Fernando García Ramírez entitled to his note in the film Blog Letras Libres, check it:
Presumed Innocent
I was very disappointed Presumed Guilty. Suffers from the greatest mistake you can show a documentary: it is partial. They were wrong victim: the victim is dead. Why Why did not interview family members? Perhaps the filmmakers wanted to show that there were two victims: the dead and Tono. And then why do we only see the reasons for a party? We see throughout the film to the family of "suspect" his girlfriend, his mom, his friends, attended their wedding, we see how her daughter was born, we see it-often-dance. Why not show interviews with the family of the deceased? Would it not have changed anything if our perception of seeing his mother, brothers crying and demanding justice? "The vision is partial, says Erika (sister of the murdered boy.) We believe that the film was made without respect. We know already exhibited in a tour and to awards won, but we just got upset and we now say that the man accused is a victim when the victim was my brother and his case goes unpunished. No one pays for the crime "( La Jornada, February 17, 2011). How do we complain to the Mexican justice system? It is partial. The documentary does exactly that. It does not do any justice to the dead. After the tape came to two conclusions: the system of administration of justice in Mexico is useless; documentaries are partial instruments hidden away part of the truth.
Presumed Guilty shows what we already knew: if you have money you get rid of justice. Wealthy lawyers and librarians (living in the Pedregal, come to study in Berkeley, counsel is the daughter of Layda Sansores, daughter turn Sansores Carlos Perez, who was leader of the PRI governor of Quintana Roo), supported by the mega-millionaire Manuel Arango, supported the cause of Tono and his film were released. When he moved a lot of money on their behalf, they released Toño. I would love to Manuel Arango also had helped the family of the deceased. When he defended the histrionic Toño Heredia attorney appearing in the film, he returned to endorse his guilt.
Other things I liked the documentary. I did not like for example, that tone is not never looked at the camera and say with all the lyrics: I'm innocent. Instead, the camera is raging with the cousin of the deceased, the accuser of Toño, who several times on his face said he was guilty. Not that I did not like lawyers, librarians do not ask Toño: And you knew those who say they were going with you? On the contrary, emphasize trivial details, as when in the documentary said it was impossible to participate in the killing Toño because when it happened "was a forty minute walk, round trip, from the crime scene." Forty minutes on foot! Ie, ten minutes by taxi. I guess to make it more dramatic, might as well say: "I was moved three hours after kneeling to the scene of the crime." In the same segment interrogate Toño's friends about whether they saw the day of the murder in front of his position, and then clear all your friends say yes they saw, what else would they say? At another point in the tape says one of the senior judges finally released Toño "eight hours I was discussing with the other judges who opposed his release." Eight hours of debate in height between judges. But on the tape do not see that they show us many arguments for his release and across multiple scenes of the judge's mouth open fiscal scenes papando flies. As a viewer, I wish that instead of projecting scenes ridiculing the prosecution I would have exposed the arguments of the judges who refused to grant him his freedom. Also, I would have liked the filmmakers to question him: Why do you asked God to metieran to jail or you take his life?, What faults charged?
Finally. I think one word missing in Presumed Guilty. The secret word. Keyword. The word PRD. What we see on screen is justice scandal PRD. What is the federal justice same? Perhaps, but that is not the tape. The film does not call into question the federal courts, but to the capital. However, throughout the documentary released figures: 92% of defendants do not see the judge. Are national figures or the City? Must be different. If the tape shows the capital's justice had to give the capital's figures. For a mere principle of objectivity. Or separate the figures. Why I say that Presumed Guilty is the justice in the City? Perhaps because the crime occurred in the City? Why was the City's legal? Why is the MP who consigned the case was the City? Why is the prison where he was put DF? Why were the judges DF? Why were the City prosecutors? Perhaps for these reasons I thought the movie was about justice in Mexico City. When apprehended Toño, Alejandro Encinas was head of city government. Today Encinas is hopeful the government of the State of Mexico, with the support of Andrés Manuel López Obrador, with the support of Layda Sansores, producing Presumed Guilty. Will we have a new documentary about this once a presumptive nominee?
-Fernando García Ramírez
http://www.letraslibres.com/blog/blogs/index.php?blog=14
0 comments:
Post a Comment