Lawyer’s Hilarious Analysis Of 'Home Alone 2' Goes Viral
Published
| Last updated
Featured Image Credit: 20th Century Fox
A lawyer's detailed analysis of Home Alone 2: Lost In New York which points out all of the legal implications of the film has gathered a lot of attention on social media.
Loading…
Twitter account The Secret Barrister has based their argument according to English and Welsh law, assuming that Kevin is old enough to take criminal responsibility.
The thread specifically focuses on the 1992 sequel where Kevin McAllister (Macaulay Culkin) boards the wrong plane in the airport, leaving him alone in New York City, where he is once again forced to protect himself from the 'Sticky Bandits', Marv (Daniel Stern) and Harry (Joe Pesci).
While watching the film, the anonymous barrister live tweeted and revealed that if he was in the UK, Kevin would have been looking at four years in prison.
*** HOME ALONE 2 LIVE-TWEET: THE RULES***
This lecture explores the Christmas classic 'Home Alone 2' through the lens of English and Welsh law.
Contributions and observations are welcome, but I'm perfectly prepared to tweet the entire film to a wall of embarrassed silence.
- The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) December 22, 2018
If you haven't already guessed, they also argued that Marv and Harry could be jailed for life, which will come as no surprise.
Kevin's parents would also have found themselves in trouble with the law, and ended up being charged with neglect.
Before starting their argument, The Secret Barrister pointed out that their findings were based on English and Welsh law (even though the film takes place in New York).
During the montage, some shopkeeer sold Kevin some fireworks. Kevin is under 18.
Someone is unfamiliar with the Pyrotechnic Articles (Safety) Regulations 2015 and the Explosives Act 1875. And that unfamiliarity could cost them 6 months of their life.
- The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) December 22, 2018
The first offence that they point out takes place within minutes of the film starting - Kevin records Uncle Frank in the shower, which is described as being an act of voyeurism.
It then just spirals from there with treason, sexual assault, fraud and corruption taking place.
During one argument, the barrister wrote: "The Sticky Bandits are conspiring to commit a commercial burglary. Max sentence 10 years.
THE BANDITS ARE CHASING KEVIN!
This is an attempt to abduct a child, contrary to s1 Criminal Attempts Act 1981.
In this light, I'd say that his actions in spilling beads over the pavement to cause them to slip amount to reasonable, if unorthodox, self defence.
- The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) December 22, 2018
"That's right. Even £millions from a children's toy store on Christmas Eve. If you're going to commit an acquisitive offence, this is the one. On an early guilty plea, that's 6.66 yrs.
"'Let me be clear, for any children watching: I am *not* suggesting you should actually go and commit a commercial burglary.
"Just that it's better, for you, than a domestic burglary (14 years) or robbery (life). Glad that's clear."
Negligent Mom and Skinflint Dad are both getting 8 months' immediate custody for child neglect. Given that their child could have been brutally killed, this is not a bad result for their barrister.
- The Secret Barrister (@BarristerSecret) December 22, 2018
Even the beloved pigeon lady didn't escape the barristers argument as they revealed she could have been charged under the Vagrancy Act 1824, which makes it an offence to sleep rough or beg.
Well, that's Christmas ruined!
Topics: TV News, TV Entertainment