so the cop tells david that alex had a air tight alibi which involves both him and the other guy hearing the wife say she was walking home alone and then they talked for a hour. This is not air tight and my 700+ episode watching of detective conan brain thought up numerous ways for him to of still killed her. Let alone they still didn't find the body and had no clue of the time of death or anything.
shareShe spoke of leaving to two people and those two continued communicating presumably while she left. I'm not sure when the husband first reported her missing. Could someone provide more detail as to why the alibi is not air tight?
sharemel2000, just because the wife's lover was on the phone for an hour starting around the time she said she was leaving doesn't mean he could not have killed her in a myriad of ways, especially if the person he was talking to was in on it. The only thing the police had proof of was that his phone was in use for an hour.
shareLOL, I just came here to see if anybody had a problem with the cops in this.
I haven't even finished it yet, but I have to say right now, that there is no
way in hell that they would be searching for a body like this after a few days
of being missing. Not to mention, where would they look? At this point in the
movie she could have driven or gone anywhere. Of course i'm american, and our
cops just maybe more lazy, IDK.
Not to mention that it is impossible to be charged with murder if there isn't
a body. The only exception is if there is a significant amount of blood that
matches the missing persons DNA, along with a sign of a struggle of some sort.
And the late night talk show host has a detective show???
The only exception is if there is a significant amount of blood thatAka the Gone Girl plot, but it's still not proof of murder, let alone proof of the person you like as the murderer, as we saw in that movie.
matches the missing persons DNA, along with a sign of a struggle of some sort.
Fanboy : a person who does not think while watching.share
The cop believed it was the husband, "it's always the husband", so he tells his chief suspect that the other suspect has an iron clad alibi hoping that will get him to crack.
Another problem with the "Detective." He pulls David into his car and says "we found the hammer with your fingerprints on it in the canal," to which I would have responded "so?" Her death was ruled accidental, her skull wasn't bashed in, why would this guy think that he was doing top notch police work here?
People hate what's popular and people jump on bandwagons. The rest of us are in the middle. Done.
That doesn't mean the cop was satisfied with that ruling. He obviously thought that something fishy was happening. Maybe he further investigated on his own, convinced his superior not to close the case, etc. We see that all the time in cop-centric shows and movies. So why could that not happen here?
As it turns out, he had the right idea anyway. Just for the wrong reasons. As for the hammer, it does throw the husband's testimony into doubt, as it kind of proves that he was at the scene, probably knows/knew about the affair, and as such had a motive. Even if the hammer was not the murder weapon, we do see the husband contemplating to use it. The cop, not being a total idiot, envisioned the same scenario.
The only problem i see with this is how highly unlikely it would be to find that hammer in the canal, if you do not at least know where to look. But maybe the demon helped out a little with that? It was in its interest to get the husband desperate and the cop was just another tool in the arsenal.
A lot of speculation in your response my guy. Sure, finding a hammer with his fingerprints would cause doubt and room for further investigation but to show your hand in the way that he did? No, I'm not running with it.
He could be as dissatisfied with the ruling as he wants, but the fact remains that her head wasn't bashed in.
People hate what's popular and people jump on bandwagons. The rest of us are in the middle. Done.
Well, of course it is a lot of speculation. I love movies that do not spell out everything for you. In any case i did not see it as a deal breaker, or even that strange, considering it is a supernatural based movie. The cop pretty much suspected the husband of foul play from the start ("It is always the husband.") and i guess he just couldn't let it go. We just don't see the intermediary steps as we would on a show centered on the cop. I actually liked that, as it showed that the world was dynamic and other people do things independently from the main characters.
Yes, her head was not bashed in, he was not suggesting that the husband killed her with the hammer though. He was just using it to cast some doubt on his innocence, maybe to get him to talk (he did that earlier with other ham-fisted methods.) After all it does place him at the scene of betrayal, and he had lied about not knowing about affair. Heck, he even contemplated killing them with the hammer before regaining control. So the cop was not that far off. He just does not take the supernatural into account (and why would he?)
But hey, if you do not buy, that is fine, i just tried to give a possible explanation for how it could have happened. I am sure if we thought about it more we could envision a scenario that is satisfying for both of us.
I could respect that. As you (kind of ) alluded to, the execution was just poor imo.
People hate what's popular and people jump on bandwagons. The rest of us are in the middle. Done.
[deleted]