Law & Order1990

Jack McCoy:
[his closing argument] Jake Kearsey and Latiff Miller didn't go out on the morning in question to have a gun battle. One thing we'll never know for sure is what set off the explosion that left Detective Kearsey dead. The defendant has plausible explanations for everything that happened, but you also have the luxury of placing those explanations in context. Latiff Miller promoted cop killing thirty years ago. He admitted dishonesty in his job, and his claim of self defense is belied by his own actions. He ran from the crime scene, hid from the police; when he was captured, he proclaimed his innocence, and now that he's facing the death penalty, it's not "I didn't kill him", it's "I had to kill him". So... ask yourselves, if Detective Kearsey were here to give his side of the story, would it look anything like Latiff Miller's? The defense urges you to see the world through Latiff Miller's eyes. Do that, ladies and gentlemen, if you want to contaminate the truth with Mr. Miller's anger and racial mistrust. Acquit Mr. Miller if you think it's fit to allow him to avoid the moral consequences of his actions by portraying himself as the victim. The victim here is Detective Kearsey, who innocently went to the wrong apartment looking for a witness and wound up dead. I don't doubt that Mr. Miller has encountered racism in his life. But it's not a free pass to commit murder.