What do you think of the outcome of the prosecution witness?

At the end of the film, Leonard was found not guilty and released in court. But the truth is surprising. Leonard is guilty. He did kill the rich woman, and it was to get the money. Everything is arranged by them. The intriguing truth is not the end. Leonard uses Christine to get away with it, abandons her, and she ends up killing him. I wonder if the students noticed that the murder weapon Christine used was the knife on the table. The knife was originally intended to be used as evidence. Why was it left on the table after the trial? Even if the defense is successful and the evidence is invalid, will there be only one piece of evidence - the knife left on the table? This is obviously impossible. Another point is that killing Leonard with a knife was actually a hint from Wilfred to Christine. Wilfrid used the principle of light reflection to use his monocle to shine on the knife, causing the angry but overwhelmed Christine to give Leonard a fatal knife that betrayed her. In this process, if Christine is the principal offender, Wilfred is likely to be an accessory, because judging from his behavior, he obviously knows that he is helping the perpetrator commit the crime.

In the end Wilfred said that Christine did not kill him, but executed him. From this point, another question may arise. Will Wilfred act as Leonard's lawyer to defend him or condone the criminal? We say that before a lawyer defends a defendant, he must first fully understand the defendant and trust him to get rid of his crime. However, the defender in the film fell into the trap set by the defendant and defended him based on his duties as a lawyer. In the end, the defense was successful, which meant that he condoned his crime and broke the balance of justice. But Wilfrid is obviously a good lawyer who advocates justice and upholds fairness. He could not tolerate Leonard's blasphemy and fooling around with English law. "The balance of justice may occasionally tilt, but it will eventually return to justice." In short, Leonard finally died.

Nurse Plimsoll, who has always played a role in regulating the atmosphere, also has an important influence in this film. When she saw Leonard being killed, it wasn't much of a surprise to her, and seeing Christine being used and then abandoned was not much of a surprise, because during the trial, the strange women in the audience were angry. Accusation, exaggeration. Crying is not without reason.

It wasn’t “because she participated in a murder trial for the first time” as she said, but because she was Leonard’s mistress and she felt that Leonard was really going to be sentenced. , very sad. Plimsol probably thought of the ending through various details, so when faced with these surprises, she did not overreact like others. Looking back at the entire movie, we will find that Plimson is actually the omniscient person in the entire movie. She clearly knew what little tricks Wilfred had done, such as stealing cigars and exchanging them for brandy. As a clue, she really understands Wilfred's experience and mood as a defender. I think the setting of this character has a lot to do with the author's belief that the law needs such supporters. The law not only requires the support of judges and lawyers, but also the support and compliance of ordinary people. Primson will likely play a major role in the film.

This film truly introduces the British court culture at that time, reflecting the role of lawyers, the cases they may encounter in peacetime, the accidents they may encounter, and the challenges they face in delivering justice. or the choices and solutions made when condoning a crime. In the end, justice prevailed. Unlike many film and television works, people's understanding of lawyers is only full of fantasy and fiction. Lawyers are not as far away as you think. They are just an ordinary profession that touches life. The law is not omnipotent, but it is indispensable.