<h2 class= "rich_media_title" > Author: Cui Jie, original title: Legal reflections outside the poetic sense - looking at "Snowflakes Falling on Fragrant Fir Trees" has a feeling. </h2>
This winter, there is a lot of snow falling in Beijing. After the spring, it snowed again.
Looking out the window at the snow, it occurred to me that among the recommended legal films, there was a poetic name that had never been included in the list of viewers. When the epidemic struck, it was isolated for several days, and in addition to working remotely, reading, watching movies, and writing were also frequent every day. There is both leisure and snowfall, and I can't help but check it out.
The film "Snowflakes Falling on Fragrant Fir Trees" is adapted from the novel "Snow Falling Fragrant Fir Trees", also known as "Love When Ice and Snow Fly".
The film is delicate and refined, alienated from Hollywood dramas, and has the elegant and classical style of European films.
The film sets two clues: light and dark. The bright line is the court trial of the murder case, the defendant Miyamoto and the deceased Hayne have been friends for many years, and the entanglement of the father in the land transaction has also made the two resentful. On the day of the crime, the two were alone on the fishing boat where the crime occurred, Miyamoto was suspicious of Hayne's death, and the court trial always revolved around whether the murder charge could be established. The dark thread is is Ismail's recollection, he was Miyamoto's wife's first love, and only he found evidence of innocence. In his memories, there is the innocence and romance of childhood, the pain of separation from war, and the loss of his left hand. His memories, like all those who have lived through war, are a reflection of history, with indelible mutilations.
The film is very beautiful. The sea, fragrant fir, fog, ice and snow, fog, chasing in the forest, court light and shadow, impressionist aesthetics; the music in the film is sometimes beautiful and magnificent, sometimes holy and clear, epic and timeless; the plot unfolds softly and slowly, calmly and calmly, under the poetic feeling, but also always hints at the waves.
It should be said that the film does not have negative poetic titles, and likewise, the film does not have the classification of negative legal films.
Inside the courtroom, prosecutors charged Miyamoto with murder, with accurate and powerful charges, and reminded the jury: 1. Miyamoto had a grudge against Hayne over the land dispute; 2. Miyamoto was the last person Hayne saw before his death; 3. There was Hayne's blood on the harpoon; 4. Hayne had a serious head injury, and harpoon could be formed; 5. Miyamoto had denied seeing Hein on the day of the crime. A series of circumstantial evidence shows that the motive of this case is realistic, the physical evidence is objective, the defense is untrue, and if the jury can be convicted, it is likely to be found guilty.
Outside the courtroom, on December 7, 1941, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, and it was a difficult period in American history. In 1942, President Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066, which required the relocation of all Japanese residents of the East Coast to internment camps, one of the most racist decrees issued by the United States government. In the film, the Japanese line up to the unknown, and the quiet picture expresses the helplessness of the people of the two countries. The fate of the Miyamoto family and the love that Ismail lost are just ordinary past events in the context of the times.
"Dispute resolvers should not have bias in favor of or against one party" is one of the standards of judicial fairness. Today, being tried by an independent tribunal has also been recognized by many States and recognized by the United Nations as a fundamental human right. In the film, the gap between the United States and Japan is serious, and whether the court trial can abide by judicial independence and not be restrained by prejudice is the real theme of "Snowflake". After all, in the whirlpool of history, it is easier said than done to get rid of prejudice, be objectively correct, and seek the truth. The judge reminded in court that "the trial should not be affected by the Pearl Harbor incident", but people are not grassy, and the jury members are also American citizens in history.
Judicial independence is the essence of the law, and there has always been no shortage of historical figures who have stood up for judicial independence. During the Meiji period, when the Russian crown prince was assassinated in Japan, kojima Weiqian, the president of the Imperial Court, still put an end to capital punishment in the face of the emperor's edict, and was punished according to the crime of attempted murder that harmed ordinary people, which became the famous Otsu Incident in history. Although this incident became one of the promoters of Foreign Minister Aoki, it was also related to the continuation of Ito Hirobumi. However, the Otsu Incident has always been a milestone in Japan's judicial independence, and its historical impact is even more far-reaching; in 1981, Ronald Reagan was shot in the heart by 26-year-old John Hinckley, just 3 centimeters away, and John was acquitted because he was found mentally ill. At the time, Nancy Reagan was preparing to file a law amendment that would "anyone who assassinates the president should be sentenced to death," which was stopped by President Reagan. The sentence "No one can be above the law, and the president, as the guardian of the Constitution, cannot be an exception, and it is worth defending with my life." "Highlighting the beauty of judicial independence adds to President Reagan's charm."
The history of humanity has its ups and downs, and the history of criminal trials is even more confusing. The famous Nuremberg Trials were declared by the Chief Prosecutor of the United States as "the most significant tribute to the power made by reason." Before the trial, Stalin's proposition that "no decisive criminals should be directly executed without trial, otherwise the world will think that we dare not try them" contrasts Churchill's view that "a hundred Nazis should be executed quickly" and Roosevelt's support of "the execution of two thousand five hundred Nazis without trial", reflecting the complex political environment and diplomatic depth of the time, and the overlap of law and history is also thought-provoking. After the 9.11 terrorist attacks, the United States passed the Patriot Act at an unusually rapid pace, revised judicial procedures, and relaxed the conditions for detention, surveillance, seizure, and secret investigation, which is necessary to combat vicious crimes. But the prejudice and discrimination that behavior can bring about, deviating from the universal values of the United States, are inevitably worried, and the recent film "The Lament of Richard Jewell" should also contain such concerns. In the well-known Simpson case, whether the defense used the trump card of anti-prejudice is doomed to be inconclusive; the Englishman Sadat Kadri in his book, from the Garden of Eden and the Divine Judgment to the trials of Eichmann and Milosevic, until the Watergate and Simpson cases, combed through many cases in the history of criminal trials, and finally the title was set as "How Unfair the Trial Is", whether there is a deep meaning may be intriguing.
At the end of the film, the lawsuit ends with a slightly bizarre identification of the cause of death. When Ismail discovered Thathen drowning, a freighter passed by on the channel, and the waves set off by the freighter were likely to cause Hain to fall off the ship, get entangled in the net and drown, and there was reasonable doubt in the case that could not be excluded. Ismail's process of breaking free from the shackles of the past and submitting innocent evidence clearly has a Hollywood routine, but this directly triggered the judge to withdraw the indictment.
What led to the acquittal in the case was new evidence, but the defence's performance should still be remembered. Attorney Gumond is old and weak, but his professionalism is not inferior, and cross-examination and closing arguments are effective and powerful. In particular, the film shows that he dared to face the historical hatred of the United States and Japan, and challenged prejudice with a calm and deep attitude, quite like the classic image created by Pike in "To Kill a Mockingbird". And his fireside dialogue with Ismail, which sets off the unique insight and rationality of legal people, is the finishing touch of the film.
Looking back at the film, it should be remembered that the law has a historical aspect, and the law must also be responsible for history.