"does the defence's case hold water? No"
-
JosephASpadaro — 9 years ago(October 15, 2016 05:11 PM)
You missed the point of the original question.
The defense (i.e., Vinny) got up in front of the jury and elicited from Mona Lisa that the
defense's
own case does not hold water.
One would expect the defense to argue that the
prosecution's
case is the one that does not hold water.
The whole strategy of Vinny in this exchange is explained in more detail on the "FAQ" Page, which is located here:
http://www.imdb.com/board/10104952/faq?ref_=ttfc_ql_op_2#.2.1.18
.
It is the 17th (or so) question down. It is entitled "Why would Vinny goad Lisa into admitting on the stand that his defense is wrong?". -
erie-05478 — 9 years ago(January 07, 2017 03:19 AM)
My point is as far as legal terminology, it's not the defenses case. It's the prosecution's case that doesn't hold water, and that should have been the line. They claimed during the making of the film that they tried to be accurate with the legal procedures and terminology. They missed it by a wide margin, if members of the defense which include Vinny, and his girl friend on the stand, his line cannot be "Does the Defense's case hold water", simply because Vinny IS the defender in the case and the opposing team is the prosecution.
-
JosephASpadaro — 9 years ago(January 10, 2017 12:30 AM)
My point is as far as legal terminology, it's not the defenses case. It's the prosecution's case that doesn't hold water, and that should have been the line. They claimed during the making of the film that they tried to be accurate with the legal procedures and terminology. They missed it by a wide margin, if members of the defense which include Vinny, and his girl friend on the stand, his line cannot be "Does the Defense's case hold water", simply because Vinny IS the defender in the case and the opposing team is the prosecution.
You missed the entire point.
Vinny was specifically saying that yes the defense's case
his own case
was wrong.
One defense theory was wrong. The one that he put forth.
But, then, he came to a realization that he was wrong, and he figured out what really happened.
So, while the defense's "case" (first theory) was wrong, their second theory was not.
In any case, the defense would claim that the prosecution's case was wrong.
But, it would really make a juror's ears perk up to hear the defense say that the defense's own case was wrong.
So, it was Vinny's way to "alarm" the jury and to "wake them up". He wanted them to see that while the defense's original theory was wrong, their second theory was correct.