Why is Kelsie reluctant and embarrassed to admit going to the canyon for drinking and partying in "Killers of the Flower Moon"?

Question

In Martin Scorsese's 2023 film Killers of the Flower Moon, there was a courtroom scene where a witness named Kelsie Morrison (played by Louis Cancelmi) is being questioned by the prosecutor (John Lithgow).

Now, Kelsie had already candidly described how he and Byron murdered Anna Brown in a secluded canyon. But when the prosecutor asked him why he later returned to that same location, Kelsie suddenly seemed reluctant and downright embarrassed to explain.

The exchange went like this:      

Prosecutor: You wanted to go back there and see where you killed Anna Brown?
Kelsie: No, sir.
Prosecutor: No?
Kelsie: No, sir.
Prosecutor: Well, what did you wanna go back there for?

At this point, Kelsie gets this sheepish smile on his face, like he's embarrassed about what he's about to reveal.

Prosecutor:  [seemingly amused] It's okay. You can tell the jury.
Kelsie: Well, it's a good... [sheepish laugh, like he's embarrassed] It's a good place to park and drink, put on parties. It can't be seen from the road, so...

Why was Kelsie so embarrassed to talk about using the canyon as a hangout spot for (the relatively innocuous purpose of) drinking and partying? I mean, he had just candidly confessed to murdering someone there—you'd think admitting to some drinking and partying would be the least of his worries at that point.

Was there something significant about the culture or time period that made him not want to be associated with drinking and partying? Or was there some narrative purpose or deeper meaning behind Kelsie's apparent unease about revealing this seemingly trivial detail to the jury, especially after he'd already candidly revealed the much more serious crime of murder?

Answer 1

I haven't watched it, but in combination perhaps with mild embarrassment about returning to the scene of a crime for something trivial, I believe the time period of the movie is during Prohibition and alcohol was illegal.

In addition the sale of alcohol to Native Americans was illegal since the early nineteenth century and was only repealed circa 1950. I mention this because I think the context of the movie involves the Osage Nation. This may not apply to the character however.

Obviously people ignored these laws regularly, but it is a courtroom and many people are loathe to confess illegal acts in such a setting as they can be prosecuted potentially.

Answer 2

Yorik's answer highlighted an important point: the Prohibition era setting, where alcohol was illegal. In that context, Kelsie's hesitation to admit to drinking and partying makes sense. However, there's a deeper layer of significance here that underscores the pervasive racism of that time period.

Earlier in the film, we witness a revealing exchange between Bureau of Investigation agents John Wren (the Native American agent) and Tom White, played by Jesse Plemons, who's leading the Osage murders investigation. Wren bluntly tells White, "Come on now, Tom. You got a better chance of convicting a guy for kicking a dog than killing an Indian."

This line drives home the disturbing reality that Kelsie would candidly admit to "killing an Indian" but feel embarrassed about breaking the Prohibition laws around alcohol. His unease reveals the moral compass of that era, where certain crimes were seen as far more egregious than the taking of Native American life. It's a commentary on the dehumanizing racism of the time.