剧情介绍
身为新闻记者的主人公，为了揭露一个检察官的腐败丑闻，故意制造假象使自己成为一桩谋杀案的嫌疑人，希望能借此诱敌上钩。没想到检察官后来察觉了他的计划，随即唯一能证明他清白的朋友突然被杀，面对种种不利于自己的证据，主人公一筹莫展……
Investigative reporter Tom Garrett is on leave from his newspaper job to work on his second novel. As Tom is having problems writing that second book, his boss and future father-in-law, newspaper publisher Austin Spencer, suggests he write a non-fiction book on capital punishment in their state instead. Both Austin and Tom have long believed that the state district attorney, Roy Thompson, has been able to manipulate juries into rendering wrongful guilty verdicts leading to the deaths of innocent people on death row. The plan would be to plant evidence leading to a guilty verdict of an innocent person in a murder case, Tom to be that innocent person. Austin and Tom would document all that planted evidence, and make it public after the rendering of the guilty verdict to reverse that wrongful verdict and hopefully lead to discussion of the merits of abolishing capital punishment. They decide that the fewer people that know about the plan, the better, which means not telling Tom's fiancée/Austin's daughter, Susan Spencer, about the plan. They are certain that the plan will not jeopardize Susan and Tom's ultimate marriage. They decide that the unsolved murder of burlesque dancer Patty Gray will be the case they use. As Tom and Austin go about implementing their plan, they don't account for two items which ultimately do place Tom's life in jeopardy. Saving Tom's life may in part may depend on the support of Susan, which may not be as easy to obtain as expected.
哈哈哈，这个反转比较无厘头。怎么说呢，对于影片娱乐性来说是很精彩的，但确实违背了导演想要探讨的废除死刑或者说死刑不合法的立场。算是比较喜欢的一部Lang了（据说他自己很不喜欢）。
在最后几分钟内峰回路转了两次。
3.5星。小问号你是否有很多朋友！！！感觉像是朗以个人法制观为题编的一个小情景故事-_-||好处是它很短——80分钟能说峰回路转，120分钟就是又臭又长的狗血剧了
容我用一个很直男的说辞：客观上挺牛b的故事。但属于看完就看完了也不会再看第二遍的片子。
细节经不起推敲，但也足以反映出法律体系的缺陷
作家和准岳父做局，将作家伪造成犯罪嫌疑人，作家受到审判，作家是不是凶手？反转。未婚妻大义灭亲自曝光相机。
这并非在演示以致揭露司法的不公，而是在嘲弄它。因此相比起司法批判，更像是传播批判。
男主语气死气沉沉
反转本身很不错 但是托出真相的方式也太扯了 幸亏你是80分钟的故事 可惜也是只有八十分钟
用现在眼光看，这个关于死刑是否该被废除而延伸出的故事，最后的反转略显多余了，但当时应该惊到了不少人。Joan Fontaine还是用熟悉的表演模板去套多疑的女人，但这里看着太别扭了。65
太扯了 不论是动机还是留证还是定罪还是无罪还是最后的反转全都儿戏一般 当法律是什么啊？
一波三折，峰回路转，不可思议，出人意料，最终的真相犹如《控方证人》的结尾，其情节虽有硬伤之嫌，但这毕竟是电影，也不能作为废除死刑的有力依据。总体而言可以一看，尤其琼.芳登为本片增光添彩，片中吞云吐雾的样子尤有腔调，优雅的女烟民当如是，哈哈哈，开个玩笑。
勉强3星，Dana Andrews又演了一部类似《作法自毙》的司法电影，同样都是想表达真正的司法公正，当然这一部的出发点更是在反对死刑上，所以构思了一个“闹剧”，报业大亨刻意设计多个证据，让原本无辜的男主被检察官盯上并送进监狱，最后由报业大亨来出面解释一切，以此反对死刑和检察官的失职，这个设计是多么荒唐且冒险，果然报业大亨出车祸死亡，男主险些被送上电椅，而后由遗嘱执行人找到一封信解释了一切，当我以为这部电影就要结束时，最后的反转真把我雷到了，男主真是凶手，这结局够黑啊，黑得我一口老血都要吐出来了，这样来看这部电影到底想说明啥？本就是要批判检察官没有掌握足够证据就定人死罪，这下好了，歪打正着？剧本本身存在很大问题。
强扭的瓜不甜。
像极了我写本科论文时先预设立场再找论证。