I am sorry but.....


The friend (or ex friend) of that kid who was killed by the bullies was NOT LEGALLY guilty of any crime. Being a bad friend, being racist, being a jerk are NOT legally crimes and at the end he was facing legal action for not reporting the crime either. No way he would be convicted.

1. He TRIED to protect his friend, but he was a victim too, the bullies restrained him when he was trying to save his friend.

2. The bullies THREATENED him, that is a VERY COMMON tactic, happens a lot in places where criminal gangs run rampant, witnesses often do not come forward out of fear and many states have even passed laws to protect frightened witnesses.

So when all is said and done his ONLY crime is being the witness to a crime that he actively tried to prevent but was completely unable to and delaying for a long time reporting it out of a genuine fear of retaliation, COWARDICE basically. He was in NO LEGAL DANGER.

reply

You are still wrong. Even though he’s not guilty of murder, he still was obliged to report it, and, at least in my country, it’s a criminal offence that can get you to a jail.

________________
like hell

reply

First of all it's a movie but in real if that happens and your the witness and you don't report it basically your protecting the criminals which is an offence.

reply

It's called being an accessory after the fact. Accessory to murder is a felony. So yes, he was in great legal danger for keeping his mouth shut, whereas if he had gone to the police in the first place he would not have been.

The Haunted Man, by Dori Davis: Sometimes it's the living who torment the dead
Amazon.com

reply

Laws vary from state to state and I do not know about the state in the movie but some states have passed laws preventing frightened witnesses from being prosecuted for not coming forward due to gangs that intimidated witnesses who fear for their lives or their families if they come forward.

They threatened him with harm himself if he came forward. Even if it was an idle threat that they could not realistically carry out the kid might not know that so in his mind he is in danger.

Plus likely when the culprits are being put on trial for killing the kid they will come clean to get mercy from the court. They will probably ADMIT that he tried to protect his friend and was restrained by them and then threatened into silence.

Yes we all hate (me too actually) because he was an A$$hole who shunned someone who had been a good friend due to buying into racist beliefs but there is no legal precedent for being a crappy friend or a jerk.

Imagine if he had kept right on being a good friend but the incident had still happened and he had not reported out of fear for himself, would you all go easier on him then? LEGALLY its the same at least technically though juries are biased human beings who might go easier.

reply