True Crime Thread

Yeah, I have that in the Netflix que so I will move it on up. Just let me know when you're ready. Looking forward to it.

__________________
Letterboxd

Tomorrow or Saturday?

You meant it, you're ready to roll. Let me see if I can get it another way besides waiting for Netflix. I will let you know. Was that HBO?

Okay, I can get a week.of Doc Club free. I will watch it there. If I get hooked on another streaming service. Ugh

I'll see if I can dredge up some memories about The Staircase when you guys get into it (prod me somehow if I forget to check back in in time!). Suffice to say, I would've recommended watching that first and then The Jinx, because The Staircase is a more traditional documentary. It's dryer, and slower, and more serious. The Jinx is much more dramatic and heavily produced, and I love it, but there's a chance something like this will feel a little boring in comparison. That said, if you mostly just want to scratch that true crime itch, it'll more than do the trick.

I was going to start talking about the case, but I suppose that has to wait.

I haven't watched The Jinx yet so I will watch them in that order. I'm not spoiler adverse so if you guys want to start talking it won't bother me.

I watched the first two parts of The Staircase. You start yet Camo?

No mate, will do tomorrow sorry. I just noticed Yoda's post as well probably because he promised me a phantom +rep .

Please post what you think so far though mate. I've already seen it, so hopefully i'll be able to keep up. Will watch the first two and make a post tommorrow.

I was thinking about this and i don't know if Yoda agrees but i think both of us will have unfair reactions to certain episodes simply because we know more than you, this is our second run at it.

Until you start developing your own feelings on this (which won't be long would be surprised if it took more than three or four episodes) i think me and Yoda should just discuss the facts with you. Obviously that is always the goal but there is a lot of things to speculate about in this case that would make our discussions more interesting IMO.

Well Camo I was hoping you would go first this time but I will lead off. The good is that I think The Staircase is going to be really addicting. I pretty much had to stop myself from watching because I didn't want to get too far ahead of you. Anything all access like this it is hard not to be impressed by it. We are getting loads of information. Things you would never see in other crime docs, like the witness coach, are so intriguing to watch for me. The access really makes this doc something very special.

The bad is that I don't know I am going to have a lot to say from episode to episode. I am hoping some of your guys thoughts may change that. That is because they are basically rolling everything out as a reveal, so I want to hear everything before I come down on one side or the other. I will say I disagree with the defense's contention that the affairs and lying about his war injuries don't matter doesn't fly with me. I think the more it comes to light how dishonest he is, the harder it is to trust anything he says. Of course, that doesn't mean he is guilty, but it makes it hard for me to trust anything he says. The way his friend in Germany died is really troubling to me, but we will see if that bears any fruit.

Can't wait to hear what you guys have to say.

Good stuff Sean. I'll definitely watch and post about the first two eps tomorrow night. I'm going to watch some of I Claudius first before voting in the TV Tournament.

I saw this years ago so I have no idea what's in any particular episode, so I'm kind of worried about saying anything until sean is done.

Just about to watch episode 1, i'll post about it after i'm done. Will need to leave episode two till later as i'm watching my niece in a few hours.

Absolutely. I'm rewatching it and it is going to be really tough coming up with things to talk about. Since its not as if i can speculate or anything

OK, this is going to be difficult. I'm going to try my utmost to just look and post about this as if it is my first time watching it. To do this i'll need to post certain things that i now know or at least think are wrong because those were the first impressions i had. So don't take anything i'm saying as ruining anything Sean because i may be mentioning things that i know are reasonably explained later or whatever.

So.. episode 1. The very first time i heard the 911 call and this time too it just didn't sound right. It sounds like he is trying to force an authentic sounding panicked and confused state. "How many stair sir?" "Uh.. ah.. 15 or 20 i don't know" His paranoia and hyper awareness of a policeman being in his presence doesn't sound right either. I've never been in a similar situation so what i think i would be like obviously doesn't hold that much weight but it is the only thing i could go by. And if this just happened and i had nothing to do with it i don't think i'd take notice of that in my distraught state. His lawyer and his little speeches are ridiculous. I understand what he is doing and why he needs to but it is still laughable. In the death of a family member the first thing officers will do is rule out foul play, if they can't then they'll rule out family members starting with the spouse if the victim has one, and if there is reason to believe said spouse was involved then they will charge. Him trying to make out that it was a witch hunt for Michael is ridiculous, when every case with a dead wife they have to rule out the husband and other family members first.

One of the most interesting things about this show is the immense access to things like the Defense and Prosecution Teams discussing strategies. Just wanted to note that because it is pretty incredible and unprecedented in an ongoing case i imagine.

Anyway i have some other thoughts that i'll leave to later episodes. I'll watch episode two later on as i'm watching my niece soon.

Absolutely. I'm still surprised that something this extensive was allowed to be made on an ongoing trial.

I'm through episode 4, so basically through opening statements at the trial. I definitely agree with you about the 911 call. His grand standing for the camera does become tiresome. However, there are things I agree with. Like when they exhumed the body of the other women and wrote on the autopsy that she died by homicidal means. That is a crazy thing to allow a jury who is supposed to be impartial hear. I continue to love the behind the scenes stuff that we would just normally never get to see. The whole thing with the main defense lawyer practicing his opening the night before the trial starts. He keeps getting interrupted and the pics aren't being shown properly. Then a cell keeps vibrating. I think in a narrative film it all might seem a little much, but it's real and it's great to watch.

My gut tells me we are headed toward him being guilty but I go back and forth depending on what I heard last, which I guess is the point. For instance in opening the prosecution shows the photo of her skull and points out how many lacerations there are. That couldn't possibly happen from a fall, reasonable. Then the defense gets up and points out how there is no skull fracture or brain hemorrhage, couldn't possibly happen from that many blows to the head, also reasonable.

Really can't wait to see where this goes.

Yeah, that "witch hunt" thing is tough for the defense. It doesn't ring true, and I think they know it. And that's a big part of their problem: what did happen? I know you're supposed to merely prove reasonable doubt, but a lot of these documentaries (and other things like them that touch on murder cases) suggest that, fair or not, your best bet is to give the jury and alternative theory. It's much tougher to get people to agree with "well, he very well maybe have, but I'm not positive enough" than it is "are you really sure it wasn't this instead?" So I think this is one of those instances where the need to have an alternative theory is forcing them into some tough decisions, and some rhetoric that's a pretty hard sell.

Finished The Staircase. I really am just at a loss as to how I feel. I don't trust Michael Peterson but I don't think I would have been able to convict him. I am dying to know how you guys feel, so please fill me in. I immediately started watching Staircase 2. Ten minutes in and already not as compelling but it is only two episodes.

Starting OJ: Made In America tonight, in case anyone is interested in watching along with that one.

I think I would've voted Guilty (at least, based on my memory of watching it, which is admittedly fuzzy). But what you just described is how I feel with almost all of these true crime stories: I think the person is usually guilty, but that there usually is a reasonable doubt.

Frankly, I think there's a pretty compelling argument that lots of cases fall well short of the "reasonable doubt" standard, and that it's possible applying it for real would lead to tons of guilty people going free. It's also possible it's important to maintain that standard as a goal even if it works better in the long run to not take it literally. I'm not sure. But one thing I'm becoming more sure of is that it's incredibly hard to really prove something like this, and that as a society I'm not sure we really apply the "reasonable doubt" standard, and I think some people would have genuine questions about the viability of the standard if they saw how many acquittals it would lead to if we did.

I did read a crazy-at-first-but-less-crazy-as-you-consider-it theory, which I'll lead behind that link for spoiler purposes, that does seem to explain a few things, even if it sounds absurd at first. I think, if Peterson didn't do it, then something really weird and improbable happened, and it's really hard to know how strongly to consider a thing that is perfectly plausible but still very unlikely. That theory, however unlikely, though, might at least get around the "alternate theory" problem I mentioned earlier, given that the idea that she just fell didn't really seem supported by the evidence.

Geeze, I think if I had read that article without knowing I would have thought it was from The Onion. I completely get what you are saying about the reasonable doubt. Things would be much different on a jury than watching a doc obviously. So I am sure I would have said guilty. The wounds seem unreasonable for a fall, but I think the defense wins just about every other argument. Like I have said about ten times already, I just found it so compelling to get such an inside look. Man, my heart goes out to the kids. I can't imagine that situation and how they deal with that mentally.

Do you remember them finding the blow poke late? That was so bizarre at the eleventh hour. I don't know if it was a conspiracy, but my BS radar was certainly going off.