It would be a much better case than the one they had, and that would probably allow John to introduce the records of the death of the nephew's boyfriend as evidence.
Once it's established that another boy was killed in the park that night, and if there was an actual autopsy that corroborated the events as Charlie described (the boys pissing on him, putting cigarettes out on him, twisting his neck, etc.) then it could be very convincing.
Now, since the jury was entirely made up of white men, and with the overall anti-homosexual attitude of the people in the movie... it's hard to say whether their verdict would be based on the evidence or their personal feelings.
At least, I think if they did still find him guilty out of prejudice, there'd be a better chance of an appeal when more people have access to those facts from the beginning. Also, since the prosecutor was using this case to "set an example" he might have lessened the charges if the truth came out earlier. When the case is "black kid kills white kid" it's the perfect case for his agenda. But when the case is "group of white kids kill gay black kid, and other gay black kid fights back and ends up killing one of the white kids" that's probably not the best case to use as an example.
And just like they swept the boyfriend's case under the rug, the white kids that attacked them would probably not face any charges. Regardless of what happens with Charlie's case, even if they went to trial their lawyers would probably spin it as self defense when the gay black kids attacked one or two of them and another all white male jury would believe it.
reply
share