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?
