ARCHIVERead-only snapshot of the zulm.net forums, captured 12 November 2026.Home · Members · Search · About

All times are UTC




   [ 1 post ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 4:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2001 7:27 pm
Posts: 6148
I wouldn't name the film (classic) or else the climax will be disclosed.

It's a well acclaimed film, depicting real life events. Court case is settled with this explanation:

A & B are fighting. C is near by.

3 of 6 bullets are shot from A's revolver. All miss and are accounted for.

C shoots 1 bullet and assumes it's this bullet that killed B.

B shoots one bullet from his own revolver and kills himself accidently.

C picks up B's revolver (murder weapon) and hides it, to frame A (only A's revolver is remaing at the scene) . C had picked up the revolver with a handkerchief and hence B's figerprints stay in tact.

The Blooper is, why did C use extra caution to preserve B's fingerprints if the idea was to hide/ destroy that part of the evidence ??


Top
   
 
   [ 1 post ] 

All times are UTC




cron