Written and Directed by: John Lee Hancock
 |
| https://play.google.com/store/movies/details/ The_Little_Things?id=2GatvdJUxY8.P&hl=en_AU |
When we watch police dramas, the cases nearly always get solved, the perpetrator is caught red-handed, or they make a full confession. In reality, however, not all crimes are solved. Sometimes, the police believe they have enough evidence to prosecute the accused in court. Other times, cases go cold, or the accused will fight fiercely to clear their name. Occasionally, the accused die in custody due to the methods used to extract information from them.
This is when things become complicated. The police will see it as the cost of doing business, the business of keeping the city free from crime. However, the public will not view it favourably. They will talk about police brutality, police ombudsmen, and suspensions. The party involved will feel vindicated, believing they were simply doing their job. That is when matters get complicated. Instead of diligently performing their duties, they have to cover their own backs and those of others as well. Everyone is seeking a scapegoat to absolve themselves of their own wrongdoings.
In this film, a seasoned police officer (Joe Deacon) becomes involved in an ongoing investigation into a series of highway murders of young women. Joe has a poor reputation around the county for accidentally shooting an innocent member of the public during an ambush. For that, he paid a steep price, remaining as a deputy sheriff in a small town. The coroner and his superior covered up his mistake. So when Sgt Baxter asks for his help, he agrees. The case leads them to a peculiar individual who might be linked to the murders. Unfortunately, they just cannot pin him down.
The main part of the story occurs towards the end when, during a game of mind, Baxter accidentally swings a shovel and kills the suspect. The problem is that there is no solid evidence linking him to the crimes. That is when Joe decides to bury the whole story.
The message in the story presents a philosophical dilemma. Should a person be punished for taking his job too seriously? If his work defines who he is, and he believes he should dedicate his life and soul to his vocation because it is his dharma, is it fair for him to be punished for being overly zealous? On the other hand, with great power comes great responsibility. In a world that demands transparency and where every move is scrutinised, one must be cautious. Deal with it.
