My Cousin Vinny: Fact or Fiction?
Emma Turlington ‘25
The legal profession is heavily dramatized by television and film, so much so that finding a legal drama devoid of inaccuracies is similar to finding a needle in a haystack. Due to the over-saturation of films in this area of the industry, e.g., Legally Blonde, Law & Order, and Suits, it can become easy for audiences to mistake fiction for fact. While these films may have merit and validity, it should go without saying that they aren’t entirely accurate.
Jonathan Lynn’s 1992 film, My Cousin Vinny, however, is heralded as one of, if not the most, accurate portrayals of courtroom procedure and decorum available to audiences today.
Synopsis
The film follows William “Bill” Gambini and Stan Rothenstein, two young men from New York, traveling across the country to attend school at the University of California at Los Angeles. At the film's opening, Bill and Stan make a pit-stop at a convenience store in Beechum County, Alabama to grab snacks and other road-trip essentials. While in the store, with his hands full, Bill absent-mindedly places a can of tuna in his coat pocket, leading to his neglect to place it on the counter and pay for it before leaving. Then, back on the road, Bill and Stan notice their shoplifted tuna: “Look. I forgot to pay for this,” “You could have gotten caught. What if somebody saw? The laws are medieval down here. You know what the minimum age for execution is in Alabama?” Following this interaction, the pair notice a police officer following them and are pulled over. Bill and Stan are eventually taken to the police station and selected as suspects of interest. When speaking with police, Bill admits he is aware of the crime he committed, understands his rights, and waives them.
Unbeknownst to Bill and Steve, a robbery and murder had taken place mere minutes after they left, leaving the convenience store clerk dead in the store. The circumstantial evidence presented in court describes two men, of similar appearance to Bill and Steve, arriving at the store and murdering the cashier. An eye-witness by the name of Mrs. Riley testifies that she “heard two loud bangs like firecrackers” and “saw two young men run out from the Sac-O-Suds and jump into a green car with a white convertible top and drive off like the dickens,” subsequently identifying the defendants and the defendants’ car as seen at the scene of the crime. This account, along with the accounts of fellow witnesses, create a grim narrative for Bill and Stan.
Due to the misunderstanding, Bill alludes to the murder being spontaneous and attempts to clear Stan’s name. In a series of comedic interactions, Bill and Stan dig themselves a deeper hole: “Aidin’ and abettin’,” Aiding and abetting? What is that, a major thing?” “An accessory? I didn’t help. I didn’t plan it." "I didn’t know it was happening. I found out later in the car.” Additionally, Bill unintentionally confesses to the murder: “When’d you shoot him?” “What?” “At what point did you shoot the clerk?” “I shot the clerk?” “Whoa! Wait a minute!”
Eventually, they come to the stark realization of their situation: “You think we’re being booked for shoplifting?” “I’m being booked for murder, and you’re being booked for accessory to murder.” As they make their phone calls, Bill remembers his cousin Vinny, Vincent La Guardia Gambini, a lawyer, thus leading to their selection of Vinny as their attorney. Vinny, a personal injury lawyer with only six weeks of practice under his belt, having never gone to trial before and only recently passed the bar exam on his sixth attempt, is duly unprepared for the trial set before him. Facing the prospect of death by electrocution, Bill and Stan’s unfit legal counsel makes for a risky trial experience.
Ultimately, the case of The People of the State of Alabama versus William Robert Gambini and Stanley Marcus Rothenstein, charged with first-degree murder—the intentional killing of another person, acting willfully or deliberately, often with premeditated intent—with a bail set at $200,000 and possibly the death penalty if found guilty.
Accuracies
Legal professionals confirm the accuracy of Jonathan Lynn’s depiction of the legal field in My Cousin Vinny, maintaining that it upholds the rectitude of courtroom procedure and honors the degree of decorum of lawyers and judges.
For instance, the film accurately portrays the beginning stages of a trial by illustrating how an attorney should (and should not) conduct themselves in a court of law: standing when addressing the court, speaking clearly and intelligibly, dressing properly and appropriately. It also outlines the communication process in a courtroom and details the procedure for arraignment, the first proceeding in a courtroom where the defendant is made aware of their rights, informed of their charges, and is given the opportunity to plead guilty or not guilty.
The film also provides an insightful perspective on how to successfully present evidence, question witnesses, and expose the cracks in the plaintiff’s testimony. In the film, Vinny is able to flip evidence on its head, exposing it as invalid or inconsistent. Though exaggerated for dramatic effect, My Cousin Vinny presents an accurate depiction of a successful trial and how an attorney can navigate a difficult case.
In subtle ways, this film highlights important aspects of trial proceedings, including the importance of having prepared, competent legal representation. It also provides an illustration of the duties of a public offender, a district attorney, and outlines other valuable intricacies of the legal profession.
Additionally, Vinny’s inclusion of his fiancée, Mona Lisa Vito, a knowledgeable and experienced mechanic who is well-versed in all things automobiles, is a valid depiction of expert witness testimony. An expert witness is someone who is permitted to testify in a trial due to their proficient knowledge of a field relevant to the subject discussed in court. Though not the safest choice, given another expert witness was present, her succinct and persuasive explanation of positraction and how the tire marks at the scene could not be made by a 1964 Buick Skylark, but rather a 1963 Pontiac Tempest, helped to persuade the jury and win the case for Vinny. Her expertise in this specific area shows the value of qualified witnesses whose knowledge can help break down complicated terminology or facts of a trial.
Inaccuracies
Though My Cousin Vinny remains loyal to legal procedure, there are a few inaccuracies present in the film.
The first, and arguably the most important inaccuracy, is that, in a real trial, Vinny probably would not have been able to represent Bill and Stan. As mentioned in the film, Vinny is licensed to practice law in the state of New York, not Alabama. He is not aware of any state-specific laws or procedures. Though an attorney can be permitted to practice law in a state other than their own, a term known as pro-hac-vice—an extension of jurisdiction for one specific case, given that the attorney is in good standing and is qualified—it seems doubtful that the judge would approve of Vinny. In his meeting with Judge Haller, Vinny lies about the accreditation of his alma mater, fabricates his trial record, and continuously fudges details about his identity to evade repercussions. His glaring inconsistencies and evident lack of expertise should have been enough to be dismissed as a possible representative for Bill and Stan.
Another inaccuracy present in the film is Vinny’s ability to absorb and retain information on legal procedure after merely cramming information the night before. It is also incredibly unlikely that, without any trial experience, a novice attorney could spontaneously possess the knowledge, skill, and confidence to undermine a first-degree murder case with eyewitness testimony and solid evidence. Though it is entirely plausible that an experienced attorney could do so, it is less believable that a lawyer like Vinny would be able to pull off such a miraculous feat.
Conclusion: Fact or Fiction?
Ultimately, director Jonathan Lynn’s portrayal of courtroom procedure in My Cousin Vinny is factual and realistic. Its depiction of how a trial operates, how an attorney should conduct themself in a court of law, and insight into the inner workings of the legal system is consistent with actual legal proceedings.
Emma Turlington is a senior majoring in communications.
Sources
(2022). first degree murder. Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/first_degree_murder
Del Grosso, V. pro hac vice. Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/pro_hac_vice
Jonathan, L. (Director). (1992). My Cousin Vinny [Film]. 20th Century Fox.
Robinson, J. (2023, Aug.). expert witness. Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/expert_witness
