Brian Katcher

14th Mar 2019

The Fugitive (1993)

Question: Kimble's wife suffered from severe head trauma. Wouldn't his defense attorney demand her 911 transcript be stricken, as her serious brain damage could have caused her to say anything?

Brian Katcher

Answer: His attorney could have done that, but I doubt such a strategy would have been successful, for two reasons. First, proving that she was just "saying anything" would be difficult at best, given that she wasn't just spouting random nonsense...she was speaking directly about what had happened. The prosecutor would have pointed out that she had been coherent (i.e., in control of her thoughts/speech) enough to a) dial 911, b) stay on topic, c) relay information, and d) name her killer (or so they believe). And second, given this high burden of proof, going with "this murder victim was just babbling as a result of the brain damage she suffered when she was brutally clubbed to death" probably wouldn't have gone over well with a jury.

But why would she say "Richard...he's trying to kill me" instead of "My husband is trying to kill me"? I think the killer made her call 911 and say the words; you can see him hang up after she's said them.

Answer: I'd say this was a definite plot hole. Basing Kimble's guilt on a dying, brain-damaged woman's incoherent mumbling was unrealistic. His guilty verdict in real life would never have happened this way.

raywest