Corrected entry: When the two boys, William and Stan, drive away from the "sack-o-suds" they do so in a controlled manner and never "burn rubber" as they leave. They never put any tire marks on the ground as they leave. A huge error considering that the trial turned on the 2 sets of tire marks.
Corrected entry: The tire tracks laid out on the pavement from the prosecution's picture is different from the picture the defense submits at the end. Mona Lisa's picture shows the left tire track going onto the sidewalk while the defense picture shows both tires on the asphalt, far from the sidewalk.
Correction: The prosecution picture only shows part of the tire track and does not show the sidewalk at all. Lisa's picture shows the full tire track. The two pictures appear to be consistent with each other with the prosecution picture being taken by someone standing on or near to the sidewalk whilst Lisa's picture is taken from further away.
Corrected entry: In the scene where Vinny and Lisa are in the hotel room and Vinny is revealing that he is scared about the trial, Lisa kisses Vinny goodnight and crawls in the bed. As she reaches over to turn off the lamp on the night stand, it shows an ash tray with cigarette butts in it. Neither Lisa or Vinny smoke in the entire movie. (00:47:40)
Correction: Just because they are never SHOWN smoking doesn't mean that neither of the characters do not smoke. Not a mistake.
We noticed this the other night and replayed it several times. The item in the ashtray was a dollar bill and not cigarette butt(s).
Corrected entry: At the end courtroom scene where Vinny is questioning Lisa, after she looks at some pictures he asks "does the defense's case hold water?", and she answers "no, the defense is wrong..." What Vinny and Lisa seemed to forget is that THEY were the defense - they were in fact saying that their own case didn't hold water. We can only assume that Vinny meant to ask "does the PROSECUTION'S case hold water", since that's who he was really opposing.
Correction: This is not an error. Pesci's character was asking "Does MY argument hold water?" He wanted her to disprove his claim, which would allow for a detailed explanation.
Also, don't forget that his original stance was that two Buick Skylarks (one from the defendants and one from the actual murderers) were at the store. He's asking her if he's correct, which she says "no" and explains that the car that made those marks couldn't be the Buick Skylark and was actually a Pontiac Tempest.
Corrected entry: They make it a fairly large point about the tire size on the car, Michelin XGV size 75R14. This is actually not a real tire size, it's an incomplete one. The real tire size would read something like 205 75r15. Meaning the tire is 205 mm wide, 75 means it's 75% tall as it is wide (153.75mm), the final number is the width of the rim in inches. You'd need to know all three numbers to make any sort of forensic judgement, any one of them missing would leave some major measurements of the skid marks out. Surely the head of automotive forensics for the FBI, would be aware of this.
Correction: In metric tire sizes, the original entry is correct, but when talking about standard sizing (inches instead of millimeters), the movie is accurate. A 7.50R14 (nicknamed 75R14) is a legitimate size for cars of that era, and a popular size 30 years ago. There is no error in this part of the movie.
30 years ago the tire would have been a 205/75R14. The numeric tire sizing went out in 1970. P-metric has been in use since around 1980. Your correction to the correction is incorrect. The original correction stands.
Since the cars in question are from 1963/1964, the p-metric would not apply.
Correction: Since the cars were 63/64, the nomenclature is correct.
Corrected entry: In the final courtroom scene, Vinny writes a note and gives it to the sheriff just before calling Lisa to the stand. While testifying, Lisa reveals that a Pontiac Tempest had to be the only car possible to make the tire marks. Next, the sheriff returns to the stand and testifies that "on a hunch" he runs a check on a blue Pontiac Tempest, which just happened to be involved in another crime. How did the sheriff know, and how did Vinny know to have the sheriff check on a blue Pontiac Tempest if Lisa didn't reveal this information until after Vinny wrote the note?
Correction: Vinny apparently knew enough about cars to have made the connection about the Pontiac Tempest. Obviously, his note was asking the sheriff to check if any cars of that make had been involved in any other crime. Then while the sheriff did so, Vinny had Lisa give her testimony. The sheriff's claim to have checked "on a hunch" was slightly tongue-in-cheek. However this certainly indicates that Vinny did figure it out, and used Mona Lisa to present the evidence in dramatic, awesome, fashion. He likely could have gotten the acquittal by walking Wilbur through the evidence. So when he later said in the car driving away that he had was upset because he didn't do it himself wasn't really right. He had to figure it out to know to put her on the stand.
You see the lightbulb go on when he is looking at the tire track pictures and jumps to ask for a recess.
Corrected entry: In the scene where Vinny is describing how the trial will work, using the "brick" explanation, he pulls the Ace of Spades out of the deck and shows it to the camera. Later in the scene, he is waving the card around. Somehow it has now become a Joker.
Correction: the change from ace to joker is intentional - vinny is doing a card trick to emphasize his explanation of how the case works.
Corrected entry: The FBI's expert testimony about the tire marks and the conclusion that the rubber residue and the rubber from the boys' tires was "identical" is actually inconclusive and misleading information. The expert's testimony established that the tire in question was the most common tire on the market. So any matching of chemical analysis data is at best anecdotal evidence. (01:00:00)
Correction: That's the point that Vinny makes afterwards. It's called "circumstantial evidence" and it can be used to help convict someone.
Corrected entry: In the trial it was mentioned that one of the boys was charged with first-degree murder, and the other was charged with accessory to murder in the first-degree. Because of this the boys would not have been tried together, since the charges are not the same.
Correction: Not true. States, in order to cut down on time and court costs try accomplices with the criminal. Also, because that way they don't have to call the same witnesses to two different trials.
Corrected entry: When Vinny and Lisa enter the cafe in the morning for their breakfast, there's a man in the background, sitting by the window, who keeps appearing and reappearing.
Correction: There are two sets of double windows, a total of four windows, on the wall to the left. The man you're referring to is seated beside the fourth window, which is the last window on that wall. In about six shots we cannot even see that fourth window or the area in front of it, where the man would be, because it's blocked from our view. However, in other shots when that area is actually visible to viewers, the man is there with his newspaper.
Corrected entry: In the final scene, Vinny and his fiancee are supposed to be driving north back to New York City in the late afternoon. However, the shadows from the sun are coming from the east (right side) of the screen. Therefore, either it is the early morning, or they were actually driving further south (not northward) to their home in NYC.
Correction: Roads don't always go directly to compass points. A major highway where I live goes east/west, but there are sections where you are driving north to go east, and south to go west, and a few miles down the road, you go east to continue west, and so on.
Corrected entry: The D.A. ends the court case by dismissing the charges against the defendants. Prosecutors don't dismiss cases - they can offer no evidence, effectively ending the case under trial, but only a judge can dismiss charges. This is not a character mistake - the legal difference is critical and no lawyer as highly placed as a state DA would ever make a mistake like that.
Correction: His actual words were "The State would like to dismiss all charges". He simply requested that the judge dismiss them, which the judge did.
Corrected entry: When Lisa and Vinny are driving from the courthouse they are talking about how he didn't win the case by himself. In one shot a piece of her hair is stuck to her lipstick and in the next shot all of her hair is behind her ears. There are other moments where her hair changes position between shots.
Correction: She's in a convertible driving down the road. We should expect to have her hair change positions between shots - and continuously for that matter.
Corrected entry: Why is Joe Pesci referred to as "Mr. Gambini" continuously by the judge, if he is supposedly "Jerry Gallo" and later "Jerry Callo"? Why doesn't the judge call him "Mr. Gallo" if that's who he thinks he is?
Correction: Early in the movie, Joe Pesci explains to the judge that Gambini is his "working name" and the name he is registered under is "Gallo" and later, "Callo." The judge buys it. Why? Who knows? But because they explained it that way, the judge is not making mistakes by calling him Gambini.
In addition, Vinny directly tells Judge Haller to continue calling him "Gambini" when the Judge first questions him about the two names.
Corrected entry: When Marisa Tomei is on the witness stand being questioned, she moves her lips to the line that Fred Gwynne is saying.
Correction: I have watched the entire scene, keeping my eyes on Marisa Tomei throughout. I cannot at any point see her lips moving to a line that Fred Gwynne is saying.
Corrected entry: It is a potentially serious ethical violation for Vinny to represent both Billy and Stan at the same time. An attorney owes a duty of complete loyalty to each client s/he represents, and Billy and Stan's interests will not necessarily be the same throughout the trial (one may want to plead guilty, the other may not, for example). Without at least addressing this issue with the boys before he agrees to represent them, Vinny would be severely sanctioned.
Correction: Just because we have not seen it happen does not mean it didn't happen. And since Stan gave up on the hapless public defender to rehire Vinny, it's quite obvious he's not going to file any complaint.
Corrected entry: When Vinny calls and questions George Wilbur (his second time on the stand) Vinny noticed Sheriff Farley as he came back into the court. The Sheriff nods at Vinny, and Vinny excuses George Wilbur. Jim Trotter III would have had a chance to ask Mr. Wilbur questions before he would have been dismissed.
Correction: Only if he asked for it. Seeing how his case has completely collapsed, he wouldn't even bother.
Corrected entry: Mona Lisa repeatedly swears while giving evidence, referring to the prosecutor's questions as 'bullshit', amongst other things. Regardless of how careless the judge is about running this case, that would get her a citation for contempt of course, if not worse.
Correction: A contempt citation is based entirely on the opinion of the judge. And this judge is smitten with Mona partly because she is hostile towards Vinny.
Corrected entry: Near the end of the trial, when Lisa meets Vinny in Dave's-BBQ, she says she just got her pictures back. These pictures are from the beginning of their trip, because Vinny says one of them is of their first hotel room. However, Vinny used her camera to take pictures of one of the witness's windows and had those developed already, so the pictures of the tire marks and hotel room would have already been developed, too.
Correction: Not if the film roll had been changed. She may have filled a roll and swapped it for a fresh one, which Vinny then used to take his pictures and had them developed before Lisa had hers done.
Corrected entry: Tire marks and a few eye witnesses alone are not enough evidence to take to trial; the prosecution would have needed fingerprints, recovered the money or a gun, gun shot residue, ballistics reports, etc. Lawyers never go to trial unless their case is air-tight, and Trotter's case was all based on circumstantial evidence.
Correction: That is the whole point. Those two didn't make the tread marks. But they had to prove that their car was incapable of making them because no one would believe them if they simply said they didn't.
shortdanzr ★