黑狱风云

I watched Murder In The First these days, this movie is based on real events. Here are the mainly plot: Henry was sent to prison at a young age for stealing five dollars, he tried to escape from the famous alcatraz prison, but failed after being betrayed by a fellow inmate. The warden of the prison, Glenn, hated Henry for threatening his position, so he put Henry in a sealed dungeon for three years, where there were numerous beatings, and Henry was mentally and physically devastated. The first thing he did when he left the dungeon was to kill the prisoner who had betrayed him with his dinner spoon. Henry was charged with first-degree murder and put on death row.

Lawyer James who had just left the school gate was ordered to defend for Henry, Henry almost lost the ability to communicate after years of torture, James did not give up any opportunity, gradually close the distance between the two people. But in the process, James encountered resistance from many sources: the judge and jury, Henry himself, and the American prison system. But he did not give up, uphold the persistence of justice, found many suspicious points of the case, in the court he directed against the inhumane prison side, exposed one appalling prison scandal after another. In the end, he won -- Henry was convicted of second-degree murder, and the alcatraz jail was ordered by a jury to open an investigation.

What struck me most about the film was the soliloquy at the end of the film by lawyer James: “That was the last time I saw Henry alive. His body was found in the dungeon the day before the appeal session. Under his body, he wrote a word on the ground on a rock: victory. Henry taught me the meaning of the word. He is the only person I know who gives more than he asks for. All he wants is a friend. I regard him as one of my best friends. Unlike others who lived longer, Henry did not die for nothing. In the end he was not afraid, he lived and died in victory. If only we could all do this.”

It’s true that Henry's body is like a worm, vulnerable to the power and the unsound system, but with his own weak, hit the stone, even if shattered. After Henry's death, humane management of American prisons was taken seriously. Although it was Henry who began the trial, but it was the prison, the dark system, that ended it. So Henry died, but he actually won.

The film takes aim at the dark side of the American justice system, especially inside prisons. The prisoner, the lawyer, the warden, form the main thread of the story. Although this is the 1940s, it still has a strong cautionary message today.

After watching the whole movie, my view is as follows:

First of all, Henry was sent to prison for stealing only five dollars. I'm somewhat mystified is that did the five dollars meet the criteria for filing a theft at that time? There was a sharp contrast, James stole five dollars from his brother as a child, but his brother only educated him. Henry, on the other hand, went straight to prison for stealing five dollars from the post office, with no chance to defend himself. And the life in prison was inferior to death, so did this conform to the principle of punishment? Can it really have the effect of cracking down on crime and civilizing criminals? I deem that was overpunishment. China's criminal law is to follow the principle of adapting to crime and punishment, the most significant thing is that it comprehensively considers that the penalty should not only adapt to the nature of the crime, but also to adapt to the circumstances of the crime and to adapt to the personal danger of the offender, so that the punishment will not be excessive or even unreasonably illegal.

Second, Henry had spent three years and two months in solitary confinement, in a dungeon it was not supposed to use -- a gas chamber left over from the first world war. At the time, the law limited a person to a maximum of 19 days in solitary confinement. So was it a loophole in the law? It was clear that Glenn's practice was seriously illegal, but no one supervised. And the dark reality of lawyer James's boss, fearing he would find out the truth to win a trial, even wanted to disqualify him from representing Henry. Similarly, the film was full of beatings and endless brutal torture. Is the law only intended to deter criminals with cruel punishment rather than guide them through a combination of moralization and punishment?

In the end, the crucial point of the case is whether Henry really did commit first degree murder. The criminal statutes of most American states grade murder according to the different types of murder and the severity of the penalty imposed. Generally, murder is divided into two levels, namely, first degree murder and second degree murder. The main difference between first degree murder and second degree murder is: there is no intention to kill and premeditated murder. First degree murder generally has the following categories: first, premeditated homicide due to negligence and cause the death of most people. Second, murder in the course of committing other felonies, such as arson, rape, robbery, burglary, and kidnapping. The second degree murder is that the perpetrator has no premeditation to kill, not in the course of the crime to kill, but a temporary intention to kill.

Therefore, I do not believe that Henry is guilty of first degree murder in this case. A closer examination revealed that on the day of his release from solitary confinement, Henry had only come to dinner. But there was a person deliberately taunted to provoke him, he killed that prisoner was a temporary intention rather than premeditated murder. Therefore, it does not meet the constitutive requirements of first degree murder. Also, I deem it's debatable whether Henry's killing was murder. The law states that an intentional killing upon “great provocation” and “in the heat of passion” constitutes the crime of voluntary manslaughter. In applying the test of whether an intentional killing was upon great provocation and in the heat of passion, the question is put to the jury, or to the judge in non-jury cases, as to whether the accused reacted as a “reasonable person”. Therefore, at this time, the role of the jury or the judge is relatively large, which requires a higher comprehensive quality of the jury and the judge. Though James eventually won the case, was justice still justice?

在影片的一开始，1938年，美国位于旧金山一个小岛的阿尔卡特兹监狱的三名犯人越狱。其中一名犯人被当场击毙，另两名——鲁弗斯和亨利杨被抓。亨利杨并不知道，鲁弗斯其实早就向典狱长格伦出卖了他们的越狱计划，换来狱方对他的优待。而倒霉的亨利杨被格伦关进地牢。格伦对亨利杨恨之入骨，因为他的越狱妨碍了他的晋升之路。在接下来的三年中，亨利杨被单独监禁在终日黑暗潮湿的地牢中，与自己的屎尿为伴，饱受狱卒的各种欺凌，每年只有半个小时的放风时间。格伦还丧心病狂地割断了他的脚筋。如果不是格伦的上级洪森提醒他亨利杨被单独监禁的时间太长，亨利杨根本就不会被放出地牢。

被解除单独监禁的当天，亨利杨洗澡剃发后，在食堂与其他犯人一起吃饭。一个好事者对他说：瞧，那是鲁弗斯，当初他出卖了你们，现在可舒服呢。亨利杨听后立即冲上去将鲁弗斯掀翻在地，把他吃饭用的金属匙子狠狠插进鲁弗斯的脖子，令他颈动脉破裂后当场死亡。亨利杨当着二百多名犯人和狱警的面，清楚地、毫不含糊地杀死了鲁弗斯。

由此，影片的主角——刚从哈佛法学院毕业并考出律师执业资格证的詹姆斯上场。他所工作的律所把亨利杨这个案子派给了詹姆斯，让他去担任亨利杨的法律援助律师。用律所负责人的话来说：这个案子连猴子去办都没啥两样。因为案件的事实清楚，证据确凿，亨利杨的一级谋杀罪名成立，只是一个程序问题。而根据加州的法律，一级谋杀的罪犯将被处以死刑。

年轻的詹姆斯接到他职业生涯中的第一个案子，十分兴奋。他先去关押亨利杨的地方——法院的羁押室去会见亨利杨。他坚持要走进关押亨利杨的铁笼去会见他，而连法警都认为那毫无必要。他们早已给他在铁笼外面准备了桌椅。

使詹姆斯吃惊地是：亨利杨不愿与他有任何交流。他像受惊的动物一样蜷缩在笼子的一角，拒绝与詹姆斯有眼神的接触，也不回答他的任何问题。一般的法律援助律师可能乐得就此罢手而离开，而詹姆斯却不屈不挠地向亨利杨提出一个个问题。他事先查阅过亨利杨的案卷，发现亨利杨在十年前因为抢劫一家商店的五美元而被捕。由于这家商店正好也是邮局，他的罪名加重。詹姆斯故意对亨利杨说：我知道你以前因为五百美元被抓，而亨利杨纠正他说：是五美元。

詹姆斯好容易让亨利杨开口，立即想和他讨论案情。没想到亨利杨接着问他：当时著名的棒球运动员迪马乔的战绩如何。詹姆斯对于棒球不感兴趣，就对亨利杨实话实说。而亨利杨听后立即又恢复了一开始拒不交流的状态，无论詹姆斯和他说什么都置之不理。

詹姆斯无法，只能回去后恶补关于迪马乔的报道，并在下一次会见时洋洋洒洒地向亨利杨汇报的迪马乔的光辉运动生涯。他的举动令亨利杨开始与他慢慢地交流，不过后者却不愿谈论案情。案子开庭的第一天，詹姆斯向法官申请延期60天，理由是由于亨利杨的自闭，他还没有与自己的当事人谈论过案子。尽管法官非常不满，但是，他还是同意延期一周。

在这一周的时间里，詹姆斯好不容易从亨利杨口中得知他被单独监禁了三年两个月的事实，而法律规定，对一个人的单独监禁最长只能是19天。詹姆斯从这个切入点入手，在恢复开庭时提出应该把阿尔卡特兹监狱、典狱长格伦和他的上级洪森都列为被告，因为它们导致了亨利杨成为杀人犯。詹姆斯的这一辩论令亨利杨案子的审判一下子成为新闻报道的焦点，他自己也受到来自各方的压力。因为洪森是胡佛账下的红人，权势极大。他的上司甚至想取消他为亨利杨辩护的资格，詹姆斯不甘示弱，顽强地顶住了这些压力，继续为亨利杨辩护。

为了取得亨利杨在监狱被虐待的证据，他从法院得到了调查令，与自己的女友玛丽和一名摄影师来到阿尔卡特兹进行取证。他们与犯人交谈，发现这些人好像全都事先被排练过一样，什么都不愿说。格伦本人对于他们要去关押亨利杨的地牢拍照也是百般阻挠。詹姆斯不得不动用调查令才得以下地牢。他被里面的情形惊呆了。

格伦等为了阻挠詹姆斯将监狱的情形曝光，对律所施加压力。詹姆斯的上级指派玛丽为亨利杨辩护，不许詹姆斯再插手案子。不过亨利杨的举动令玛丽不愿为他辩护。詹姆斯从律所辞职，自立门户，重新成为亨利杨的辩护律师。亨利杨喜欢詹姆斯，是因为詹姆斯和他年龄相仿，愿意花时间和他聊天，他感觉詹姆斯是自己的朋友。尽管他本人对于自己的命运根本不抱任何希望，一心想死，但是看到詹姆斯对于他的案子如此热情高涨，也就愿意用他的自己话来说，陪着詹姆斯玩玩。詹姆斯自己，也把亨利杨视为朋友。两人互相交流自己的青少年时代。詹姆斯受亨利杨的影响，逐渐成为了棒球的球迷。

亨利杨的案子，随着审理的深入，连胡佛都介入，因为洪森是司法部的高级官员，他不想看到高官的名誉因此而受损。他们无法给詹姆斯施压，就对他的哥哥施压。詹姆斯的哥哥拜伦已经是一名著名律师，他也在父母去世后把詹姆斯抚养成人，所以詹姆斯对他很是尊敬。拜伦去找詹姆斯，劝他放弃这个案子，而詹姆斯说他只在乎正义。他连自己的哥哥都不能相信。且拜伦为了帮助检方，偷走了詹姆斯证人的照片，导致该关键证人的证词最终未被法官采纳。

詹姆斯现在是众叛亲离，只有靠着自己坚持着。他力排众议、克服重重困难让格伦和洪森都到法庭上作证，并通过自己的精彩提问让这两人崩溃，暴露出格伦残暴无情的性格和洪森对于格伦管理监狱的放任。詹姆斯还通过出示他在阿尔卡特兹监狱收集到的证据，令检察官、法官和陪审团看清了这座监狱的内幕。到这个阶段，每个人都已经信服：由于监狱、尤其是典狱长格伦对亨利杨的残暴行为，才导致了亨利杨杀人。

这个案子的胜利对于詹姆斯来说已经是囊中之物。由于他的不懈坚持和努力，从一开始对他抱有敌意的检察官和法官转而对这个愣头青开始欣赏，甚至用自己的专业知识来帮助他。根据庭审的表现，詹姆斯告诉亨利杨，陪审团将他罪名从一级谋杀将为二级谋杀，甚至一般的谋杀都是有可能的，他只需最多再坐个十年牢就能获得自由了。

但是，让詹姆斯意料不到的是，亨利杨要他向法官求情，判他死刑。

因为，就算他逃过一死，他还是将在阿尔卡特兹监狱服刑，还是要面对格伦。亨利杨害怕这个，要比害怕死亡更甚。

詹姆斯坚持认为亨利杨是无罪的，如果亨利杨要让自己被判死刑，就得自己在开庭的时候对法官和陪审团说。结果，在詹姆斯的提问下，亨利杨在庭上喊出了“我宁愿死也不愿回阿尔卡特兹监狱！因为我害怕他们。我只是武器，但我没杀人，他们才是凶手。”

最终，陪审团认定亨利杨没犯一级谋杀罪，而犯误杀罪，刑期是三年。陪审团还签署了请愿书，请求联邦政府对阿尔卡特兹监狱立即开展调查，因为陪审团认定这座监狱和监狱的典狱长犯了违反人道的罪。詹姆斯大获全胜。

亨利杨还是被押回阿尔卡特兹监狱服刑，还是要面对格伦。不过他能够对格伦说：“我赢了，而你没法把胜利从我这里拿走。”在上诉开庭的前一天，他的尸体在关押他的地牢里被发现。他用一块石头在地上写了“胜利”这个词。七个月后，阿尔卡特兹监狱的地牢被联邦最高院裁定被永久关闭。而典狱长格伦犯虐待罪。1963年，阿尔卡特兹监狱被永久关闭。

整部电影就这样讲述詹姆斯如何不屈不挠地打赢了他第一个案子，而这个案子，所有人一开始都说他是输定了。我就不谈几位演员的演技是如何出色：凯文·贝肯扮演亨利杨，加里·奥德曼扮演格伦，他们的精彩演出使人难忘。不过，这部影片使我思考最多的问题，是死磕派的律师詹姆斯为什么能够成功。

首先，他热爱自己的职业，他从小就想当一名律师，在法庭上与对方唇枪舌剑。他对于正义有着火一样的热情。当他刚接到这个案子的时候，公诉人认为这个案子只要六分钟就能审理完毕，而他则使审理至少进行了六个月，并在这个期间，揭露了阿尔卡特兹监狱的黑暗内幕。所有人在一开始都认为亨利杨是有罪的，而他证明了亨利杨不是无故杀人，他不过是阿尔卡特兹监狱的牺牲品。一个初出茅庐的法律援助律师，靠着死磕把一个铁板钉钉的案子翻了过来，还顺带着揭露了监狱系统的黑暗，这不能不说是一个奇迹。

其次，他不仅具有专业的精神，还具备专业的技能。詹姆斯的哥哥是个律师，从小被哥哥抚养大的他耳渲目染。他本人又在哈佛大学法学院深造过，学校的培养了他出色的庭审辩护技能，他能够在庭上控制证人，利用巧妙的提问让证人暴露自己，达到自己想要达到的效果。美国的庭审十分精彩，就是因为律师和检察官不相上下的辩论。

最后，也是最重要的，他得益于美国的司法制度。美国是世界上三权分立最彻底的国家，而且不仅三权分立，它们之间还相互制衡。这种体制保证了司法的独立性。我们在影片中也可以看到，在监狱这种权力不受监督的暗箱操作之地，只会盛行腐败、反人道等种种骇人听闻的罪行。有很多其他电影，包括著名的《肖申克的救赎》，都反映了美国监狱的黑暗。而只有像詹姆斯这样的死磕派律师，以及新闻记者和其他正义人士的不懈努力，揭露这些黑暗，才能导致局面最终被改善。美国独立的司法制度也保证了像詹姆斯这样的死磕派律师可以存在，尽管官方用了种种办法对他施压，但是他们无法让法院听命于他们。法院超然物外的地位保证了司法的公正性。官方对于詹姆斯这样令人头疼的“扒粪者”也是无计可施，因为他可以不为政府工作，自己开律所单干。在其他国家这个案件的审理会是什么结果，不说大家也知道。此外，美国还十分重视证人出庭的制度。撒谎是人性的表现，证人出庭可以有助于控辩双方对证人进行交叉盘问而发现疑点。且律师可以申请任何人出庭作证。如果该证人不愿意，法院可以强制他出庭。

在电影中，詹姆斯这个死磕派律师，在孤立无援的情况下依然同公诉人斗、同隐藏在后台的官方斗，甚至还要同亨利杨斗。亨利杨其实只想死，他是把詹姆斯当做朋友，才由着他一路死磕。这样的一名律师，以后肯定在他的职业生涯中精彩纷呈，因为他不仅专业技能优秀，还坚信正义一定会胜利。

是不是觉得这样的人物太励志了？

其实，这部电影是根据真人真事改编的。

影片两大主旨：反思司法制度与监狱管理（量刑不当、虐囚）；实现人生价值，赢得胜利。

胜利是多重的，James首战告捷，Henry克服心魔，James努力让Henry找到人生意义并最终认可这份友谊又何尝不是胜利。

1941年，迪马吉奥（Joe DiMaggio）连续56场比赛击出安打；伴随着两侧囚犯的敲击声，Henri昂首走入地牢，无人能夺走他胜利的果实，于是他刻下“victory”一词，从容死去。Henri之死意料之外，情理之中。回归地牢，再一次陷入黑暗，他可能仍会害怕，但如今他有朋友，妹妹生活幸福，与他境遇相似的人可能不必遭受他所经受的折磨。Henri或许永远克服不了对幽闭空间、对黑暗的恐惧，但他不再惧怕残暴的狱长、不再惧怕 Alcatraz 、不再惧怕死亡。活下来是胜利，带有尊严的死去也是胜利。

回归现实，1963年，Alcatraz关闭。2019年，关塔那摩监狱虐囚图震惊世人。如果历史不断重复，那无数先驱心中企盼的理想社会只会成为空想。