Rules Of Engagement Movie

Jordyn Granito
Movie: Rules of Engagement (2000)

Col. Terry Childers is a highly respected Marine Veteran with 30 years of service. He is viewed as a hero but after a mission gone wrong he starts to be viewed as a killer. Now he is trial for firing into a crowd that is said to be was firing at Childers and his team with the only real witness to this is dead. In the state's eyes he has broken the rules of engagement. His lawyer being Col. Hayes Hodge, also a retired Marine Veteran. Much of the evidence presented is not in Childers favor. However this changes when a Vietnamese Colonial testifies. He tells how Childers killed an unarmed POW in order for him to call off the attack on Childers men, however the Colonial also reveals that if the role was switched
It gave a great example of what would have been a controversial event if it would have actually of happened which in my opinion is very interesting. I also liked that i could point out somethings happening in the movie on a legal basis that i would have not been able to point out if i did not take this class. The movie also intrigued me on a legal basis d reminded me a bit about the stand your ground law. It's very interesting to see how the truth can still come out despite evidence not being in favor of the defendant. The case was extremely interesting. The movie help broaden my knowledge on self-defense. It intrigued me to do more research on the rules of engagement. It also reminded me of the stand your ground law. However the stand your ground law is less strict. Self-defense is a serious topic. Someone who has no intent on killing someone might have to if their life is on the line when put on trial for murder could be a very nerve-racking emotional process for the defendant. Self-defense is an important right especially if a person is ever faced with danger. This movie has helped me appreciate that more and expanded my knowledge on