MovieChat Forums > A Simple Plan (1999) Discussion > FBI would've nailed Hank regardless

FBI would've nailed Hank regardless

posted 10 years ago by StakkaDakka
10 replies | jump to latest

Think about it - they have the location of the plane, that they knew had 4.4 million in it, but the cash has mysteriously shrunk to $500,000. Where did the other 3.9 go? Then they realise the sheriff took this local guy out to the reserve because he was linked to the money because had reported hearing a plane, the guy ends up being the survivor of a shootout that left 3 dead. Then they realise that this same local guy just weeks earlier was a survivor of a double murder situation at one of his friend's houses. It is never discussed, but in both of those situations there would be a crime scene analysis in which there would be flaws in Hank's story - for eg. how exactly did Hank shoot the kidnapper in the face, how did he get so close if the man was armed, at Lou's house there would be shells and blood splatter in locations that don't match his version of events, which already had discrepancies with the other witness (Jacob) etc etc

I think they would very quickly put together that Hank is in it up to his ears and they would simply search his property where they would find a gym bag containing the missing 3.9 million. Then they would do him for 5 murders!

[–] pfgpowell-1 10 years ago

Or you could just stop analysing the film to destruction and simply enjoy it.

[–] JaySherman7 9 years ago

you are aware the whole point of imdb boards is to discuss the minutiae of films, right?

I've never understood the point of the whole "its just a movie" argument. what is the point of even replying? its a rather useless addition to the thread, wouldn't you agree?

No way Bells is bigger than Waimea, bro.

[–] GuyOnTheLeft 9 years ago

Yes, exactly! Why do these people even go on the IMDB boards? Do all their posts consist of policing others by reminding them "it's just a movie"? Sheesh.

--------
My top 250: http://www.flickchart.com/Charts.aspx?user=SlackerInc&perpage=250

[–] cartesianthought 9 years ago

What if he gets enjoyment out of analyzing films?

[–] pinkybanana2000 9 years ago

These discussions are good. They just show that the average Joe is not so average after all.

[–] mitsub001-1 10 years ago

^this

Please let me know if I spelled something wrong. I actually DO give a s**t.

[–] cartesianthought 9 years ago

I agree. Hank knew he was screwed either way and wasn't sure there was any resolution in sight. From the first murder on, everything was just about damage control and he had to just keep moving.

[–] 06986 9 years ago

That is why he burned the money, they can question Hank and he would have been very suspect but they had no proof, just suspicion. He did not spend any of the money and the other people had none of that money.

[–] wesperkins 8 years ago

Good call⬆️. I think the Feds had to have considered his story suspicious, but by burning the money it eliminated evidence. I still would have saved the money for later but he was super paranoid, and with reason. It sucked to go through all that and not get a dime, but he was protecting himself and his family.

[–] manram24 8 years ago

I think the FBI guys were trying to scare him and he overreacted making him burn the money.

Y'know, I could eat a peach for hours