Coupable par amour

Good story. I feel for those families that lost their time with their parents.

This was a good movie, I agree with the last poster. However, that last poster was making a lot of sense until their last sentence where they criticized the star of the movie in not being very pretty and being pushy. Huh? What has that to do with anything? It totally turned that intelligent review of the movie into a base adolescent review. In real life, we are not all pretty, handsome or meek and mild. Movies don't always feature beautiful people. I find it shallow of one to remark on the looks of the star in this movie. She gave a great performance. To top it off, do you know what the "real" person in this story looks like? She could be even uglier than your perception of the lead character in this movie. I fail to see the relevance in the actress's looks. Besides, she is not ugly. Ugly is more related to character than physical appearance. I believe "ugly" people are people who are evil. This actress is not ugly.

This powerful and disturbing film portrays the horrifying unintended consequences of bad Congressional legislation in America, where lives are ruined by idiotic laws. The subject is 'mandatory minimum sentencing' under an Act of Congress dating from 1986. The fact that Congress could be so stupid as ever to pass this law will come as no surprise to the large majority of the American population who have said in repeated polls that they have less respect for members of Congress than they have for used car salesmen. After all, the notorious, and probably unconstitutional, Patriot Act, was originally passed by Congress without having been read by a single senator or congressman. The Patriot Act effectively abolishes a large part of the American Constitution, but few seem to be troubled by this fact. When it came up for renewal not long ago, only 23 senators voted against it, which means that the U. S. Senate at the present time consists of 23 sane people outvoted by 77 incompetent morons or dangerous psychopaths, whichever description may be considered the more charitable. But then, that too is no surprise to the public, I expect. When has respect for any branch of Government ever been lower in America? In this instance, the woman sent to prison for a mandatory minimum sentence of twenty years (yes, I did say twenty years) is named Susan Walker, and her story is a true story, although apparently a conflation of three separate cases with some identities fictionalised. Susan Walker got this heavy sentence despite the fact that she did nothing wrong! No, she did not kill anybody, rob anybody, or even insult the flag. She was entirely innocent, but she was caught in a legislative trap. Americans seem to love 'wars', and they fight wars against everything. They have a war on cancer, a war on drugs, a war on crime, a war on carbon, a war on 'terror', but strangely enough, no war on corrupt bankers, no war on illegal eavesdropping, no war on IRS persecution of political groups, no war on abuses of power, no war on government fraud and waste. In other words, the 'wars' which are actually waged are largely phoney. This film deals with the massively phoney 'war on drugs'. It has been well known for decades that the American Government itself, through its security agencies, deals in drugs constantly. Remember the Iran-Contra Scandal? Of course, nothing is done about that, but people who grow a few marijuana plants are treated as master criminals and sent to jail for interminable periods of time. And I do not criticize this because I like marijuana. I have never smoked any and hate the smell of that smoke so much I will cross the street to get away from it sticking to somebody's clothes who passes me. So I could be described as a truly extreme marijuana-hater. Nor have I taken any other non-medical drug. In fact, I hate drugs and even believe that major dealers should be executed. But having made my position on drugs clear, I believe that the 1986 drug legislation is one of the worst laws ever passed in the USA. This film shows why. Susan Walker, played in a bravura performance worthy of an Oscar by Mercedes Ruehl, is a widow with two children who has a boyfriend named Russell (shiftily played by Alex Carter). He smokes pot once in a while, which irritates Susan and she says she cannot have him doing that near her children. She even breaks with him over this and throws him out of the house. But before doing so, she answered a phone call from a friend of his and passed him the phone, not knowing what it was about. This was to turn out to be her 'crime'. After ridding herself of the boyfriend, Susan is asleep early one morning when armed policeman batter down her door and raid her house, tearing it apart looking for drugs. She is taken away in handcuffs. It turns out that her ex-boyfriend and some of his friends whom she barely knew had been secretly growing 2000 marijuana plants, smoking the result, and selling the remainder to friends. She knew nothing about any of this. Under the crazy legislation, anyone associated with a drugs offender who has even unwittingly passed on a message relating to drugs (as she did by answering her own phone and saying to him 'It's for you') must be given a mandatory minimum sentence not less than the offender himself. Under the equally sinister plea-bargaining system, the true offenders can then reduce their own sentences by 'giving information' about someone else. All the real offenders in this case 'give information' against Susan and get their sentences reduced. But she, the only one who is completely innocent, can give no information because she knows nothing, so she gets twenty years and some of them get only a few years. This travesty of justice has been repeated many times and is apparently still going on. In 2010, 39.4% of the prisoners in America were in prison on mandatory minimum sentences. Tens of thousands of wives, girl friends, sisters, neighbours, and other innocents have flooded the women's prisons in America despite the fact that they themselves did little or nothing, and their sentences are generally greater than those of the criminals who really did do something. This is a 'message picture', but what a horrifying and important message! Mercedes Ruehl is overwhelmingly convincing throughout in her harrowing role. I cannot reveal the end, but few of these wrongly imprisoned people ever got out without serving their full sentences. A tiny handful were pardoned by Clinton, after intense pressure, but not exonerated. So many lives have been ruined by this idiotic legislation, and the courageous people who made this film to expose this miscarriage of justice all deserve medals, as well as the campaigners on this tragic issue.

Court cases are always interesting when human stories are involved and this is a human story-not something to do with organised crime or fraud. It highlights an injustice for a start and its a reminder that the worse the crime is the less time you serve if the continuing release of rapists who go on to reoffend is anything to go by.

Though this is not 100% about a real person its many who found themselves serving a sentence for what is actually NOTHING. At the beginning you see the woman Susan trying to find a solicitor who was supposed to be better than the ones the courts appoint but her fees were too high so she declined because she can't find the money without remortgaging her house she learns she can't as its been seized-supposedly paid for by her partner's drug business which she had nothing to do with. You see her pleading with him and finally ordering him out because of the drugs business.After which she is suddenly arrested and learns the partner has been as well but as he plea bargains for a lesser sentence she can't do that -she knows nothing. These mandatory sentences are unsafe convictions. The main of the film is to show how she coped inside-which is admirably. This conspiratory law is likely to be repealed but at the moment its as crazy as the Human Rights Act

This is an issue that still gets little attention from the media. Kudos to the writer and director for addressing one of the several crises (including health care and prison reform) that are still in shambles today.

Mercedes Ruehl is excellent as a woman who merely dated someone (who happened to be a drug dealer.) She was a nurse and had young children in the house, and once she realized what was going on she kicked the boyfriend (Russell) out.

At any rate she was arrested for associating with a drug ring. She had answered the phone a few times and merely taken a message, like anyone would in a busy house with children, friends, etc. Apparently the burden of proof for the prosecution in this criminal case was accepted as hearsay. People are guilty until proved innocent once they are "in the system". And if you cannot afford an excellent criminal attorney to defend you, the system is unjust.

We see many of the women in similar situations who were imprisoned with ridiculous sentences, some for 100 years. This is a disgrace that this can occur here in the U.S. If you like this film you may also enjoy "Against Their Will: Women in Prison", starring Judith Light as a woman who was unjustly imprisoned. 10/10 Very highly recommended.