An Analysis of Law film: Anatomy of a Murder

An Analysis of Law film: Anatomy of a Murder

At times people commit crimes, but they are not aware of the judgment they would receive. However, at times, innocent people can be accused of committing crimes that they have not done. Most judges are never careful about discussing the verdict and examining the case reported. This ignorance has resulted in the suffering of very innocent people. Some have been imprisoned while others have been executed due to the presence of substantial evidence, which is false. Capital punishment has led to the death of many innocent lives as the data collected world and in specific states like in the US.

However, the case is not the same in the film, Anatomy of Murder Judges are reasonable, and a bit cooperative and apply justice in all the facts they handle. Anatomy of murder is one of the fascinating films that I have ever watched concerning the topic of law. The unique part of this film reflects on the importance of justice and the application of deductive reasoning. In this paper, I will critically analyze the overview of the film Anatomy of a Murder. I will discuss one theme that is related to law, and critically examine if this film is accurate or it is inaccurate.

Overview of Anatomy of a Murder

Anatomy of a Murder is a critical courtroom drama or play that is written by Otto Preminger that addresses the significant weakness experienced in the trial cases in a jury system. This film was drafted in 1959. We have critical characters in this film, like the Former Michigan District attorney General. He spends most of his time fishing, using the piano to play jazz, and drinking. He also offers legal advice to diverse people from time to time (Traver, 2014, n.p). He offers this advice to whoever seeks it. However, the Attorney’s best friend is a former lawyer by the name Parn McCarthy, whose career failed due to his habit of excessive drinking. They two friends spend their time well. They use most of their evening reading laws and drinking as usual.

However, Paul Biegler or the Attorney is suffering in various ways. For one, he has a financial crisis or strains. From the film, it is clear that his secretary’s machine or the typewriter cannot work due to breaking down. Again, the secretary has to wait for a bit long time to receive her pay (Hildebrandt, 2016, n.p). Paul is straining to obtain money to pay his secretary and repair the broken non-functional typewriter. Thus, Paul accepts to defend an army Lieutenant, Lt. Manion, in his case. Manion is accused of killing an owner of a particular bar after the Katter is charged with raping Manion’s wife. Helping Manion to win this case would bring great significance to this character. He would not only receive money, but he would also accord him a chance to prove to the world that he is very competent. At the same time, he would determine that he is satisfactory compared to the successor in the district of the other Attorney general who overthrew him from power. Biegler considers the other Attorney as a secondary character. He reviews the chances of winning the case and takes the case for three thousand dollars. Later he requests, his friend McCarty to help him in the case.

Although Biegler finds it difficult to like his client, he does not mind whether he is innocent or guilty. What draws Biegler’s attention are the issues of succeeding in the case. He is sure that if he wins the case, he will obtain money. At the same time,  he would gain some respect from the other attorney general, who he considers as inferior. He focuses on trying to convince the jury than his client, Manion, has a legal excuse, and this will be enough justification as to why Manion killed this victim.  It would be easy to convince the Jury that Manion murdered the victim. The victim raped his wife and that it was an impulse that he could not resist. He knew that the victim raped his wife. Although this form of defence is unusual, McCarthy and Biegler find it easy to win the case by finding a precedent in Michigan. They later resolve that they do not have to justify to the jury that Manion made the killing as fueled by his impulse.

However, obtaining this goal is not easy. These two characters face numerous challenges. These are obstacles that seem to demean the significant story. This story is to be used as evidence for the defendant in the court. Manion and his wife find it difficult to understand why things have gone against their expectations. For one, the doctor who examines her says that he could not find evidence for the alleged rape (Pirie, 1981, n.p). The alleged rape did not seem to have happened willingly. It is revealed to be morally loose, although she dresses like a faithful wife as she heads to court.  It the truth of this case lies under the lover’s lane or path.

The most important thing here is to win the case. Therefore, Biegler wants to manipulate the jury by asking specific questions, and he volunteers to offer information that is heard by the board even though the judge dismissed it. For instance, Manion asks, “How can the jury disregard something that it has heard?” while Biegler responds by saying, “They can’t.” However, the entire jury process is said to be ironical. All the involved parties have planned what to say in this court. It is a fascinating irony that is worthy of listening. Biegler and his friend go to Mansions’ place to obtain his signature, but they find that he left. He left behind a note written that they took a flight with his wife, and it was an “irresistible impulse,” a term that he uses during the jury process.

Theme of justice and reasonable doubt

This film revolves around deliberations in the jury on a murder trial. The men stated in this film are after getting the idea of justice or bringing justice to the accused. This play is simple and clear to understand once it does not bring the complex concepts that are evident in the American criminal system. The right image of the criminal justice system is reflected in the presentation of the twelve jurors. Biegler and the Lawyer represent diligent men, ration, single-minded men who go through various evidence and discover the facts present in this evidence. These presented judges uncover what happened between the accused and the Bar owner on the night this murder occurred (Stiglitz, 2009, n.p). However, the opening moments in this movie reveal how people are motivated and their perspectives and conceptions concerning justice, which are influenced by their personal experiences and not rational.

A good example is Biegler, who stands alone even after the deliberations and his demotion. These presented judges, for this case, are not passionate. In their debates and discussions, their biases and irrational quality reveal. It is shown that Biegler and his friend McCarthy are after money since they are on the financial crisis.

First, the presented prosecutor in Manion’s has diverse views on his civic duty. For instance, some of them decide to pass judgment more abstractly to that of the American criminal system. Most of these claims made is that this juror clings to the American penal system of justice since they have great experiences injustices. Also, from their first judgments is clear that they are after making a verdict and go home. The primary judge seems to be and ready for a careful examination of this case. At first, he appears to be more rational and fair compared to the other judges and the lawyers involved in this case.  However, we later learn that this juror was only unrealistic and illogical in fact. If he were not sympathetic to this Manion and Biegler, this Mansion would have faced capital punishment. Other jurors claim that the defendant is guilty basing these claims on their experiences and biases. For one, he allows Biegler to narrate the story of Laura’s case of rape. Laura is Manion’s wife in this case.

Justice and reasonable doubt reveal from the Attorney, the lawyer, and the judge in the jury. The judge is not sure about the defendant’s innocence, and that is why he fails to vote; that is, he is guilty. He doubts the position of the defendant, something that he confesses several times in this pay. This judge does not claim that the defendant is not guilty or innocent, but the fact is that he is guilty (Hildebrandt, 2016, n.p). In factors, jurors cannot know the truth unless they carefully examine the accusations and the evidence provided in this case. From the case, it is like some of the people involved in this issue doubt if they did the right thing by saying that Manion is guilty. According to Biegler, they agreed with Manion he would pay three thousand dollars if the case succeeds. Manion does not pay, which turns out to be so ironical for he is not guilty. The author accepts the truth. He feels that doubt is a critical element in the judicial processes. Uncertainty in the legal system takes specific amounts of knowledge and gives one the benefit of the doubt to avoid punishing an innocent man. This act of executing Manion is what Biegler is afraid of since he will benefit greatly if it wins.

As the film unfolds, the prosecutor appears to be convinced that the defendant is guilty. The provided evidence is later analyzed, thus provided accuracy. The judge (Weaver) goes through some logical questions repeatedly though some jurors insist that it does not matter what this interpretation would be or imply. However, others claim that this interpretation matters a lot if the defendant faces this capital punishment. In the jury room, the judge examines all shreds of evidence provided. This judge is cautious in this process. All the evidence is evaluated keenly and logically. However, he raises questions on whether or how the murder witnesses stated in this case were truthful. It is no doubt that the accusations or the statements made against the defendant are inaccurate. They do not accuse them of lying, but it seems they interpreted that way in this case. Biegler convinces the juror that this defendant did the act out or irresistible instincts since the murder victim had raped his wife.

However, one of the judge decides to go through the provided evidence and accusations, keenly. The parties keep on arguing back and forth as they review the presented evidence (Malmgren, 1997, n.p). As this judge explains, his ideas, bias, and values reflect what he says for their intention is carrying out their civic duty. With time, the judge change their votes from guilty to innocent to not guilty and later end up passing a verdict or deciding the case. This verdict takes places after Biegler presents the case of Manion’s wife, rape.  The issue of justice here is a bit complex, for they all carry out a jury deliberation.  The judge believes that the defendant is guilty not because they carry out a careful discussion, including the lawyer and the Attorney, who help in proving the innocence of the accused. They realize that Manion is not guilty because they find this case being beyond a reasonable doubt.

However, this movie or film is a reflection of absolute justice as something that the jury cannot reach or examine. All the things that can be obtained are the reasonable doubt justice that is outlined in the legal system, thus making this definition to be more realistic. Some of the truth allow or make compromises as a result of irrationality that is displayed by the judge. Also, it results from the witnesses of murder who happen to be the Attorney and the lawyer. From the presented case, this juror tries to figure out what happened in this case and confront people. The scientific process of examining the corpse is done, and the judge passes a verdict. The fact is a simple idea is not arrived at through objective truth regarding justice in cases where human beings are present. From this case, justices could result from prejudices or biases of the jurors or even from their personal experiences. The prosecutor sets the accused free, and we learn that one of the characters keeps a great secret about the accused.

                            The position of Anatomy of a Murder and its purpose

Anatomy of a murder is a fictionalized story that is based on a true story of a death. However, this film deals with more than a court system. However, it aims at revealing the real-life and the activities that are observed in the presence of Americans. However, it is a fiction but adapted from the novel of John D Voelker. Therefore, we can say that this film is a fictional film that is based on a real story.

However, this story is argued from a real-life story in which an Attorney defended a character. The author of this film is careful enough, for he draws this case as it happens in the real-life story (Stiglitz, 2009, n.p). The narrated story is similar to what happened in this context. Therefore, the idea of observation is evident in this film.  The writer aims at scientifically portraying the legal system. This act is attained by carrying out a scientific investigation concerning the murder of the victim or the murder of the bar owner who was accused of raping Minion’s wife. Therefore, the legal system is revealed in a realistic way or manner.

Moreover, in this story, the characters observe one another. They are all aware of the images that they are likely to form. The way they appear determines their trial in the jury. Moreover, this theme is developed through Preminger’s observation of the neutral camera. This work motivates the readers or the audience to evaluate all the details presented in each case. This act helps the audience in designing their opinions and interpretations of the given situation, which allows them to imagine or feel that it is happening in a real jury.

In terms of accuracy, I can say that the Anatomy of Murder is an official story basing my argument on the fact that it is fiction but based on reality. It is a reflection of what happens in most American legal systems or criminal systems. In most cases, clients could be set free, yet they are guilty, and at other times. Other clients could be executed or set to face capital punishment when they are innocent. Again, this movie reflects on different criminal juries where the judges or the jurors are never careful about the presented evidence. In most American penal systems, we have a juror who passes verdict without examining or evaluating the presented evidence or facts concerning the case. Also, we have other judges who pass judgments according to their personal experience.

A good example is a juror who has hugely experienced injustice in the US. He will end up giving unjust verdicts to the defendants or the accused. Again, we have other jurors who pass judgments as per the person’s appearance, gender, the race, among other social factors.

Therefore, the Anatomy of a Murder is a significant reflection of all the activities carried out in the jury. It accurately presents real-life experiences in the form of fiction as outlined. It contains the similarity of ninety-five per cent of the real-life activities and mostly in America. In this state, where many issues are affecting the law or the criminal system. The effect result from irrationally, bias, and competent lawmakers or judges in the process of case hearing.

Moreover, this movie reveals a fundamental approach to murder issues. This act starts from the onset of the story, where we have a character who is guilty and believes that he would be proved innocent through insanity. That is the reason Manion calls Biegler to stand by him during the court proceedings (Pirie, 1981, n.p). Again, it accurately reveals much on human nature and, most notably, peoples’ character as the film comes an end. The fascinating accuracy is the fact that when we examine time, this story is relevant to today. In the contemporary American criminal system, these activities or irrational and bias jurors still exist. Again this story becomes more interesting as it presented the legal system as it represents an actual case that the author handles.

The purpose of Anatomy of a Murder

Anatomy of a Murder‘s primary objective is to critic the American judicial system through scientific methods. Preminger is a scientist. He decides to select a case to evaluate specific things and depict both the strengths and weaknesses of the American justice system or criminal system.  Through watching this movie, the audience is requested to behave like a scientist. They are inspired and motivated to observe things or behaviours in society and later evaluate them and then observe what people do, and they come up with conclusions for such actions. Again this film calls for people’s observation of trail in a systematic manner. Anatomy is a scientific term. Science involves following various procedures to study different interactions and body organs. In our case,  murder here consists of a body that is divided into investigating the cause of the killing. For instance, the camera used in this case zooms in and out. It reflects on the screen and is used in the court.

In the court, the displayed image is used to examine the cause of murdering the American criminal or justice system. Therefore, I can say that the author aims at depicting and informing people about the importance of scientific technology in the judicial system. Again. The author encourages the characters to do what his characters do in this film (Traver, 2014, n.p). Still, the characters in this film address the issue of science by employing observation.

A good example is the Attorneys who bring his case by reviewing the witnesses and critiquing their motivation to reveal the preferred version of this film. So the purpose here is the importance of considering the use of language or the right words to pass a message to the people and relay in a truthful manner through the use of scientific reports. These reports include all the facts observed in the film.

Additionally, Anatomy of a Murder portrays a vivid image of the judicial system and its structure. The author presents his experiences or in other words, a picture of himself. From the film, we learn that he learned the law, and he has a doctorate in law while his father is Attorney, a character that he revels in this movie. His intention here is to reveal this judicial system more realistically and truthfully. The message brings the audience close to legal matters.

In conclusion, this film is brilliant for it depicts the importance of the invention of law. It starts from the ancient times and reveals how law it is today. The major theme is clear, thus showing its purpose. Also, I find it is informative. It informs people what code has come to be today. Again it educated people on the relationship between law and science and also its importance. The author employs both personal experiences as an Attorney and prosecutor, which make the message revealed authentic. This film is a beautiful watch. The creation of the crime scenes in the jury portrays or reflects on the author’s knowledge on the topic of law. Therefore, the story is well structured and based on facts or real-life activities. I would recommend many people to watch this film. It is a fantastic watch.

Work cited

Hildebrandt, Sabine. The anatomy of murder: Ethical transgressions and anatomical science during the Third Reich. Berghahn Books, 2016.

Malmgren, Carl D. “Anatomy of murder: Mystery, detective, and crime fiction.” Journal of Popular Culture 30.4 (1997): 115.

Pirie, David, ed. Anatomy of the Movies. New York: Macmillan, 1981.

Stiglitz, Joseph E. “The anatomy of a murder: Who killed America’s economy?.” Critical Review 21.2-3 (2009): 329-339.

Traver, Robert. Anatomy of a Murder. St. Martin’s Griffin, 2014.