My Cousin Vinny : Vinny didn't really do anything

The reason the defendants got off was because the real perpetrators got themselves arrested in possession of the murder weapon. Ballistics would match the bullet from the crime scene with that gun, unequivocally exonerating the defendants,regardless of the quality of Vinny's lawyer abilities.

Yes, but the real perpetrators were found in another state or another jurisdiction.

Police did not connect all the dots, that those two who were arrested in another jurisdiction were involved in the instant case.

I believe it was Vinny (Pesci) who connected all the dots.

That is correct, right before Vinny goes to get Lisa to testify he hands the police officer a piece of paper and asks him to check on this. That is when the cop comes back and says they found the other car.

Yes. And, actually, that scene always surprised me.

When Vinny makes the request, the Sheriff basically says: "No way, that's not my job! I'm not doing that!" pretty defiantly.

Then, Vinny says "Please, I only have three minutes." (or whatever), and the Sheriff does a complete 180 and obliges the request.

Also: that actor was perfect in that role of sheriff. He looked and acted like a typical Southern redneck sheriff. Pot belly and all.

that's D-Day, from Animal House!













Take your pinche color-coordinated sponsored chingada and take a flying fck

The actor (who played the Sheriff) was in Animal House?

He must have been quite young back then.

With his trademark mustache

http://pyxurz.blogspot.com/2011/09/national-lampoons-animal-house-page-2.html














Take your pinche color-coordinated sponsored chingada and take a flying fck

Wow! Just as I said he was really young in that film (and in that photo).

Interesting to see that photo. Thanks!

He might (perhaps) be best known as recurring character "Jack Dalton" on the series "MacGyver".

~Brad

---

He might (perhaps) be best known as recurring character "Jack Dalton" on the series "MacGyver".

---

I never watched MacGyver. But, wow, that goes way back!

And now we know where he went with that police car he stole.

Yep!

. Ephemeron.

Joseph: "Yes. And, actually, that scene always surprised me. When Vinny makes the request, the Sheriff basically says: "No way, that's not my job! I'm not doing that!" pretty defiantly. Then, Vinny says "Please, I only have three minutes." (or whatever), and the Sheriff does a complete 180 and obliges the request."


I think there's a couple things going on with that-

One, Sheriff Farley is genuinely curious about what kind of information he will get if he *does* put a trace on a 1963 Pontiac Tempest.

Also, the Sheriff has no personal animosity toward the defendants Bill and Stan (or Vinny for that matter.) He wants whoever killed that clerk to be caught and convicted. Now if it turns out to indeed be Bill and Stan, fine, throw 'em in prison. BUT, if the evidence proves that they had nothing to do with the murder, then the trial with Bill and Stan is a waste of time, and he wants the *actual* killers to pay.



~Brad

---

I think there's a couple things going on with that-

One, Sheriff Farley is genuinely curious about what kind of information he will get if he *does* put a trace on a 1963 Pontiac Tempest.

Also, the Sheriff has no personal animosity toward the defendants Bill and Stan (or Vinny for that matter.) He wants whoever killed that clerk to be caught and convicted. Now if it turns out to indeed be Bill and Stan, fine, throw 'em in prison. BUT, if the evidence proves that they had nothing to do with the murder, then the trial with Bill and Stan is a waste of time, and he wants the *actual* killers to pay.

---

You make some good points.

However:

(1) The Sheriff does a very quick turn-around. One second he says, "Forget it, I am not helping you, that's not my job!" And, literally two seconds later, he goes along with the request.

(2) Throughout most of the film/trial, the Sheriff clearly sides with the prosecutor. Throughout, he looks upon Vinny with scorn and contempt. A few times, he giggles and laughs at Vinny. You could clearly tell that he was on the "side" of the prosecutor. Not necessarily on the "side" of finding the real killers.

In other words, once he "thought" that they had the correct killers, he was pretty much closed-minded.

For some reason, he became open-minded (or maybe, just curious) when Vinny made that last-minute plea for help.

Also:

The Sheriff did seem to have personal contempt for Vinny.

When Vinny was flailing all over court and falling on his face a few times, the Sheriff clearly was enjoying Vinny's mis-steps. The Sheriff was highly amused and was gloating over Vinny's failures in court (along with his "boss", the prosecutor).

This was (likely) personal contempt for Vinny based mostly on the fact that he was an "outsider", from New York.

They (the Sheriff and the prosecutor) did not like Vinny from Day 1, mostly because he was an "outsider" from New York, who was trying to step on the toes of Southern justice. It had nothing to do with the fact that the Sheriff and the prosecutor were yearning for "real justice" and to find the "real killer".

Also, for the above reasons, the Sheriff and the prosecutor were highly biased against the two boys (the suspects). They were also outsiders, from New York, who thought they could run through this backwoods redneck town, do as they pleased, and get away with murder (in the closed-minded and biased view of the Southern folks, including the Sheriff and the prosecutor).

So, yes, there was indeed personal animosity.

And, of course, the Judge didn't help matters much. He "fed into" (and encouraged) the Sheriff's and the prosecutor's disdain for Vinny.

"There was indeed personal animosity".

Indeed - especially considering that at one point he took it upon himself to blatantly lie in court by testifying that the defendant had stated "I shot the clerk". Funny nobody mentions that.



"facts are stupid things" Ronald Reagan

True.

But in the Sheriff's defense the defendant did indeed say "I shot the clerk". The Sheriff wasn't "lying". Although, of course, he was being misleading and he was misrepresenting the facts.

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

I agree with all you said. Yes, that's very plausible.

But you have to admit, Farley (along with the D. A. Trotter) certainly was basking in the glory of all of Vinny's fumbles and failures.

Definitely!


Pobre de Dios que no sale en revistas, que no es modelo ni artista, o de familia real

I wouldn't say they were basking in glory. But they were amused by his ineptness.

Yes, they were definitely amused.

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.

Yes, all good points.

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.

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.

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!"

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.

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).

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.