MovieChat Forums > The Fugitive (1993) Discussion > I guess Kimble had a lousy attorney

I guess Kimble had a lousy attorney

posted 8 years ago by Angry_Dukat
15 replies | jump to latest

This is one aspect of the film that always bugged me. A good lawyer would have pointed out that Helen could have easily meant "Richard, he's trying to kill me" rather than "Richard...he's trying to kill me" or that she could have easily been coerced into saying that by the intruder. Either one of those would have ensured reasonable doubt, all of which needs to be removed to convict one of murder. I doubt a doctor couldn't afford a better attorney.

Feminism dismantled: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=a2bvAMj-GLc

[–] julesaz 8 years ago

I always got the impression that the drug company interfered with a fair trial.

[–] dmcreif 8 years ago

We are shown Kimble's lawyer is a friend of his ("My advice, as both your friend and legal counsel...") in a flashback. So, IMHO, Kimble picked a lawyer he trusted but who might not have been that good. Furthermore, another scene seem to show that Kimble tasked his lawyer with finding the "One Armed Man". It's possible that Kimble demanded his lawyer focus on that lead (Hoping to at the same time catch the man who killed his wife), instead of the evidence and the lawyer complied with a strategy that far less likely to lead to a successful defense because it's what his client, a close personal friend, demanded of him.

[–] JannTosh 8 years ago

yeah the trial aspect and how terrible Kimble's attorney seemed really bugged me. A wealthy surgeon should honestly have a team of lawyers and maybe even a private investigator working the case.

[–] sdtony42 8 years ago

A wealthy upper class white doctor with no criminal history and no solid evidence tying him to the crime is not getting convicted.

[–] Cinnamental 8 years ago

And any decent attorney would also advise his client to shave off his Unabomber beard for a trial. It makes him look deranged to a jury. Clean shaven for court, with glasses.

[–] uruseiranma 8 years ago

I do feel that the lawyer was a friend who might not have been as competent as he needed to be.

One litle clip during Kimball's passing out in the woods after escaping from the dam, shows his lawyer saying, "we can't find the guy!"

Though one has to wonder if maybe the lawyer's thoughts were a little skewed given what the other team found.

"Thanks, guys." "So long, partner."

- Toy Story 3 (9/10)

[–] sidgirl 7 years ago

Lol. Except they *had* evidence, and wealthy upper class white doctors (or other professionals) with no criminal history have certainly been convicted of crimes. Often.

*****
People said love was blind, but what they meant was that love blinded them.

[–] IMDB_Vits 8 years ago

We don't see the whole trial. Maybe the did point that out and it wasn't considered to be enough evidence.

[–] mikeyg24 8 years ago

"Richard, he's trying to kill me". That's one thing that get's me too. When you put it in the context of the trial the DA is basically saying Richard wanted to kill Helen, started by smacking her around a bit, stopped to let her make a phone call to the Police to implicate him, smashed her noggin in and waited to be picked up. Seriously?

Hey! You're not old enough to drink! Now go and die for your country!!!

[–] pjpurple-1 8 years ago

Really good points about Helen's 911 call. If he was trying to kill her and she somehow

managed to get to a phone, it's more likely that she would've said, "My husband is trying to kill me."

I took it to mean that she was near death and the last person she thought about was her husband. She was no longer aware of the phone but instead was trying to call out to Richard.

She was in a very confused state to say the least. It was revealed that her head injury would've caused death in minutes.

Also the police looked to Richard as their prime suspect because his prints were on the gun and bullets. Well, he TOLD them that it was his gun! He was a surgeon so you'd think he'd be smart enough to find a different way to get rid of his wife if he really wanted to kill her.

Of course some smart people are so arrogant that they think they can get away with murder, literally.

But then again he had no motive. So what if his wife was wealthy and he had life insurance on her? He wasn't cheating on her. Whenever there's money involved and the wife gets murdered it's usually because the husband has a girlfriend on the side and wants to be with her without splitting the couple's assets in a divorce.

[–] bouncing_ball_of_rubber 8 years ago

How did his lawyer miss the fact that Richard's car phone called Sykes as Richard was at the conference that night in front of hundreds of people?

[–] bpjtuition 7 years ago

I think on balance it would have been a very close trial compromised by media attention on 'Doctor kills wife' sensationalism.

Richard had no alibi

He was at the scene of the murder

His fingerprints were on the gun which he owned and only he had access to

His skin is under her fingernails indicating a struggle

His one armed man theory seems implausible with nothing credible coming up and no forced entry found.

The phone call is damning

It's implied in his highly emotional state that the police handled him with total assumption of guilt.

Reasonable doubt is not an exact science

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7401) 5 years ago

I have issues with it, too. Also the evidence of his fingerprints being on the gun and lamp should be inadmissable since it is circumstantual. Not to mention it's his lamp and his gun so of course they would have his fingerprints on them! That part is even dumber! His skin being under his wife's fingernails could tie him to the murder but the fact the cops freaking say his fingerprints being on his gun and lamp proves he's guilty is freaking stupid!

[–] PaladinNJ (20309) 5 years ago

The part i always wondered about was that Kimble was able to follow the evidence to the killer on his own when the trail was cold. A competent investigator (whether the police or Kimble's attorney's people) should have been able to easily find the same thing when everything had just happened.

That's one of the reasons the original series was plausible. There was no motive to kill Helen and therefore no trail to follow. Kimble was the only viable suspect.