Of course, this also shows that the evidence in this case is indeed conclusive.
So he plausibly said: "Even if we talk for another hundred years, it won't change my mind!"
"I don't want to change your mind, but this verdict will determine a person's fate. What if we are wrong?" Juror No. 8, played by Chen Weijie, said.
He was not very loud and still looked gentle and gentle.
"Assuming this house will collapse, anything is possible!" Juror No. 7 said, spreading his hands.
"You're right!" Juror No. 8 really had no intention of changing the other person's mind.
"What difference does it take how long it takes? Maybe we can solve this matter in five minutes!" Juror No. 7 continued.
"I just think it's too hasty to decide a person's fate for the next few decades in five minutes? We can spend an hour discussing it. The game won't start until eight o'clock, right?" Juror No. 8 looked at 7
No. said.
Juror No. 7 was convinced. Of course, it was not that he was persuaded to change his mind, but that he was persuaded. Anyway, after discussing for an hour, it was too late to go back to watch the football game.
Others also agreed with Juror No. 8’s statement. After all, it was only an hour.
But Juror No. 10 said: "Great, I've heard all the arguments."
But his words changed the color of Juror No. 8. He said: "That's not why we are sitting here!"
"Okay, then please tell me, why are we sitting here?" Juror No. 10 was not convinced. In fact, Juror No. 10 represented a kind of person, and he was naturally classist towards that young man.
.
"I don't know, maybe there is no reason. The defendant, that is, the child who has been kicked around, his family is poor, his mother died when he was nine years old, and his father broke the law and was imprisoned. He is indeed born
Bad, he is a wild child full of anger, why? Because he has no mother to teach him, no money, and is bullied every day, but he still lives tenaciously to the age of eighteen, I think we should give him a chance." 8
said Juror No.
"We owe him nothing, and he got a fair trial, didn't he? How much do you think such a trial would cost? He is lucky enough to have such an opportunity!" He stood up as he spoke.
, said: "Okay, everyone is an adult. We have all heard the actual story, right? We shouldn't believe what he said. We all know what kind of person he is. I have seen too many people like this.
They are young people, and none of what they say is true. Yes, they are pitiful, but there must be something hateful about pitiful people.
Many people who come from poor backgrounds eventually become talented, but he is not. No one asked him to become a dwarf mule. It was his own choice. No one really believes what a dwarf mule says, right?"
But these words angered the juror next to him.
The two argued for a while. At this time, Juror No. 8 spoke again: "Okay, we don't need to listen to your lecture..."
In fact, some people are thinking, but more people are talking about their own things.
Until the jury foreman, Juror No. 1, suggested that since Juror No. 8 disagrees with everyone, let's talk about why.
Juror No. 12 smiled and said: "It seems that we have to convince him that he is wrong and we are right. We may spend a few minutes..."
Although there seems to be nothing wrong with the logic. After all, at 11 to 1, they can indeed reach an effective resolution by convincing Juror No. 8. But obviously the jury foreman also listened to Juror No. 8, so he decided to let everyone
a speech.
Soon the first juror began to speak: "It's really hard to explain why. I just think he is guilty! From the testimony, it is very obvious. No one can prove his innocence!"
But there is obviously something wrong with what he said.
Juror No. 8 immediately said: "No one should do that. It is the prosecutor who should prove their innocence. The defendant does not even have to speak. This is his right!"
"I know, but what I mean is, I just think he is guilty. There are witnesses who saw him killing people!" After Juror No. 8 said this, Juror No. 2 also seemed a little embarrassed.
Juror No. 3 spoke: "Okay, this is what I think. I have no personal bias against this case. I just want to discuss the facts!"
Juror No. 3 was obviously well prepared. He also made a record: "The old man who lived downstairs at the murder scene heard the quarrel and quarrel at 12:10 on the night when the murder occurred.
He heard the defendant shout: "I'm going to kill you!" A minute later, he heard the sound of someone falling to the ground, so he ran to the door and saw the defendant rushing down the stairs to leave. He called the police, and the police found the deceased's chest
There was a knife inserted, and the forensic autopsy concluded that the time of death was midnight. These are all facts. These are irrefutable facts. The child is indeed guilty!"
"I'm as sympathetic as anyone else. I know he's only 18 years old, but he still has to pay the price!"
Juror No. 4 continued: "I agree with your statement. It is obvious that the child's testimony cannot stand up to scrutiny. He said that he was watching a movie when the crime occurred, but he could not remember what the movie was and the starring role.
who is it......"
At this time, Juror No. 10 also echoed: "The woman who lives across the street, where is her testimony?"
"Yes, she saw him kill someone!"
Juror No. 1 reminded him to speak in order, but Juror No. 10 obviously did not intend to cooperate. He disliked the defendant very much, so he continued speaking very quickly: "This woman was sleeping when the crime happened. She couldn't sleep because she was hot.
No, she looked out the window and saw the child stabbing his father's chest with a knife. The time was 12:10, which matched perfectly. She had watched the child grow up, and he was only separated from her home.
A narrow tram track, she witnessed his murder with her own eyes!"
"But a tram happened to be passing by at that time!" No. 8 reminded.
"There happened to be no passengers on the car. Although the lights on the car were all dark at the time, the prosecutor also proved that you can indeed see things through the tram window! As long as the lights are dim, you can see the scene on the other side.
"No. 10 continued.
"I want to ask you a question. If you don't believe that child, why do you believe this woman? She is just like him!" No. 8's words directly caused the smile on No. 10's face to freeze.
He seemed a little angry.
However, I returned to my seat with everyone’s comfort.
At this time, it was Juror No. 5's turn to speak, but Juror No. 5 seemed a little inferior. In fact, he himself had the same background as the defendant.
He said: "Can I abstain?"
"Of course, this is your right!"
No. 6 said: "I don't know. I believed he was guilty from the beginning. I have been looking for his criminal motive. This is really important. Without a criminal motive, the case cannot be established..."
He found the testimonies very convincing!
But No. 8 immediately retorted: "You said that can prove the murderer's motive, but I don't think the motive is strong enough. Don't forget, is it common for such a child to be beaten? I don't think he was beaten twice.
A slap in the face is enough to make him angry enough to kill..."
"Maybe he was pushed to his limit? Everyone has a limit!" Juror No. 4 interjected.
It was the turn of Juror No. 7: "You have said everything. We can go on and on, but the conclusion is still the same! He really killed someone! Look at his criminal record, it is too numerous to describe...
"
These people all felt that since the defendant had such an experience, it seemed reasonable for him to kill someone, and they all felt that he would do that.
Especially No. 3, he told about his son. He had a big conflict with his son and he couldn't stand him!
This also points out why he is so angry all the time.
And because No. 10 said: "Children from that kind of place are trash, and I don't want to be lumped into the same category as them!"
But his words made Juror No. 5, who had been silent, very dissatisfied: "Listen to me, I have always lived in the slums you talk about!"
The two almost quarreled, but in the end they settled it down, but obviously they were not as unanimous as they seemed during the previous vote.
Finally it was Juror No. 8's turn to speak.
"I thought you wanted to convince me. Isn't that your original intention?"
But at this time, No. 10 stood up and looked uncooperative, which immediately made Juror No. 1, who had been responsible for maintaining order, angry.
He asked Juror No. 10 to be the foreman of the jury.
But at this time, Juror No. 10 became intimidated.
"I know as much as you do. According to the testimony, the child is guilty. Maybe he was actually killed. During this time, I sat in the court and kept hearing the witnesses' testimonies. Everyone's tone was very similar.
Yes, I have a very special feeling about this trial, so I want to ask some questions. Of course, maybe it doesn't make any sense, but I feel that the defendant did not do a complete cross-examination. He missed some small details.
!”
No. 10 was upset again: "Lawyers don't ask questions because they already know the answers!"
"Then is it possible that the lawyer is a fool?" No. 8 asked equally unceremoniously.
"That's possible, right?"
"I have always put myself in the perspective of the defendant. If I were him, I guess I would hire a better lawyer to help me. After all, this is about my future destiny, and I would hope that my lawyer would refute
Eyewitness testimony should at least be tried, right? Even when I was sitting in the court, I felt that the lawyer should do this. There are two eyewitnesses in this case, and their testimony is the key evidence in this case, but if they are both wrong
Where is it?"
"What do you mean? Isn't that the witness's responsibility?" Juror No. 12 asked doubtfully.
"What if they're wrong?" Number Eight repeated.
"They all swore an oath!" Number Twelve tried to explain.
"But they are also human beings, and they will make mistakes. What if they all make mistakes?"
"All wrong? How is it possible?"
"Do you really think so? Do you think there is nothing wrong with their testimony?"
"No one can guarantee this, right? That's not a scientific argument!"
At this time, Juror No. 3 asked angrily: "What about the murder weapon? What happened to the folding knife inserted into the deceased's chest? The child admitted that he bought the knife that night, so what happened?
What’s going on? Let’s talk!”
"Okay, let's talk about the murder weapon!"
Juror No. 1 immediately called the bailiff and asked to see the murder weapon.
In fact, everyone thinks that the murder weapon is the most powerful evidence!
Especially Juror No. 4 started to analyze it.
"He bought that knife specially. There was a beautiful pattern engraved on the handle. It was not an ordinary knife. The blade was unique. The shop owner said there was only one such knife in his shop...
.”
"And he also went to the bar, and his friends also saw this folding knife, and that knife was the murder weapon identified in the court! He said that he dropped the knife from his pocket, and he was simply
You’re lying! Isn’t it obvious?”
In fact, at this time, after listening to everyone's words, especially the securities analyst No. 4's analysis one by one, the audience in the screening room also felt that there seemed to be nothing wrong.
What the defendant said indeed seemed to be full of loopholes.
At this time, the bailiff brought in the evidence "murder weapon".
Juror No. 4 proudly showed the evidence to Juror No. 8!
"I just want to ask everyone a question. What he said does not sound very reasonable, but is it possible? Is it possible that someone took the knife he dropped and killed his father?" Juror No. 8 said calmly.
"Look at this knife. It is not an ordinary knife. I have never seen such a knife. Moreover, the shop owner also said that this is the only one in the shop. So is this a coincidence?"
"Yes, but why can't it be such a coincidence?"
At this time, Juror No. 3 also came over: "But there are too many coincidences, so it is no longer a coincidence!"
In the original version, Juror No. 8 directly took out an identical folding knife, but obviously, in the current environment, this is impossible. Although such a scene will appear more dramatic, in reality, Hong Kong In the island's court, it is impossible for jurors to come in with knives.
Therefore, the plot of the domestic version is more reasonable.
But that would indeed reduce a lot of drama, so Li Yi synthesized it.
Although jurors cannot bring in the "murder weapon", they can hand it over to the bailiff in advance.
Let the bailiff send it to them when they need it.
"Please ask the bailiff to bring my things in!" Chen Weijie said.
Soon the bailiff brought his bag in.
Chen Weijie took out a folding knife from his bag and inserted it directly on the table!
"Damn it, where did you get this thing?"
"Why is this knife exactly the same as the murder weapon?"
"Where on earth did you get this knife?"
Everyone immediately gathered around.
Not only them, but also the audience in the theater were all stunned.
"Don't you usually shop online?" Chen Weijie asked.
"Online shopping?" Everyone looked stunned.
Chen Weijie took out his mobile phone from his bag again and opened Pinxixi.
I searched for folding knives.
As a result, this knife is really bad, it’s only 19.9, and it comes with free shipping!
