“The Accused” – Looking for justice, on the road less travelled by.

Introduction

The Accused (1988) is an acclaimed Hollywood legal drama film directed by Jonathan Kaplan and starring Jodie Foster in the lead role, and Kelly McGillis in the supporting role. The movie was a critical and commercial success, winner of an Academy Award (Jodie Foster for Best Actress) and was chosen by the National Board of Review as one of its top 10 films of the year in 1988.

The Plot

The movie is about Sarah Tobias, a young woman who is not deemed to be a “model citizen”. One night she has a fight with her live-in drug-dealing boyfriend, and goes off to a sleazy bar and has too much to drink. She starts dancing to the jukebox, and begins to flirt with a man in the bar’s back room. Reacting on this self-assessed “invitation”, three men take turns raping Sarah, while others look on. The movie details her quest to get justice in a societal structure that brands her an outcast.

The assistant district attorney, Kathryn Murphy is not impressed with the things she discovers digging into Tobias’s past such as her previous conviction on drug possession charges, or her drinking on the night of the crime, feeling that this will not sit well with the jury. In a meeting with the lawyers of the rapists, she agrees to reduce charges to “aggravated assault.” Tobias feels betrayed. She was raped, brutally, in front of many witnesses, which is certainly not the same as “aggravated assault.” The underlying message of the movie is simple; even if a young woman does “disapproving” things, she still should have the right to say “no” and be heard. The movie portrays the contrasting perspectives, the subdued expectation of the district attorney stemming from experience against the optimistic naivety of the victim; the district attorney knows how the judicial system works, and how the favourable outcome can be quite separated from justice. Not willing to go down without a fight, Sarah and Kathryn team up to prosecute the onlookers for solicitation of the crime.

Social issues raised

What really stands out in the movie is the realistic portrayal of a rape trial, as was then in 80’s America and sadly still is, in most parts of the world. The plea bargain was not resorted to, due to friction between the women, but out of pragmatism, believing that something is better than nothing. If they went to trial, the jury, consisting of people from the small town would almost certainly stop seeing her as a victim after knowing her past, and start seeing her as ‘reckless’, and the rapists would get off scot free.

The plot of the movie hinges on the fact that the rapists would not be convicted because the promiscuity of Sarah Tobias would convince the jury to let the rapists go off with a lenient sentencing. It is imperative for a victim to make a good impression on the jury, and Sarah was infamous for her past which casted aspersions on her character according to the assistant district attorney. Not only that, but Sarah had also been charged with possession of drugs with a friend earlier in her life, and the record of the rapists was clear.

The movie raises a very important point, about how society is very quick to judge the completely legal personal choices of a woman, and paint her as “reckless”, “easy-going” or “debauched”. This behaviour often supersedes inquiring the (im)morality of the wrong that has been done to the woman, and focuses on a superficial morality of the woman’s past actions that may provide a justification of the wrong that was perpetrated on her. A major turning point of this movie is how Sarah Tobias had to, without being asked her will, settle for a plea bargain on the rape charge for the simple reason that the general populace was disapproving of her behaviour and did not consider her to be worthy of the same justice that other people deserve. Even the assistant district attorney, Kathryn, who fights for the state, wants her to plea bargain, and ends up doing it anyway.

Analysis of the theme

The movie conveys how society can be unforgiving towards young independent women, judging them on a rigid moral standard that has no rational basis in reality. The personal life of the victim does not obviate the illegality of a crime. There is a mental pressure on the young woman to conform to certain superficial standards and ideals set by society to “deserve” justice. And Sarah Tobias did not fit the image. There is an implicit understanding that Sarah should not expect a positive outcome from the jury even without being called as a witness to narrate her story, because she simply is not society’s image of a victim. Anyone, but especially young women falling out of the confines of a role created by the social structures will not be treated on an equal footing, regardless of the merit of what is substantial.

The film also showcases the difficulty of fighting for your right. The framework is there, but the cogs of the wheel don’t work like they should. Only when a broken Sarah rebuilt herself with everything, and mentally prepared herself for any onslaught the lawyers across the aisle would perpetrate was she able to get somewhat of a consolation prize; the conviction of the accomplices. And the verdict is clear: you do not get what you deserve, but you take what you get, by fighting for it. Sarah Tobias’s rapists get off relatively unscathed, standing on the shoulders that promises justice but runs on comprises.

Screenwriter Tom Topor wrote the script taking inspiration from the trial of Cheryl Araujo, upon whom the film is loosely based, saying "There were almost no movies where the subject of the movie is rape. There are many movies that have a rape incident in them, but The Accused is about rape, there's no other subject. And it's about two women; there's no man who comes to rescue them. It's a very tough subject.”.

The film at the time was one of the first to highlight that regardless of a victim’s behaviour, a crime remains a crime. It is widely considered to be a trailblazer in showcasing with authenticity the themes of rape and victim blaming.

This movie review is authored by Shailendra Shukla, a student of Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar.