评论
打印
No. 8: It's all right. I don't have anything brilliant. I only know as much as you do. According to the testimony, the boy looks guilty. Maybe he is. I sat in court for six days, listening while the evidence spilled out. I began to get a feeling that the defense counselor wasn't conducting a thorough enough cross-examination. He let too many things go by, little things.
8号陪审员：那好吧。我没什么特别好的想法。我跟你们知道的一样多。根据证词，这孩子像是有罪的。也许他确实有罪。我出庭6天，也听到了很多证词。但我开始有一种很奇怪的感觉——被告律师并没有进行彻底的交叉讯问。他忽略了太多问题——太多细节问题。
No. 10: What little things? Listen, when these fellows don't ask those questions, it's because they know the answers already.
10号陪审员：什么细节问题？听着，这些人不问问题，一定是因为他们已经知道了答案。
No. 8: Maybe. But it's also possible for a lawyer to be just plain stupid, isn't it? I kept putting myself in the kid's place. I'd ask for another lawyer, I think. If I was on trial for my life, I'd want my lawyer to tear the prosecutor's evidence to shreds. Look, there was one alleged eyewitness to this killing. And someone else claimed that he heard the killer run out of the room afterwards. Supposing they were wrong?
8号陪审员：也许吧。但也有可能是律师太愚蠢了，不是吗？我总是把自己放在这个男孩的位置上，我觉得如果我是他我会再请一位律师。如果将被裁决的是我的命运，我会希望我的律师把原告提出的证据驳斥得体无完肤。请注意，该案件有一位自称目击了整个谋杀过程的目击者，还有一个人声称听到凶手事后跑出房间。假设他们都错了呢？
No. 12: What do you mean? "Supposing they were wrong." You can suppose there were no witnesses at all.
12号陪审员：你什么意思？“假设他们都错了。”你干脆假设根本就没有证人好了。
No. 8: Could they be wrong? They are only people. People make mistakes.
8号陪审员：他们不能错吗？他们也只是人，而人难免会犯错。
No. 12: Come on. This is not an exact science.
12号陪审员：得了吧，这又不是一个精确的科学问题。
No. 8: That's right. It isn't.
8号陪审员：没错，它不是。
No. 3: OK, let's get to the point. What about that switch blade they found in the old guy's chest, the knife this fine boy admitted buying on the night of the killing. Let's talk about it.
3号陪审员：好吧，让我们切入正题，来说说他们发现的插在老人胸口上的那把弹簧刀吧，这个好孩子已经承认了那把刀是他在案发当晚买的。我们来讨论一下这个问题吧。
