If I killed her why would I come back

[EngLearner]

Source: "A Trace Of Danger", a movie (timestamp: 17m58s).

David came home, found his dead wife there and then called the police. The police now suspect that he did it. David calls his lawyer, and they both go to the place where the crime was committed. David is trying to convince his lawyer that he didn't do it. The following conversation takes place between them:

David: "I came home and I just found her lying there. I tried to help her, but it was too late, and I called 911."

David's lawyer: "And they found you with the body?"

David: "I had her blood on me. I was checking her pulse. If I killed her, why would I come back, why would I call the police?"

I'm wondering about the underlined conditional sentence. Does he mean this: "If I had killed her, I wouldn't have come back, and I wouldn't have called the police."?

 

[jutfrank]

Well, yes, that's the implication of what he's saying.

He's effectively saying 'If it is true that I killed her, how can my coming back and calling the police be explained?' Pragmatically, he's making an argument of defence—by saying that it can't be explained, so therefore he can't have killed her.

 

[emsr2d2]

Slightly off-topic: I don't know when the movie was made but it strikes me they made a procedural error. If the man had already called the police and is a suspect, neither he nor his lawyer would be allowed back to the crime scene. The only people who would be there would be the police, crime scene investigators and the coroner.

 

[SoothingDave]

He found his wife dead.

 

[emsr2d2]

He found his wife dead.

We know that. It's in post #1. What difference does that make to any of our responses?

 

[EngLearner]

Slightly off-topic: I don't know when the movie was made but it strikes me they made a procedural error. If the man had already called the police and is a suspect, neither he nor his lawyer would be allowed back to the crime scene. The only people who would be there would be the police, crime scene investigators and the coroner.

I think that at that moment in the movie the police have already been there and carried out all the necessary procedures. David pled not guilty at the first court hearing and has been released on bail pending a further court hearing. He's with his lawyer in his own house, and he's wearing an ankle bracelet that allows officials to monitor if he violates house arrest.

 

[emsr2d2]

I think that at that moment in the movie the police have already been there and carried out all the necessary procedures. David pled not guilty at the first court hearing and has been released on bail pending a further court hearing. He's with his lawyer in his own house, and he's wearing an ankle bracelet that allows officials to monitor if he violates house arrest.

So this part from post #1 isn't what happened? ...

"David calls his lawyer, and they both go to the place where the crime was committed."

 

[EngLearner]

So this part from post #1 isn't what happened? ...

"David calls his lawyer, and they both go to the place where the crime was committed."

Yes, that's what happened, but it did after the police was there first.

 

[EngLearner]

found his dead wife

He found his wife dead.

Do you mean that the word order in what I wrote is incorrect?

 

[SoothingDave]

Yes, I mean the word order is better the way I put it.

 

[SoothingDave]

We know that. It's in post #1. What difference does that make to any of our responses?

"He found his wife dead" emphasizes the fact of the discovery.

Do you not find the wording "he found his dead wife" odd?

 

[Bambook]

"He found his wife dead" emphasizes the fact of the discovery.

Not a teacher (added by moderator)

May be it emphasizes the change? She was alive and now dead.

 

[emsr2d2]

Not a teacher (added by moderator)

Maybe it emphasizes the change. She was alive and now she is dead.

@Bambook You're welcome to try to answer other learners' questions but please note that you must make it clear that you're not a teacher. I've added the relevant information to post #12 for you. You can add a signature line to your profile instead.

Note my changes above. Your opening sentence was not a question so a question mark was not appropriate. Note the correct spelling, in this context, of "maybe", meaning "perhaps".
The word order itself doesn't emphasise a change. Anyone who's dead must, by definition, have previously been alive.

 

[Bambook]

The word order itself doesn't emphasise a change. Anyone who's dead must, by definition, have previously been alive.

-Thank you for always correcting my grammar. I really try to make best use of all your comments.
-As to the meaning of these two sentences I still stay with my opinion. That is my opinion only but strong one. If you, Englishmen, do not agree with that completely than I am fully mistaken and must examine my English thoroughly.
- "He found his dead wife" in that context sounds not only "Odd" but comical. "Dead" is adjective in here. So it is her feature. So it may mean she has always been dead.
- "He found his wife dead" puts things in place. This can be understood as he expected to find her alive but found her dead. So I called this "change".

 

[BobK]

...

David: "I had her blood on me. I was checking her pulse. If I killed her, why would I come back, why would I call the police?"

I'm wondering about the underlined conditional sentence. Does he mean this: "If I had killed her, I wouldn't have come back, and I wouldn't have called the police."?

Just a note about the colloquial 'if I killed her'. As @jutfrank said, your 'if I had killed her' is right'. The use of the indicative ('I killed her') is a way of making the argument more persuasive, by temporarily assuming a suspicious viewpoint. It makes the implication 'If (as you and/or the police think) I killed her...'.

 

[5jj]

. If you, Englishmen

English people. Many of our members are female (or something else, but let's not get sidetracked).