Justice aveugle

This harrowing but well-done film, purportedly based upon actual incidents, relates in nicely detailed fashion how the criminal justice system can fail in its avowed purpose of bringing only the guilty to heel. Jim Anderson (Tim Matheson), a happily married free-lance photographer preparing for his first gallery showing, relieves himself behind a park building in the course of taking his morning run, is spotted and arrested by a policeman for indecent exposure and, during the booking procedure for his malfeasance, is seated directly beneath a composite drawing of a felony suspect with his general appearance, a coincidence not long unnoticed by the police, who then rearrest him for robbery, and his good life ends. He is "identified" by the several victims of the actual criminal's spree, is charged within several jurisdictions for numerous counts of robbery, kidnapping and rape, and his convoluted struggle against the zealousness of law enforcement seemingly places the innocent man upon a hopeless one-way street. The film is strongest in its depiction of Anderson's strained relationships with his wife (Mimi Kuzyk), parents, friends and employer, some of whom begin to consider his guilt a possibility, as does he when incriminating evidence from the victims mounts. The work is nicely directed by Rod Holcomb from a script by Josephine Cummings and Richard Yalem, and the acting is good throughout, particularly that of Matheson, Kuzyk, Linda Thorson, and Lisa Eichhorn as his defense attorney who tries her best to free her client from the nightmare road upon which he travels.

... DNA became part of the arsenal of crime fighting and also proving innocence and overturning convictions. As of November 2019, 367 people previously convicted of serious crimes in the United States had been exonerated by DNA testing since 1989, 21 of whom had been sentenced to death. It makes you wonder, did we actually execute any innocent people? The answer is probably yes.

So Tim Matheson plays a photographer who badly needs to go the bathroom one morning when there is none around. He does his business as discreetly as he can, but an overzealous cop spots him and hauls him in for public indecency. So now he has a mug shot. And that mug shot is ID'd by victims and witnesses as that of a man who is responsible for a streak of rapes and robberies.

So now his mug shot starts making the rounds of other police departments and other accusations come in. The man's life is being destroyed because of the suspicion he is a Jekyll and Hyde character. Able to put on a civilized charade but internally a savage. Nobody feels safe around him.

I saw this film back when it originally ran and a couple of times in repeats, so I have a foggy memory of all details, but I do remember one particularly chilling scene. There is one of those old instant photo development booths - these were common when people shot pictures with film instead of phones - out in the middle of a parking lot at night, long after the businesses around it have closed. There is a young woman working there alone. Someone walks up and obviously has criminal intentions toward her. And then you hear the blare of police sirens everywhere and see headlights surround the guy. You finallly see the perpetrator's face. It is Matheson. And then you see a startled Matheson sit up in bed. It has been a nightmare. However, the criminal accusations against him are still very real. Matheson is beginning to wonder if he does have a split personality. How could all of these people be wrong?

This was a very creepy film showing how innocent people can get caught up in the criminal justice system. Even with the changes in technology and forensics over the past 35 years I think it is still probably worth a look today if you can find it. I don't know why this film currently has such a low rating.

I remember seeing this movie back in 1986 and thinking how horrible a scenario like this would be. Now in 2014 when you look into all the cases that the innocence project looks into and how many people they have freed by DNA testing it becomes eye opening to think how many innocent people are locked up wrongfully. In certain cases prosecutors would fight against the DNA testing and keep innocent people in prison prolonging their incarceration. Texas versus Michael Morton case proves this happens. Over the years we see more prosecutor misconduct and cases tried and won when the prosecutor uses theories without any evidence that shows our system is not working.

A flawed system and prisons now overflowing because some prosecutors are not looking for the truth but wanting to show how many they can put behind bars. We need to change the laws and hold prosecutors to a strict code of conduct of innocent until proved guilty and not just base cases on theories. If prosecutors decide to break the law they should be sent to prison.

They should consider doing a remake of this movie and keep it updated to show people how our justice system is slowly becoming more flawed and the truth isn't being put first and formost.