The documentary was generally engaging, though some parts dragged on and seemed less relevant to the case. Nonetheless, it was better than most Netflix documentaries.
A significant issue highlighted was the apparent stubbornness of the police department, the District Attorney's office, and particularly the old detectives interviewed. Their adamant stance that Mr. Ellis was guilty despite glaring issues in the case-speaks volumes about their competence, or ESPECIALLY the lack thereof. This stubbornness, coupled with a problematic press conference by the DA's office, painted a troubling picture of justice being mishandled.
The two former detectives stood out for their unwavering belief in a "clean" case, which to me, indicates a disturbing level of incompetence that likely contributed to the wrongful conviction of an innocent man for years. It's often the case that those who so pursue convictions against all evidence might be projecting deeper personal issues onto their professional responsibilities. (Probably bullied in school)
While everyone is entitled to their opinions, the facts, as presented by the evidence, tell a different story:
A significant issue highlighted was the apparent stubbornness of the police department, the District Attorney's office, and particularly the old detectives interviewed. Their adamant stance that Mr. Ellis was guilty despite glaring issues in the case-speaks volumes about their competence, or ESPECIALLY the lack thereof. This stubbornness, coupled with a problematic press conference by the DA's office, painted a troubling picture of justice being mishandled.
The two former detectives stood out for their unwavering belief in a "clean" case, which to me, indicates a disturbing level of incompetence that likely contributed to the wrongful conviction of an innocent man for years. It's often the case that those who so pursue convictions against all evidence might be projecting deeper personal issues onto their professional responsibilities. (Probably bullied in school)
While everyone is entitled to their opinions, the facts, as presented by the evidence, tell a different story:
- Involved police officers had corrupt practices.
- Mulligan, the central figure, was compromised.
- Crucial evidence was overlooked and not reconsidered.
- Evidence was withheld and tampered with.
- Numerous questions remain unanswered.