I’m going to attempt a mostly spoiler free review with a few minor plot points sprinkled in to make it cleared. From an author’s perspective, the 10 ep documentary offers insight into the behind the scenes workings of court reporters, lawyers, and law enforcement. In particular, it demonstrates interrogation/police procedures techniques, the good and the ugly. The interrogation of a sixteen year old boy with a 70 IQ who doesn’t know the meaning of the word “inconsistent” is especially disturbing. His mother didn’t know the meaning of the word either. I felt so sorry for the poor kid. From a writer’s perspective, I’d recommend watching it if you have an interest in writing crime fiction. I learned a lot. However, I’m going to issue a ‘possible trigger warning’ because it deals with two disturbing cases of violence against women.
Netflix Description: Filmed over 10 years, this real-life thrilled follows a DNA exoneree [Steven Avery] who, while exposing police corruption, becomes a suspect in a grisly new crime.
I found myself going through a lot of emotions as I watched the series, because I didn’t like the central focus of the doc, Steven Avery. He is a shitty human being. I was proud that the film makers didn’t shy away from that fact. I felt really sorry for his parents, who seemed like good people. But even though Steven is an asshole that doesn’t mean he doesn’t have rights. Innocent until proven guilty. Period.
I’ve seen a lot of justifiable anger posts online about the cases. I’m more upset about his nephew, but I can understand the ire. Overall, I like the style and format of the documentary. It was gripping to watch. I felt like the victim’s family got a little shafted, because we only had press conferences from the brother. They were stiff and formal, which can never properly demonstrate their grief. I can't imagine how they were feeling.
Has anyone seen the series? Do you think the jury made the right decision?