Surely he knew he may have had ulterior motives. He may have thought he was smarter than him, but why take the risk? Every criminal should know never to talk to the police. They could find a way to use anything you say against you. And what he said actually helped Hanna catch him. And I assume the conversation was recorded, so if McCauley survived the shooting, it could've been played in court.
shareNo! Hanna was pulled over in a traffic stop and complied with the police’s orders!
He never admitted to anything.
This happened in real life to the guy Mann used as research.
The sequence is legendary.
It wasn't an order, just a suggestion. And even if it was an order, he didn't have to say anything. He didn't admit to any specific crime, but like I said cops can find a way to use anything you say against you. I'll copy and paste from TV Tropes:
"Neil's downfall can be directly traced back to the moment he tells Hanna about Eady while having coffee with him. After Neil kills Waingro at the hotel, Hanna arrives and picks Eady out in the crowd, a woman who looks to be waiting anxiously for a loved one. Hanna is able to put two and two together and Neil is forced to flee, setting up their final, fatal confrontation."
And if he survived being shot, he could've made up the typical sob story, e.g. terrible childhood, mental illness, poverty, remorse, forced to be a criminal, tried to get out, only committed crimes out of fear, etc. But in that conversation, he admitted he's a criminal simply because he loves it, and feels no remorse.
both men are on a truce - like the ww1 football game on christmas day
all that legal shit doesent apply
They are two gladiators in the same game with a a begrudguing repect for each other who felt they needed a chat.
Its a world away from when a cop pulls someone over for speeding and informs him his next words will be read out in court.
I can understand them respecting each other, but going on a truce just because they felt they needed a chat would be extremely out of character for both men. Hanna is extremely dedicated to catching criminals, he puts it above everything. McCauley is very smart, he knows cops can manipulate, and he'd do anything to avoid prison.
shareEven recorded it can't be used in court as evidence. Because Hanna did not show his ID as police, he did not read Neil his rights, so it is just a conversion, Neil could say he was lying to play with Hanna.
And Neil was disciplined enough in what he was saying, he did not really give away anything, nothing really could be used as evidence even it were played in court.
But still never a good idea to talk to police, that scene showed Neil's ego and arrogance.
Hanna would only have to show his ID as police and read Neil his rights if he arrested him. Neil could say he was lying, but I don't think a judge would believe it. He didn't admit to any specific crime, but he admitted he's a criminal simply because he loves it, and feels no remorse. If he survived being shot, without that conversation, he could've made up the typical sob story, e.g. terrible childhood, mental illness, poverty, remorse, forced to be a criminal, tried to get out, only committed crimes out of fear, etc.
shareIt is not about what a judge believes, there needs to be evidence to send a person to prison, and there isn't.
If a person can be sent to prison simply because what a judge believes then we are in so much more trouble than just having crime around us.
Hanna would only have to show his ID as police and read Neil his rights if he arrested him
Hanna arrives and picks Eady out in the crowd, a woman who looks to be waiting anxiously for a loved one. Hanna is able to put two and two together
I want him to know that hes goign to feel better evebutally.
shareNeil hiring Waingro and them brushing off Waingro's escape from assassination was the real culprit in Neil's downfall.
When his mastermind/sensai Nate asks Neil "What happened out there?", Neil blew it off like it was spilt coffee. Huge mistake.
the way it happens in LA Takedown, Hannah arrives in the car park of a strip mall that he's been told Neil's in, to carry on surveilling him. Just has Hannah's getting out of his car, Neil walks out of the place and they're both kinda caught off-guard as they spot each other at the same time, only a few feet away from each other.
Both men know who the other one is. Both know that each one is on to the other one. They just kinda stare at each other awkwardly, and Hannah asks if he can buy him a coffee, almost to break the silence and uneasiness of the moment, and it seems like a completely spontaneous act. Neil could easily have told him no, was probably expected to, but maybe because he wanted to do the opposite of what "the enemy" expected, he agrees to it.
Due to the calibre of the acting, the 2 scenes are no contest when compared side by side, the one in Heat possibly the most iconic moment of the film.
But the way it happens in LA Takedown seems far more plausable, being a spontaneous offer that Neil would agree to it, rather than have Hannah fly all over LA and then chase Neil down the freeway and pull him over just to chat - as the OP says, Neil should have been wary.
oh, and I forgot to add....maybe someone with more knowledge of American law can advise on this, but unless McCauley has been told about and agrees to the conversation being recorded, I don't think Hannah can. Well, he could still record it on the sly but it wouldn't be admisable in court.
Actually, back in 1995, it's not just a question of recording it on your phone like it is now. Unless Hannah was wired at the time (and I don't mean on cocaine) he'd have to get a tape recorder out and put it on the table so I don't think he could have recorded it covertly anyway.
I just found out that these 2 characters and the sit-down was I spired by real events and people from the 60s. So stupid or not, it did happen.
share