If Anthony Hopkins killed the two poachers, then why is he in America and being tried there?
share[deleted]
I love your answer because it’s perfectly illustrative of the moral lesson of this movie.
The behavior of humans wasn’t always so warped, so twisted, so hateful or so stupid. In the beginning, perhaps 10,000 years ago, we lived a utopian existence, in lush environments, in closer harmony with our natural instincts.
We conceive of evolution as a progressive process, by which an organism improves over time, progresses from a simple, primitive form to something more complex and sophisticated.
But perhaps that is an illusion. Maybe evolution isn’t a process of growth, but one of decay.
And now our state of decay is such that we can no longer to recognize ourselves in our original and best form.
This movie wasn’t a “reeking pile,” but it was about one. The “reeking pile” is shallow-minded morons like you.
The American government would most probably never allow one of their citizens to be tried halfway around the world, especially if there is any doubt as to his mental condition. Plus if you think about it, that story would have probably made headlines and there would have been population pressure to bring him back so he could have a fair trial.
shareAnd why wouldn't he had a fair trial in Africa?
shareBecause its Africa.
shareDo they even have a justice system in Africa??
share
Yes, of course they do. South Africa even has one of the most inclusive constitutions in the world, calling for equal rights for gay people, unlike many countries that claim that are modern and open-minded. No offence, but you should start reading more and commenting less. Try to think outside the 'box'.
agreed !
share"Yes, of course they do. South Africa even has one of the most inclusive constitutions in the world, calling for equal rights for gay people, unlike many countries that claim that are modern and open-minded. No offence, but you should start reading more and commenting less. Try to think outside the 'box'. "
He wasn't in South Africa or Cairo or Morocco or anything like that, he was in the heart of Africa, very unstable countries politically.
That was the outrageous flaw that the film was based on. He was arrested, imprisoned and then---for no known or stated reason---collected by the US State Department and essentially held here without charges, and the premise was that if Idiot Doctor could show that he wasn't a threat to anyone, he would have been free to go.
But he didn't need them, he had a ball point pen and a couple of drooling co-conspirators that got him all the way to Africa.
In reality, if you get arrested for a crime in another country, you will be tried and sentenced there. All the US will do is have someone from the embassy come visit, maybe a lawyer, but they won't even provide you one.
In theory, it is possible to commit a crime in another country, be sentenced, then have your imprisonment transferred back to your home country, but this is almost unheard of. If it were done, you still have to serve your time in your home country, not just prove you have your marbles then take a walk.
It's been a while since I've seen this move but quite often distinguished scientist will be given rights beyond that of other people because of what they've done. In central Africa executing a distinguished gorilla zoologist would be absolutely horrible publicity. It would like be putting Jane Goodall in jail, any halfway competent dictator would extradite him in a second to show the world just how "sane" he is. An idiot American who kills a hooker on the street would be beheaded on the way to jail, someone halfway famous gets the red carpet experience to show the world that the area isn't what it is because that is what gets publicity.
shareThis question is for previous poster thequapp, you said that "...quite often distinguished scientist will be given rights beyond that of other people because of what they've done..." Can you offer us a single example of when a distinguished scientist has been given (presumably legal) rights beyond that of other people because of what they've done? I'm more puzzled by your post than the absurd plot of this film.
share