A big surprise to me
11 September 2012
Warning: Spoilers
****MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS***** I just finished watching Cell 2455; it was shown on TCM the other night (September 2012). Wow--not what I was expecting, not cheesy, not cliché ridden, but well acted, exciting, and amazingly of all, the protagonist's voice-over is far from boring. I well remember Chessman's case; Governor Brown (father of incumbent CA governor) finally permitted the execution, in 1960, I think it was. The movie was made before then so the "hero's" fate is left hanging. There are some very interesting legal aspects briefly touched upon in the film. For one thing, they executed a non-murderer (my coinage!). Under CA's "LIttle Lindbergh Law" (little because there was a federal similar statute), injury to a kidnap victim can warrant the death penalty. As the criminal complains, what kind of "kidnaping" involves moving the victim (the women he raped, at least one into insanity) only a few steps? Note: New York's highest court ruled, in the 50s or 60s, their kidnap statute did NOT cover moving a victim a short distance in aid of another motivating crime such as robbery (victim was driven around a bit in a car and robbed).

Another strange aspect was that the trial court reporter died before transcribing his shorthand notes. At a hearing the head of a national association of certified shorthand court reporters testified the notes were unreadable by anybody but their original (now deceased) writer. Chessman lost the hearing nonetheless, and had to appeal on a transcript made by a substitute reporter.

Chessman published three or four memoirs before execution. The first one -- the eponymous title -- got him huge publicity. In my long experience with crime and Liberals, let me just say a favorite "victim" of anti-capital punishment people is the brutal criminal who can write decent books. (Recall Jack Henry Abbott, a two-time killer championed by Normal Mailer for his prison writing. Mailer's influence helped him get parole; within a year or so he killed a harmless waiter in an alley fight. So there's no mistaking my beliefs, I do not blame Mailer for Abbott's release: that was the responsibility of the New York Parole Board. Mailer eventually expressed contrition for his role.)

Chessman dragged out his execution for about twelve years from sentence to asphyxiation in the gas chamber. This was a remarkable feat, because in those days-- 1948-1960--there were nowhere near as many tricks and tips, dodges and feints, to drag out executions as there are now. Chessman was mainly responsible for fighting and winning his own legal battles along the way. I think I read his IQ was 140 or thereabouts.

One last oddity: the introducer of the film on TCM said they changed the name of the character from Chessman to avoid legal entanglements (with his family? victims?). That seemed plausible until the opening credits, which featured a big blow-up of the dust jacket of Chessman's book, obviously identifying him as the subject of the film. Prior to that, a credit said it was based on his book. Yet there was, in tiny type, the usual "no persons living or dead, etc.". You can't beat these Hollywood studio lawyers.
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed