"If you don't kill me, the precogs were wrong and Precrime is over" -- How?

In Minority Report (2002), at around 2:13:45, Burgess approaches Anderton and Anderton says:

No doubt the Precogs have already seen this. You see the dilemma, don't you? If you don't kill me, Precogs were wrong and Precrime is over. If you do kill me, you go away. But it proves the system works. The Precogs were right.

My question is about the bold-faced statement. Isn't the exact point of Precrime is so that the murder doesn't happen? And how would the Precogs be wrong if Burgess does kill him? The Precogs predict that a murder on Anderton will occur, perpetrated by Burgess, and so if it does happen, then the Precogs are correct (not wrong, according to the statement).



Best Answer

Isn't the exact point of Precrime so that the murder doesn't happen?

Precrime assumes that people will do what the Precogs see, unless someone else intervenes. So the Precogs see a future murder, and Precrime sends officers to stop the murderer from killing the victim. So the exact point of Precrime is to stop murder, as you said, but it assumes that murderers won't / can't stop themselves. Law enforcement has to stop them.

And how would the Precogs be wrong if Burgess does kill him?

The Precogs would not be wrong. They would be right. That's what the quote says: "If you do kill me, you go away. But it proves the system works. The Precogs were right." The phrase "you go away" is a slang term referring to Burgess being imprisoned (via one of those headbands they put on criminals to control / stop their minds).




Pictures about ""If you don't kill me, the precogs were wrong and Precrime is over" -- How?"

"If you don't kill me, the precogs were wrong and Precrime is over" -- How? -
"If you don't kill me, the precogs were wrong and Precrime is over" -- How? -
"If you don't kill me, the precogs were wrong and Precrime is over" -- How? -



Who is the person the precogs predicted Anderton will kill?

While United States Department of Justice agent Danny Witwer audits the Precrime operation, the Precogs predict that in 36 hours, the program's commanding officer, John Anderton, will kill Leo Crow, a man whom Anderton has never met.

How does the precogs work?

Three mutants, known as precogs, have precognitive abilities they can use to see up to two weeks into the future. The precogs are strapped into machines, nonsensically babbling as a computer listens and converts this gibberish into predictions of the future.

Why do Andertons precog visions disagree?

The next thing that Anderton learns is that the three Precog's visions don't always match, creating a discrepancy in the validity of their visions. Whenever there is a dissent, it is always Agatha who disagrees with the twins because she is the stronger of the three.

Why did Lamar set up John?

Lamar (played by Max von Sydow) sets up a situation for John (Tom Cruise) to find with the idea that when John enters into this situation (where he's confronted with evidence of his son's death), he'll commit murder. The precogs predict the murder and John sees himself kill an unknown man on the Pre-Crime viewscreens.



Simply Red - If You Don't Know Me By Now (Official Video)




More answers regarding "If you don't kill me, the precogs were wrong and Precrime is over" -- How?

Answer 2

I think it refers to the intention of killing him. If Burgess does not have any intention of really killing him that means that the crime would never occur and the Precrime should never have seen it, but instead the Precogs see that the crime is going to happen so that Burgess must have a real intention of killing him. Of course, Precogs should act before the crime is committed.

In short I think that Burgess is really going to kill him but as he says (from wiki):

Once people are aware of their future, they are able to change it.

so after seeing the future his intention to kill Anderton disappears.

Burgess had the intention of killing Anderton so the crime was going to happen until he saw his own future.

Sources: Stack Exchange - This article follows the attribution requirements of Stack Exchange and is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.

Images: