Julie Tanya P.

Lanzar Philosophy of Law Fri 6:00-8:00 pm July 28, 2017

REACTION PAPER: MY COUSIN VINNY

Stan Rothenstein: No, you're being booked for shoplifting. I'm being booked for accessory to
shoplifting.
Bill Gambini: No Stan, I'm being booked for murder, you're being booked for accessory to
murder.

One of the plots of the movie is the ever spiraling misinformation thus ultimately
leading to a very bad conclusion. But the worst twist of the early stages of the movie was when
Bill Gambini and Stan Rothenstein thought that they were both brought in for questioning for
charges of petty theft. But to Bill and Stans astonishment, they were actually being charged
with first degree murder, and an accessory to the first degree of murder, respectively.

The rule of law requires that an accused has the right to be informed, at the onset of his
arrest or when he is already considered as a suspect, to be informed of the charges against him.
This was apparently not done because Bill started confessing to the authorities. He thought that
he was being charged of a less serious crime. Thereby waiving his right to a counsel during this
confession.

Upon learning of the real charges against them, with the help of Bills mom, contacted a
fresh bar exam passer, Vincent La Guardia Gambini. Barely in his 6th week as a practicing
lawyer, this was his first trial and not to mention, his first ever real client.

It is also worthy to note that Vincent La Guardia Gambini a.k.a Vinny, had
unfortunately and miserably flunked the bar five times. To quote him, The 6 th time was my
charm. I mean this certainly shows character, he most certainly did not even have second
thoughts about giving up this dream. And I reckon this was partly because of his Judge friend
who had helped him a lot in the course of his study in law and who has treated him like a son
he never got.

I wanted to convey the message of reluctance of Bill and Stan for not having trusted
Vinny in handling the case. First , for not having the trial experience and second, for deliberately
failing to impress upon the judge his knowledge of criminal procedure. But Vinny is undeniably
argues good and upon presenting an understandable and well worded plan, yet totally not a
legal strategy, to Bill, the latter still continues to retain the former as his lawyer.
 When your life hangs in a balance, would you really continue to retain an
inexperienced lawyer, who has also been repeatedly sited in contempt by a judge, who by the
way dislikes that lawyer? But then again, both Bill and Stan couldnt afford to pay big bucks to
hire a hot shot lawyer to defend them. Even the public defender assigned to Stan, has shown to
be incompetent as well during his cross with the witness. He was undoubtedly unprepared.

But to vindicate Vinnys lack of court experience is his unrelenting will and
perseverance that he can very much so defend with all his might his clients. And all those
sleepless night, actually paid off when he swept off the court crowd with his arguments.

The movie has actually spawned a number of high praised from renowned legal experts one of
which was a Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals judge Richard Posner praised My Cousin Vinny as
being,

particularly rich in practice tips: how a criminal defense lawyer must stand his ground against a
hostile judge, even at the cost of exasperating the judge, because the lawyer's primary
audience is the jury, not the judge; how cross-examination on peripheral matters can sow
serious doubts about a witness's credibility; how props can be used effectively in cross-
examination (the tape measure that demolishes one of the prosecution's eyewitnesses); how to
voir dire, examine, and cross-examine expert witnesses; the importance of the Brady doctrine
... how to dress for a trial; contrasting methods of conducting a jury trial; and more.. 1

The movie has actually taught me a lot in terms of trial techniques and most of the
lawyers who have watched the movie have said how parallel to real court room practice. I was
most particularly fond of the moment when the judge asked Vinny during the arraignment
whether or not his clients plea guilty or not guilty. And yet he still continued to argue that it
was a clear mistake that his clients where brought in. Although practically, it would have been
considered, but the rules of procedures cannot bend in to common practice, because as the
judge said in the movie, he cannot disregard centuries old judicial system for one persons
privilege.

Another most notable stance that the show has delivered, although not categorically
preaching, that it was against the capital punishment of death penalty. This is bolstered by the
fact that, if eyewitnesses are the only form evidence then a persons life would be taken away
even if their testimonies are false or unverified. If Vinny was not as uncompromising and
vigilant at his research on the witnesses of the prosecution, both the defendants would have
been convicted entirely on unreliable testimonies of witnesses.

1
Posner, Richard (2009). Law and Literature (3rd Ed.). Harvard University Press. Pp. 446-447. From Wikepedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Cousin_Vinny#cite_note-9 date accessed: July 27, 2017.
 In the blog of Atty. Alan H. Crede he posits the idea of The Collapse of American
Criminal Justice, the late Harvard Law professor William J. Stuntz wherein he diagnosed one of
the problems with the American criminal justice system as its obsession with procedure and the
elevation of proper procedure over issues of substance, such as guilt, innocence and fairness.
American jurisprudence is primarily concerned with whether a trial followed proper
procedures. If the right procedures were followed if hearsay evidence was excluded and the
defendant was allowed to have an attorney, and that attorney was able to cross-examine the
witnesses then its very hard to challenge or overturn a criminal conviction.2

This is just one of the legal realism depicted in a movie that some judicial system
prefers to follow the procedure rather than achieve the ultimate goal of the system which is to
serve justice. Too often we can observe that America justice elevates procedure over fairness.
But our Supreme Court has held one too many times that, Considering that although
reglementary periods under the Rules of Court are to be strictly observed to prevent needless
delays, jurisprudence nevertheless allows the relaxation of procedural rules. Since technicalities
are not ends in themselves but exist to protect and promote substantive rights of litigants [Sy
vs. CA, et al., G.R. No. 127263, April 12, 2000; Adamo vs. IAC, 191 SCRA 195 (1990).

In summary, the film presented truths in the legal world and also the inadequacies of
the justice system. This movie has some great scenes and legal basis in their defense, however,
most of us would rely on the movies we watch or the brief brush of courtroom experience as
our definitive conclusion of our whole legal system. To me, as a student, the whole system is
more than a simple walk in the park, it is entirely a complicated and complex system full of
general rules and exceptions and exceptions to the exceptions! That alone can blow a persons
mind. But despite that and going back to the film, I enjoyed the unlikely pairing of my favorite
Joe Pesci and the best supporting actress of this role, Marisa Tomei.

2
Crede, Alan H. My Cousin Vinnys Version Of The Criminal Justice System.
http://www.bostonpersonalinjurylawyerblog.com/2012/03/my-cousin-vinnys-idealized-version-of-criminal-
justice/ . Date accessed: July 27, 2017.