一级谋杀

偶然被推荐看了这一部电影，很震撼，不是被什么大制作，而是被融入于细节不经意间透露出来的人性所感动。

令我印象最深的是他被关进小黑屋时遇见了一只蜘蛛，（按照我以前看的电影电视剧情节），一种惯性思维让我觉得他是不是要吃了它，这是很合乎常理的，因为那里的食物很少很差，但是令我没有想到的是亨利他把自己的食物给了那只蜘蛛。

在暗无天日的环境里他没有泯灭人性，他很善良，他想要有朋友，他想念自己的妹妹，他要的并不多呀！当最后一幕发生时，我很替他难过，但是他赢了，他有了自己的朋友，见到了自己的妹妹，洗清了自己的冤屈。

是这个社会扭曲，而他仍然保持着柔软的心。

在我看电影的同时，儿子偶尔拿着他的乐高从我身边跑来跑去。在看到一个赤身裸体的人在受到虐时，他的表情有点恐惧，“妈妈他怎么了？他为什么被打？”我说他在监狱里，他在受惩罚，他越狱了。又过了一会儿，他又过来了，“妈妈都演这么半天了，他怎么还在监狱里受罚？他有很重的罪么？”我说不是，他没有犯很重的罪，但他在监狱里受到了不公平的对待，他们把他关在黑黑的没有窗没有床没有厕所的小屋里三年多。“那他太可怜了……”看到结尾亨利抬起头和监狱长不卑不亢的说：你可以打我但拿不走我的胜利果实！儿子又不知什么时候站在我身后了，我说你是不是没看明白？他点头。那你还总过来看？他说这犯人好像变厉害了！

小孩子看不懂电影，但有时他们说话，就是很在点儿上……无论电影有几分真实几分虚构的艺术创作成分，它依然有它要传递的信息，依然能让我在看完之后有被触动。

我只告诉儿子，有信念有思想能坚持，是件很难的事，但希望你能成为这样的人。

亨利最开始连说话都不愿意，但最后他有了朋友，有了支撑，他强大到可以说出自已所愿所求，可以去反抗，可以成为颠覆司法的一个起点，真的很了不起！

人的一生，没有几个一千天，怎么过都是过，但我还是希望能过得更有宽度，更珍惜阳光和拥有的一切。

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?

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。