MovieChat Forums > The Onion Field (1980) Discussion > Who fired the other 4 shots?

Who fired the other 4 shots?

posted 16 years ago by kennyrov1
12 replies | jump to latest

Joseph Wambaugh believed it was Smith yet the movie portrays him as much less cold-blooded and calculating individual than Powell (although perhaps James Woods' commanding performance helps to make him seem so intimidating!) The director is non-committal, the shooting scene is deliberately ambiguous.
Smith maintains that he is a petty thief and not a killer. I haven't read the book.
Just wondering if either Smith (death-bed confession?) or Powell have ever made any subsequent admission about who fired the 4 shots into Campbell's chest as he lay on the ground?

[–] Homer900 16 years ago

To the best of my knowledge, neither one of the two punks ever admitted to being the trigger man. Doesn't matter, under California law, both were equally guilty and the only problem with this sorted event was the 1972 Supreme Court decision to overturn the death penalty (Furman v. Georgia) that kept these two animals from dying in the gas chamber. Smith died earlier this year and Powell is still in prison.

[–] bertrambunter 16 years ago

i'm with you - who cares who fired the other four shots - the first one was fatal and they should both have fried or whatever was the execution method of choice at the time. there's something very wrong with a legal system which allows two cold blooded cop killers sentenced to death by the people of california to escape and live long lives at the expense of the taxpayer.

[–] 1btb 16 years ago

I agree except for the first thing. The first shot was NOT fatal, it was the next four shots to the chest as he lay on the ground that killed him. The first shot hit just below the nose, in the soft pallet tissue just above the teeth. Autopsy reports said this bullet would have not been fatal. The DVD contains a very informative Special Feature that explains this and other questions one might have about this film/story.

[–] nutsberryfarm 12 years ago

good point.

“Can't go wrong with taupe."- Wynn Duffy

[–] WarpedRecord 15 years ago

There also something wrong with a system in which it costs even more to execute someone than to let two killers live long lives. So what's the answer? Let 'em go for the sake of fiscal responsibility?

[–] steveintucson 12 years ago

Great point and much more relevant now. In Arizona prosecutors now routinely pass on the death penalty because of the expense.

Here in Tucson alone, and believe me, things are a lot worse up in Phoenix, we have a murder almost every day and a sensational one at least once a month. By sensational I mean cruel and depraved in one way or another and gaining much notoriety, and generally with little doubt who the perpetrator was. The shooter of Gabriel Giffords and 6 others who were killed. Yet, I can't recall the last execution that was carried out and I'm sure there haven't been more than 2 in any single year during the 20 years I have lived here. It's like you really can get away with murder.

[–] WarpedRecord 12 years ago

I lived in Phoenix in the late '80s, and it seemed pretty safe then for a large city, but I know there are major problems with drugs, gangs and the border now.

California hasn't had an execution since 2006, and capital punishment is on hold pending a review of some of the drugs used in lethal injection. Meanwhile, voters will decide in November whether to abolish the death penalty, and the backers of the measure are emphasizing more the tremendous expenses in the endless appeals rather than the moral issues.

Frankly, I'm undecided about the death penalty, though on cost alone, it's a huge drain to the state because of the revolving-door of appeals. And I also wonder whether it's an effective crime deterrent. It's such an abstract concept to someone who, for whatever reason, is about to commit a murder that they might possibly be executed (but probably not) in a few decades once they exhaust all their appeals, courtesy of the taxpayers.

[–] CaliManDan35 10 years ago

-steveintucson- your statement isn't true. Maybe I'm picking at straws here but I do get a little bent out of shape when someone speaks about something they claim is fact yet they are wrong.

You mention that in Tucson there is a murder almost every single day. If that were true then Tucson would have something close to 365 murders a year, one for every day, give or take of course.

Yet you wrote that statement in 2012 and in the year 2012 Tucson only had 43 murders the entire year. Hardly "almost every single day". Furthermore, Phoenix and Tucson are almost dead even as far as murder rate. I say murder rate because Phoenix obviously has many more murders than Tucson but that is also because Phoenix has 3 times as many people too. So even though Phoenix had 123 murders in 2012 and Tucson had 43, there murder rate is almost dead even at 8.3 per 100,000 and 8.1 per 100,000 respectively.

Tucson has a higher crime rate (per capita) than Phoenix in almost every category except for burglaries and auto thefts.

[–] resul452 8 years ago

i rekon it was Powell

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]