LEGAL FACT: John James Rambo broke no laws.
Prove me wrong.
sharehe broke teasles law.
unfortunately that is what matter!
MovieChat Forums > First Blood (1982) Discussion > LEGAL FACT: John James Rambo broke no la...
He didn't break a law. Teasle in the movie was a no good stinking jerk who was best friends with a sadist. He also refused to let Rambo get food. I like the movie a bit but prefer the novel where Teasle is sympathetic.
shareYou didn't actually watch the film did you.
1. Rambo assaulted a police officer at the police station prior to escaping. He also assaulted Teasle near the end of the film.
2. Grand theft auto when he stole a motorcycle.
3. Fleeing arrest.
4. Resisting arrest.
5. Carjacking.
6. Destruction of property.
I wasn't talking about that part of the film. I was talking about him getting arrested at the beginning. He wasn't breaking laws by coming back into town. Teasle was a prejudiced stupid jerk and that's what started the whole thing. Not to mention he was a no good stinking jerk for telling Rambo to walk over 30 miles away to get a bite to eat. Teasle was the one who was in the wrong at the beginning and unlike the book is a no good stinking jerk who you don't feel sorry for when Rambo shoots him to death at the end.
shareThe post of yours that I was repling to did not contain the words beginning or arrested. You said "He didn't break a law".
But yeah, Teasle was a jerk.
I don't know about Washington where this most likely took place but I remember during college in New York State a few decades ago a fellow carried a knife in a belt sheath. There was a statute against doing such from what I understood. Maybe where Rambo took place there was a specific statute and that Rambo might have been formally charged once at the police station.
share
A lot of what he did, BEFORE he went bugfuck on the entire town, could be excused as self-defense.
He was being held hostage by a rogue police force acting in clear and flagrant violation of his rights.
He was justified in doing whatever was necessary to secure his escape from them.
What happened in the woods was simply an extension of his escape.
Trautman was right — they should’ve let him go after that. Even if they’d picked him up later, any decent defense attorney would’ve been able to get him acquitted.
It wasn’t until he came back at them seeking revenge that he truly and unforgivably broke the law.
I'm not a lawyer, not even on Movie Chat. But I think you are completely wrong.
While the law might work the way you suggest for the rich, for the poor like Rambo, it would not work that way.
Vagrancy would be the charge, although it's vague when it comes to a drifter, so it would depend on the judge.
Yeah, Teasle was a dick. I get him trying to keep smelly transients out of town, but he could have let him get something to eat before driving him to the town line.
Really? You made a claim, you prove it is true.
shareNo. I have seen this movie quite a few times. It's mainly just that Rambo didn't commit any crimes until Teasle unrightfully arrests him. It doesn't help when he brings Rambo into the police station an officer asks, "What's the charge, Will?" and he replies, "Another smartass drifter." Meaning he goes out of his way to treat every poor and homeless person like crap.
I admit though I prefer the novel where Teasle is sympathetic. Book Teasle would be offended by movie Teasle.
Being a bum, that's what! Oh that's Rocky
shareOh well at least it brought us the funny line, "Vagrancy, wasn't it? That'll look real good on his grave at Arlington. Here lies John Rambo, winner of the congressional medal of honor! Survivor of Countless incursions behind enemy lines! Killed for vagrancy in Jerk Water, USA."
share[deleted]
Not at the beginning.
share