Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Basically my screenplay story is a crime thriller where the protagonist (a police detective), gets into a shootout and kills another cop by accident. Not wanting to get into trouble, and also blaming it on the villain as the villain's fault, the cop wants to frame the villain for the killing and cover up that he did it.
However, is it even possible to do that with today's forensic technology? I can't figure out how to write it, and in all the research of forensics I have done, says it's impossible.
Today's forensic technology is so good, and that's why you never hear of anyone getting away with murder anymore cause the cop's always find one crack, that leads to all the others. I keep thinking that the police are stupid in my story, cause they would have found something, where as I want my protagonist to get away with the ends justifying the means. Or maybe there is a way to cover up such a crime, but in my research I cannot find one at all.
But is getting away killing someone, especially one that was not even planned to the T, and was an accident that has to to be covered up, even believable in modern times? Especially since audiences are use to killers being caught, not only in real life, but in fiction as well, where as I want mine to be never be discovered.
What do you think?
But you have to limit / control the evidence. You ever see the final scene in "The Departed?"
Well O.J. Simpson was caught but he was just one example. Perhaps other criminals could make more effort to cover their tracks, and not get caught today?
Well O.J. Simpson was caught but he was just one example. Perhaps other criminals could make more effort to cover their tracks, and not get caught today?
You don't get it.
O.J. didn't cover his tracks AT ALL. Everything he did pointed straight to his guilt, including trying to flee to Mexico. He left a ton of forensic evidence behind, and then made some more.
What the prosecutors lacked was evidence that tied him directly to the crime.
The one piece they had- the bloody glove- had shrunk because it had been soaked with blood, and leather shrinks when soaked with moisture. So the glove didn't fit when O.J. tried it on in court. That wasn't a genius stroke by the murderer- it was a prosecutorial screw-up. They should have realized leather shrinks when wet.
That's the point. You can have a stack of forensics that's 6 feet high, but without some direct ties, a jury can still fail to convict. And do, all the time. In the face of forensic evidence.
If you can wrap your head around that, then you can make your story work.
It's your world and your rules. That's what happened in The Departed. The writer made the crime fit his rules in his world.
Don't get hung up in the trifling details until you have the story finished as you want it to end.
Once you have it all, it will be easy to go back and change the details to fit the story.
Right now, you are trying to make the story fit the details. It's the wrong way to do it.
Start riding the bike and quit carrying the bike on your head. Things will go a lot faster and smoother if you do.
Oh okay thanks, but I have the whole story laid out and what I want to happen. I know exactly how I want it to end, just not sure how to have the main character's plan work for it to get there. But I do have the entire story laid out including the ending. You said don't get hung up on the details till I have it finished, but it is finished, including the ending. So now it's time to get hung up on the details, isn't it?
I have everything else finished, I am just not sure how to make this rule fit my crime world. It doesn't have to be realistic, but how does the main character fire shots from his gun, and then they are not traced? I just have no idea what to make up for that.
I guess what I could do when it comes to making up my own rules is to have the main cop, dig the bullets out of the dead cop's body, and dig the bullets out of all the places in the vicinity that the bullets would have struck into, after fired. Then after that, he would leave and not tell anyone he was there, and when the police come to investigate shortly after, they cannot find any evidence of him being there, cause he dug all the bullets out and wiped away any prints... Does that work, for making up my own rules?
Last edited by ironpony; 11-15-2017 at 08:00 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Possible
