| Director | André Cayatte |
|---|---|
| Genre | drama film |
| Runtime | 105 min |
| Country | France |
The film opens with a voice-over narration explaining the French judicial system, particularly the role of citizen jurors in assize courts. It then shows the process of selecting seven jurors for a murder trial at the Versailles Court of Assizes. The jurors are ordinary people from diverse backgrounds: Gilbert de Montesson (Jacques Castelot), a successful businessman dealing with marital infidelity; Théodore Andrieux (Noël Roquevert), a conservative farmer and war veteran with strong Christian and patriotic views; Marceline Micoulin (Valentine Tessier), a middle-class housewife struggling with family obligations; Jean-Luc Flavier (Jean-Pierre Grenier), a young intellectual and teacher facing financial difficulties; Félix Noblet (Raymond Bussières), a working-class waiter with a history of personal losses; Eguermont, a retired pharmacist haunted by his wife's prolonged illness; and Michel Beaumont, a reserved engineer with recent experiences of betrayal. Each juror's summons interrupt their daily lives, revealed through brief flashbacks.
The trial begins under President of the Court, played by Antoine Balpêtré, who oversees the proceedings with stern impartiality. The accused, Elsa Lundenstein (Claude Nollier), a pharmacist of foreign origin, stands trial for the premeditated murder of her husband, Roland Lundenstein, a prominent pharmaceutical laboratory director suffering from advanced cancer. Elsa admits to injecting him with a fatal dose of morphine but insists it was at his repeated pleas to end his unbearable pain, as he had begged her during his final days in agony.
The prosecution, led by the advocate general, presents evidence suggesting ulterior motives. Roland's sister, Élisabeth de Sutter, testifies that Elsa was having an affair with Dr. Jean-Pierre Grenier, a colleague, and stood to inherit a significant fortune from Roland's estate. Witnesses include the family maid, Agnès Deluca, who overheard arguments about money; the social worker Mlle Point, who describes Elsa's composed demeanor after the death; and the pharmacist M. Point, who confirms the morphine was obtained legally but in excess. Medical experts debate the ethics of euthanasia, with one doctor affirming Roland's terminal state and another questioning if the dose was truly merciful or calculated.
The defense attorney counters by emphasizing Elsa's devotion, calling witnesses like the priest who counseled the couple and a nurse colleague who saw Roland's suffering. Elsa takes the stand, tearfully recounting Roland's deterioration—his coughing fits, weight loss, and pleas for release—and her internal conflict before fulfilling his wish one night in their home.
As the trial unfolds over several days, the jurors observe from the box, their reactions shaped by personal parallels. During recesses, they discuss informally: Théodore condemns euthanasia as against God's will, drawing from his religious upbringing; Eguermont sympathizes, recalling his wife's similar pleas; Gilbert suspects infidelity as the real motive, mirroring his own marital issues; Marceline wavers, thinking of maternal compassion.
After closing arguments, the jury retires to deliberate in a tense room. Initial votes are split: four for guilty, three for not guilty. Heated debates ensue. Théodore argues for conviction, citing moral law and Elsa's foreign background as suspicious. Félix shares a story of his brother's painful death, swaying toward acquittal. Jean-Luc analyzes the evidence logically, pointing out ambiguities in motives. Michel reveals his ex-wife's affair, initially biasing him against Elsa but leading to empathy. Eguermont's emotional recount of his wife's end tips the balance. After multiple rounds, they reach a majority verdict of not guilty, acquitting Elsa on grounds of compassionate intent rather than malice.
Elsa is released, embracing her lawyer amid courtroom murmurs. As the jurors disperse—Gilbert returns to his strained marriage, Théodore to his farm, and others to their routines—a final voice-over by the narrator reflects on the subjectivity of justice, noting how different circumstances might have altered the outcome, leaving the true nature of Elsa's act ambiguous in the eyes of the law.