
sean_pak215 — 12 years ago(July 22, 2013 05:22 PM)
I'm surprised that nobody has pointed out what (I thought) was obvious: we don't know that Chris DIDN'T get caught eventually. As the others in this thread point out, there were way too many clues, and way too many opportunities where the police would find out the burglar didn't do the crime.
Just a smidgeon of investigation would turn up phone calls, Nola's pregnant status, the gun used in the murders (which they would eventually find out the burglar never had access to). The burglar route could easily go cold, then the detectives would investigate Chris again. They may discover how expensive the weapon was, and that combined with the unborn baby would immediately ring a warning bell and make the detectives think of Chris. All it would take is one DNA test (Chris left his sweat all over the crime scene).
My theory is that Chris goes to jail after the movie ends. It would tie in with the theme of the film, which is the ups and downs of luck. Throughout the story, Chris's fortunes swing both ways. At the end, luck is on his side, but who's to say that his fortunes won't sink again? -
Brian7250 — 12 years ago(July 25, 2013 05:59 AM)
I agree it's possible he might get caught later, but why bother to introduce another suspect unless you want to give the impression he might well get away with it? I think the police did mention the fact that she was pregnant by him, that would not in itself prove his guilt, however it's very unlikely that they would agree to keep that quiet just to save his marriage. Obviously any serious forensic investigation would have shown he was guilty anyway and in the absence of any proof of the other suspect's presence at the crime scene, I don't think they would just wind up the case, after all, a buglary could have taken place without it having any connection to the murder. Personally, I think the film was great and the story believeable - right up to the last fifteen minutes when the police intervention was farcical and rather spoiled what went on before. That part was like a Woody Allen comedy rather than the serious stuff that led up to it. There would have been a fair sized investigation for a double murder, not a couple of coppers deciding he might not be guilty after all. Perhaps the idea was that he wouldn't be able to live with what he had done, even if he remained free.
-
drnossal — 12 years ago(August 23, 2013 08:56 AM)
I don't think so. Chris goes scot-free, unless he does something dumb like confess.
- There is no evidence that Nola was actually pregnant. Her claim may well have been a ruse. Even if she was pregnant, the police already know all about Chris' affair with her. It might highlight an even stronger motive, but the police sergeant was already certain Chris was the guilty party; he didn't need a pregnancy to convince him that Chris was his man. Their problem was overwhelming evidence that a drug addict with a long record and stolen goods in his possession did it. They had little more than a motive for Chris, to continue to pursue that line of inquiry would have been pointless and a waste of police resources.
- Same for the phone call. The affair was known, even if the call was connected to both Chris and Nola (I don't recall which phones were used), he could simply admit to having spoken with her that day. Corroboration of the affair? Yes. Proof of murder? No.
- How do you prove the drug addict didn't have access to a shotgun? We already know the addict had a long arrest record. While the movie doesn't tell us, quite possible some of those arrests involved theft or use of firearms or other weapons. The drug addict was, as I recall, shot to death, so he was obviously associated with people who had guns, at the least.
- How in the world could the police determine the value of the shotgun that was used in the murders? Not possible, unless Chris used some kind of exotic shot shells. In fact, the police automatically assume the murder weapon to be some junkie's concealable sawn-off shotgun when it was not.
- To perform a DNA test, you have to have a viable sample. The police would have to swab the entire insides of both apartments and the hallway, testing literally hundreds of samples likely containing DNA from multiple people. After all that, Chris had a legitimate explanation for his DNA having been present in those areas, having obviously visited on multiple occasions.
DNA is useful when you have an obvious sample to work with, for example hair, skin, blood or other bodily fluids left at the scene. Chris left no such obvious clue. - The one serious clue left by Chris occurs when he rushes out of the apartment building, obviously upset, sweating and carrying a sizeable duffle bag, and collides with a passerby. If that man ever connected the double murder with his sidewalk encounter with Chris, very likely he could positively identify Chris, placing him at the scene at the precise time of the murders. The jig would certainly be up then. Unfortunately for the police, that potential key witness never materializes.
- The theme of the film is, as you say, luck and how a single, nearly random twist of fate decides whether you spend the rest of your life alone in prison, or in the luxury of wealth and a loving family.
Not only does Chris avoid getting caught by multiple means (the passerby, being seen taking or replacing the shotgun, getting caught by a security camera, a witness to the Nola murder, the elderly neighbor home and alone at the right time, Nola shows up on schedule, successfully destroying or hiding the evidence, etc.), he also had the unbelievable one in a million lucky chance that the ring didn't fall in the river, was picked up by a perfect patsy and the patsy managed to get himself killed before the police could interview him properly.
The determination, reluctant though it may have been, that the drug addict was the very likely culprit served to short circuit any line of investigation that might have turned up solid evidence against a man who commits a double murder, gets away with it and lives a lovely, comfortable life for his trouble. Some people just win the lottery, through no real effort of their own other than a willingness to buy a ticket. End of story.
"You didn't come into this life just to sit around on a dugout bench, did ya?" - Morris Buttermaker