MovieChat Forums > The Departed (2006) Discussion > Why didn't Delahunt stop Quinan from bei...

Why didn't Delahunt stop Quinan from being...? SPOILER

posted 9 years ago by RynoII
16 replies | jump to latest

If Delahunt was an undercover cop, why didn't he stop Quinan from being murdered? Delahunt was the only man with a shotgun so he could have stopped the others from killing Quinan, but not only did Delahunt not stop them, but he also removed Quinan's pistol.

There are possibilities I see with this. Delahunt having spent so much time with the gang, has developed some kind of attachment to them and has converted to their side, and is not a cop anymore in spirit.

Or, he never was an undercover cop, and the police lied about it to the press, in order to protect Costigan, so Costello wouldn't look for a rat anymore.

Could that be it?

[–] hero-de-celluloid 9 years ago

First - many feel he wasn't a cop so that would explain that.

Second - if he was an undercover, he might have thought that they weren't going to kill Quinan - Fitzy even says they went too far - so the plan might not have been murder but just went too far. He could have taken his gun because he wanted to defuse the situation. If he takes his gun - his gang won't get itchy trigger fingers. He also could have thought if he blows his cover - they are both dead - even though Delahunt was armed - they were still out gunned and blowing his cover wouldn't have saved Quinan. We don't see Delahunt actually killing Quinan - he could have immediately started looking for the informant - which was their main mission - then the crew threw him off.

I would not go with the attachment theory, just doesn't seem to fit the script - but there is no definitive answer.

I would tend to go with not a cop - the only thing that is wrong with that is I have never - ever - heard of a police department - purposefully declaring a known gangster who they would suspect killed a police captain - was a police officer when they knew he wasn't. The liability alone would prevent that - but it is a movie.

User Error Please Try Again

[–] RynoII 9 years ago

Would the police department take the flak, if it meant protecting Costigan from being sought out as the mole? In real life could the police department later on, say that they lied to the media about it, as part of a sting operation?

[–] hero-de-celluloid 9 years ago

The police would never say that a gangster was a cop when they knew he wasn't, so it would never get to the point of later on telling the media. I know the police do lie - they lie to suspects, they lie to defendants, etc - but I never heard of lying to the media by stating a criminal in a gang was a cop - add to the this that he was suspected of murdering a captain. The liability would be too much - it wouldn't happen - but this is a movie.

User Error Please Try Again

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] RynoII 9 years ago

Well in the movie, the police have already lied to the court. They had Costigan plead guilty to assault, as part of his cover, and they never told the court, that it was part of an undercover operation.

So if the police are willing to lie to the court, as part of an undercover operation, then what is to stop them from lying to the media?

Plus I don't think the police would really have a lot of liability to worry about. No one is going to sue them for lying to the media to protect an undercover officer. They tell the court, they did it to protect a cop, and right there, the law would be likely on their side.

[–] hero-de-celluloid 9 years ago

Well in the movie, the police have already lied to the court.

They didn't lie to the court - they had their undercover go to jail on a fictitious assault. Do you actually think the police would have him assault someone to go to jail? How it works is the courts (at least a judge) do know about the undercover going through the system. It's a set up.

They tell the court, they did it to protect a cop, and right there, the law would be likely on their side.

That's not how it works. They just don't get a free pass because it was for a cop. the law doesn't change just because a police department wants to break it for their benefit.

As far as the liability - if Delahunt had family/friends and people find out he was a rat cop - they could be assaulted and/or killed. Look at the liability of someone getting killed because the police lied about someone being a cop. The courts wouldn't say - oh - it's for a cop so we'll let them pass this time. Either way - it just would be unheard of - it doesn't happen. Like I wrote prior - they do lie in many cases - but I have never heard of them proclaiming a gangster was a cop when they knew he wasn't. Now it is a movie - so they do get some creative license and it worked for me.

User Error Please Try Again

[–] RynoII 9 years ago

Oh okay, I didn't know they would go after Delahunt's family or friends, after finding out.

[–] taran-rod 9 years ago

Okay if Delahunt was a cop, I undersrood the whole thing wrong. I always thought that said it to protect Billy because well... how will he be able to say otherwise...

[–] hero-de-celluloid 9 years ago

I'm not saying he was or wasn't -just that there is an arguement either way. I think it is left to be ambiguous. If they were doing to protect Billy - they would have said that if Delahunt was or wasn't a cop. But Costello had more than one person in the police - so he would or should assume that there could be more than one cop in his gang - so stating that he was a cop when he wasn't wouldn't do too much. There are many reasons on why he would not be a cop - but I have never heard of a police department declaring publically that a known gangster was a cop when they knew he wasn't. But it is a movie and they do get to push the envelope as far as reality.

User Error Please Try Again

[–] taran-rod 9 years ago

Exactly, and this movie is a fiction adaption of Whitey Bulger's life so... of course some things will be far from the reality. But it is clearly said that Costello was a FBI informant, so he was undercover all way long. So, I kinda wonder if the police would have risked two staties to infiltrate Constello's gang just to go on an operation that was certain failure, and certain death...

[–] taran-rod 9 years ago

And yes I know that Quinan "didn't know" that Costello was protected by the FBI. And I say it that way because even there, some details in the movie made me speculate that Quinan was more than aware of that fact WAY before Billy came to his house to tell him.

[–] hero-de-celluloid 9 years ago

What details would make you feel that way? Just like the state police said they keep info from the FBI - the FBI will keep info from them. The way Dignam and Queenan were hell bent on getting Costello - I didn't appear that they knew it was a lost cause.

User Error Please Try Again

[–] taran-rod 9 years ago

Do you the story of Whitey Bulger? Even if you are protected by the FBI, it's not a total failure. Just the scene when they are in the car with Dignam and Billy asks why don't they arrest him. Honestly, they had more than enough proofs to arrest him. Quinan all the way seemed to know that they have to build a solid case against him. Dignam was just his student, he followed what Quinan was saying, I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't know a single thing. Quinan and Costello have clearly been close, you see it in that scene when Dignam and Quinan intercept Costello by surprise. The way they both were speaking to each others really sounded like they knew each others very well. In another hand, this is just my personal theory, and I don't have any problem to say that I might be completely wrong. These are speculations.

[–] hero-de-celluloid 9 years ago

Good points either way.

User Error Please Try Again

[–] MrJJay 8 years ago

Watch this and answer for yourself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7ivCtiKWfw