most of
In the old will, that which was revoked, were you not to receive the bulk of Mrs French's estate?Witness for the Prosecution · 1957 — 第 18 / 27 章 · 4'05" · B2
Sir Wilfrid takes the housekeeper apart on the stand. He doesn't deny she hates Leonard — 'He's a shiftless, scheming rascal' — he uses it. Then he asks how she could identify a voice through 'four inches of solid oak', and lands the real blow: she has applied for a hearing aid. Her certainty was about belief, not hearing.
On the stand at the Central Criminal Court, the housekeeper Janet McKenzie faces Sir Wilfrid's cross-examination. He draws out that the old will left her the bulk of Mrs French's estate, while the new one leaves almost everything to Leonard Vole. She calls him a 'shiftless, scheming rascal', and insists she heard his voice through a closed door — until Sir Wilfrid asks about her hearing aid.
注目の表現
a wicked injusticea scheming rascalthe murmur of voicesthe way your mind worked
このシーンの表現
a sly rogue
Janet calls Vole a scheming rascal and then insists she is not hostile to him.
Everyone warned me about that scheming rascal.
a terrible wrong
low voices
how you were thinking
out for repair
request from
54 行のセリフに 24 件のメモ
most of
In the old will, that which was revoked, were you not to receive the bulk of Mrs French's estate?negative question: The negative question assumes the answer and pushes the witness to agree.
In the old will, that which was revoked, were you not to receive the bulk of Mrs French's estate?apart from
Whereas in the new will, except for a bequest to you of a small annuity, the principal beneficiary is the prisoner, Leonard Vole.contrast clause: Whereas sets the new will against the old one to highlight what she lost.
Whereas in the new will, except for a bequest to you of a small annuity, the principal beneficiary is the prisoner, Leonard Vole.even a cent of
It'll be a wicked injustice if he ever touches a penny of that money.hostile to
It is entirely understandable that you are antagonistic to the prisoner.lazy and useless
He's a shiftless, scheming rascal. But I'm not antagonistic to him.rogue — An old-fashioned insult; playful with friends, rude to strangers.
He's a shiftless, scheming rascal. But I'm not antagonistic to him.made you lose
I suggest you formed this opinion because his friendship with Mrs French cost you the bulk of her estate.the real words
- What did you hear them say? - I didn't hear what they actually said.low voices
Sir Wilfrid reduces her testimony to a murmur of voices, hinting she never caught the words.
- The murmur of voices? - They were laughing.rushed
You were in a hurry to get the pattern so you probably walked quickly past the closed door, yet you are sure you heard Leonard Vole's voice?contrast with yet: Yet links two clashing facts, implying her certainty does not add up.
You were in a hurry to get the pattern so you probably walked quickly past the closed door, yet you are sure you heard Leonard Vole's voice?enough time to
I was there long enough to hear what I heard.The t sounds in don't and wish to are often dropped in fast speech.
Come, I'm sure you don't wish to suggest to the jury that you were eavesdropping.oh, come on — A spoken opener that pushes back; too casual for formal settings.
Come, I'm sure you don't wish to suggest to the jury that you were eavesdropping.how you were thinking
What you mean is that you wanted it to be him. That's the way your mind worked.out for repair
Janet rules out the television because it was away being repaired that week.
Because the television was away being repaired that week, that's why.pay regularly
Aye, that's so. Four and sixpence I pay out every week.And reduces to a light /ən/, so the sum runs together.
Aye, that's so. Four and sixpence I pay out every week.device for hearing
- ...a hearing aid? - For... for what?hard oak wood
However, you state that you walked past a door, which is four inches of solid oak, you heard voices,The end of distinguish slides into the, with the g almost silent.
and you are willing to swear that you could distinguish the voice of...hardly missing anything
you are missing very little. You may stand down now.The whole cross-examination is a lesson in destroying a witness without calling her a liar. Sir Wilfrid never disputes that Janet disliked Leonard; he agrees, and turns her loathing into motive: 'I suggest you formed this opinion because his friendship with Mrs French cost you the bulk of her estate.' When she protests she is not antagonistic, he only sharpens the point. Then he dismantles her one solid fact — that she recognised Leonard's voice — by stressing the closed oak door, her hurry, and her wishful thinking: 'What you mean is that you wanted it to be him.' The hearing aid finishes it. She has sworn to a voice she may not have been able to hear, and her own application proves it.
It'll be a wicked injustice if he ever touches a penny of that money.Janet's bitterness is on full display: she would see Leonard taking any of the money as an outrage.
What you mean is that you wanted it to be him. That's the way your mind worked.Sir Wilfrid's key move — reframing her certainty as wishful thinking rather than evidence.
I was there long enough to hear what I heard.Her blunt, stubborn defence of her own testimony, refusing to concede she might be mistaken.
He's a shiftless, scheming rascal. But I'm not antagonistic to him.She insults Leonard and denies bias in the same breath, handing Sir Wilfrid the contradiction he exploits.
It gives her a motive to hate Leonard: his friendship with Mrs French cost her the bulk of the estate, so her testimony against him is not disinterested.
Janet's key evidence is that she recognised Leonard's voice through a closed, four-inch oak door. If she has applied for a hearing aid, the jury can doubt that she heard anything clearly at all.
The film leaves it as mistaken certainty rather than a proven lie. Sir Wilfrid's point is that she wanted it to be Leonard, and her hearing trouble means she may simply have guessed.
She insists she has no personal grudge even while calling Leonard a 'shiftless, scheming rascal' — a contradiction Sir Wilfrid lets the jury hear for themselves.
Half joking, she complains that her own hearing aid has not arrived six months after she applied, and the judge wryly dismisses her from the stand.
次のチャプター · 第 19 章an accomplice toChristine Testifies Against Vole
第 1 章put it in mothballsSir Wilfrid Goes Home
第 2 章when her back is turnedSir Wilfrid Hides Cigars in His Cane
第 3 章circumstantial evidenceVole Tries to Hire Sir Wilfrid
第 4 章in the hands ofLeonard Tells Sir Wilfrid His Story
第 5 章not cricketHow Vole Met Mrs French
第 6 章a hot potatoLeonard Recounts the Night of the Murder
第 7 章with flying coloursInspector Hearne Arrests Leonard
第 8 章call it what you likeChristine Vole Meets the Lawyers
第 9 章a way with womenChristine and the Green Socks
第 10 章worships the ground I walk onChristine Denies She's His Wife
第 11 章on the chance thatWilfrid Photographs Vole in Prison
第 12 章gave someone ideasLeonard Meets Christine in Hamburg
第 13 章clutching at a razor bladeVole Tells How He Married Christine
第 14 章to a pointLeonard Vole Pleads Not Guilty
第 15 章take someone by surpriseHearne Testifies About the Prints
第 16 章account forThe Bloodstained Jacket in Court
第 17 章hither and thitherJanet McKenzie Takes the Stand
再生中 · 第 18 章a scheming rascalWilfrid Cross-Examines the Housekeeper
第 19 章an accomplice toChristine Testifies Against Vole
第 20 章a chronic and habitual liarMyers Destroys Christine on the Stand
第 21 章shed new light onSir Wilfrid Calls Leonard Vole
第 22 章establish an alibiMyers Cross-Examines Leonard Vole
第 23 章wild-goose chaseThe Call About the German Wife
第 24 章on the slySir Wilfrid Buys the Letters
第 25 章a pack of liesSir Wilfrid's Blue Letter Trap
第 26 章dispose ofVole Is Found Not Guilty
第 27 章call someone namesChristine Reveals Leonard Was Guilty