While there are some nice touches in the form of surprising competency from the protagonist's team, there is no intrigue here at all and none of the characters are written memorably.
#WITNESS TO A CRIME MOVIE#
Herein, Gary's character demonstrates strong James Bond overtones, but the disappointing screenplay helps make for a movie that in no way presents a threat to the genuine 007 series. Unbeknownst to most folks, this is actually the first (or second?) part in a short-lived franchise for Daniels that also includes QUEEN'S MESSENGER. The story: On a mission to deliver vital dispatches to an embassy in Africa, a special forces operative (Daniels) is caught up in a terrorist operation headed by a sadistic rebel (Nick Boraine). While a viewing does reveal some unique touches, the movie isn't worth hunting down to all but the most enthusiastic Daniels fan. WITNESS TO A KILL is fairly unknown even among the Danger Man's faithful, not in the least because of how well the generic DVD cover and indistinguishable cast blend in among the low-budget mass. We have obtained not guilty verdicts and dismissals of charges in these situations.Outside of DTV enthusiasts and hardcore fans, most of Gary Daniels' movies qualify as obscure. The attorneys at Sieben & Cotter have handled multiple cases of domestic assault and criminal sexual conduct where there was only one eyewitness to the alleged crimes. The attorneys at Sieben & Cotter have experience in these types of situations. If the case goes to trial, however, this preparation will allow the criminal defense lawyer to thoroughly cross-examine the witness, which could result in you being found not guilty of the charges.
This type of aggressive preparation can result in the dismissal of charges before trial. A good criminal defense lawyer will also go over that witnesses’ statements to law enforcement and others to look for any inconsistencies. How do you discredit a witness’ statements?Ī thorough investigation of the alleged victim’s background, including whether they have been convicted of any crimes is part of the discrediting process. Because of this, the best defense in these cases is often to discredit the witness. The witness’s testimony is direct evidence that the prosecutor can use to convict you of a crime. Contrary to what many people believe, the prosecutor does not need any physical evidence of your guilt. In many domestic assault and criminal sexual conduct cases, there is little to no physical evidence supporting the charges. That person’s statement is often enough for you to be charged and convicted of the crime. In domestic assault and criminal sexual conduct cases, often the only eyewitness the prosecutor has is the alleged victim of the offense. However unfair as it may seem the prosecutor can file charges against you even if they only have one eyewitness to support the charges.
Is one eyewitness enough to prove that you’re guilty of a crime?
0 kommentar(er)
