They really put in too many side stories that are boring. The case is so interesting, but all the side stories, unimportant information, made it boring sometimes.
45 Reviews
I wish It was shorter
TARSL19 November 2020
A true life depiction of abuse of power
pie-7835113 November 2020
I am astonished at the criticism in some reviews. This is a true life, mega serious event which took away the life of a 19 year old black male. Is there anything worse than being stitched up by corrupt police as you head off to a very lengthy prison sentence? Being killed is probably the only worse occurrence.
Sean Ellis clearly has not one tiny bit of malice or badness in his body. The accepted conspiring of power by Police Associations as power leverage is of itself an abuse of the rule of law.
You cant go wrong with real life reports.
This is a brilliant series. If it is aimed by Netflix to enlarge upon the political scene in USA today in a somewhat subtle manner then this I do not like.
The "victims" (not the police) all speak from a natural attitude without animus. The police seem arrogant and sorry they were caught out.
Dirty cops, Dirty DA, Dirty Prosecutor, Dirty system.
zack_gideon13 November 2020
Another story of a young black man getting screwed to close a big case. The boston DA, prosecutor and the cops who gathered "evidence" should be the ones in jail. This happens EVERY DAY. A complete perversion of the justice system in every way.
A bit long, but very important
AdamDroge12 November 2020
I will admit that I'm a sucker for these types of documentaries. And there's a lot of them. In general, I love crime shows, fictional or real. But you give me a documentary or a docuseries about a person wrongfully convicted of a crime and I'll be glued to the screen. These are stories that are very important to tell. For every person like Sean Ellis who was fortunate enough to eventually go free, there's still plenty more locked behind bars. And most of them aren't lucky enough to have a Netflix documentary telling their story. It's a cold, dark, sad life for them, which is a depressing thought.
The thing that I liked about the structure of this docuseries is that they don't play this "did he or didn't he go free" game that some of them do. We don't know the very end of story right away, but we start with him getting released after being granted a new trial in 2015, then we go back to the beginning to tell what happened. The fact that he's being interviewed along the way clues us in that this probably ended well. Thus the purpose is to tell his story instead of stringing us along.
I think my biggest complaint is that I don't know if this really needed eight episodes. Granted, I know a lot of work got put into this and the filmmakers wanted to give it the time they deemed necessary. But I look at fellow shows like "The Innocence Files" from earlier this year, also on Netflix, and they only needed an episode or two for each story. They could've edited this a bit more because it does drag at times, like when they decide to spend a full episode on the District Attorney race. I think they were trying to be the next "Making a Murderer," but I don't know if they needed to.
That said, this story does have some bizarre twists and turns to it. The level of corruption that's uncovered is shocking and the justification from some of the Boston police officers that agreed to be interviewed was disturbing. That's why I say that this is important. To the reviewer who gave this one star and complained about when are they going to stop making these... the answer is when it stops becoming an issue. Which unfortunately is probably never. As long as there's still problems with the system, these stories deserve to continue to be told.
If you like this type of docuseries, you probably don't need the approval from a random internet person like myself before deciding to give it a chance, but you have it anyways, so check it out!
The thing that I liked about the structure of this docuseries is that they don't play this "did he or didn't he go free" game that some of them do. We don't know the very end of story right away, but we start with him getting released after being granted a new trial in 2015, then we go back to the beginning to tell what happened. The fact that he's being interviewed along the way clues us in that this probably ended well. Thus the purpose is to tell his story instead of stringing us along.
I think my biggest complaint is that I don't know if this really needed eight episodes. Granted, I know a lot of work got put into this and the filmmakers wanted to give it the time they deemed necessary. But I look at fellow shows like "The Innocence Files" from earlier this year, also on Netflix, and they only needed an episode or two for each story. They could've edited this a bit more because it does drag at times, like when they decide to spend a full episode on the District Attorney race. I think they were trying to be the next "Making a Murderer," but I don't know if they needed to.
That said, this story does have some bizarre twists and turns to it. The level of corruption that's uncovered is shocking and the justification from some of the Boston police officers that agreed to be interviewed was disturbing. That's why I say that this is important. To the reviewer who gave this one star and complained about when are they going to stop making these... the answer is when it stops becoming an issue. Which unfortunately is probably never. As long as there's still problems with the system, these stories deserve to continue to be told.
If you like this type of docuseries, you probably don't need the approval from a random internet person like myself before deciding to give it a chance, but you have it anyways, so check it out!
A very fine documentary.
gspritha26 December 2020
I am surprised that some negative reviews mention that the series was 'too long".
But if all the facts in this matter are to be presented in this explosive case how is it possible to pare it down to a couple of episodes? I binged on it and finished it in a couple of days.And enjoyed every minute of it.
And it really does open up a can of worms where the police force is concerned. Corrupt police personnel can make life a living hell for the vulnerable anywhere in the world- that's the message I took away from this series.I am thankful to lawyers like Rosemary Schapiro who rooted for Sean Ellis and fought his battle for him.
A Sloooooooow Burn
My-Two-Cent13 November 2020
Two and a quarter episodes in and I'm not sure if their proving his guilt all while proving that the Boston PD was super crooked and racially motivated to convict a black man for the crime.. The makers of the doc haven't provided any info on how they came to find where the weapons were located and have done a poor job providing a timeline of the suspect's arrival at the crime scene and at what time the crime was committed which I was able to figure out by the receipts that were shown.. I'll ultimately finish watching it but so far it's not a very well directed piece..
This was great but I don't think it is mainly about corruption
trudjoh11 November 2020
Warning: Spoilers
It is easy to think that this show is about corruption etc but I totally disagree. Watching Rosemary and Sean work together, watching how patient Rosemary was with Sean and how much he matured was wonderful. The Ellis family was heartfelt. It was good to see something besides anger at the misses of the cops and legal system.
Would Have Been 10* If They Cut The Crap
dgjones-622588 April 2021
My advice - watch the first 30 minutes of the first episode then jump to episode four because there is so much filler it spoilt the show.
You can also miss episode seven about the DA election.
This case brought me to tears and makes me not just fear the police even more, but to realize that the US legal system is truly terrifying.
You can also miss episode seven about the DA election.
This case brought me to tears and makes me not just fear the police even more, but to realize that the US legal system is truly terrifying.
Must see for those in the minority or exploitable groups subject to this treatment
leonmccottry15 November 2020
This is a great example of how in the US justice system, any person can be a statistic or an example before they are a human. It does this by humanizing the protagonist. his attorney, his family and his supporters, while at the same time, giving in-depth examination the system which they are fighting against.
In reaction to those who are rating this documentary based on how much it entertained them, it illustrates that the big picture is still being missed in our society: and that is that these are no actors performing for our Netflix entertainment -- these are real human lives that were and still are being seriously effected in ways that most of us could not bear by a deeply flawed system.
In reaction to those who are rating this documentary based on how much it entertained them, it illustrates that the big picture is still being missed in our society: and that is that these are no actors performing for our Netflix entertainment -- these are real human lives that were and still are being seriously effected in ways that most of us could not bear by a deeply flawed system.
Long
robertalevesque30 December 2020
I agree with the other reviews. This was long and could have been cut back. I found that there was no excitement because you knew he was going to be free from the first episode. I think the message is good. The cartoons were a little more graphic than I expected. You were left with a lot of questions though.
Worth watching
lchrisjohn16 November 2020
As a Boston Ian, I remember this case. The corruption was/is real. Just glad that Sean was able to get a fair shot at freedom. I ready many reviews thst the series was long. That it is, however it pulled me in. I watched it in its entirety and was glad I did. Bravo Netflix.
The documentary should have been 3 or 4 episodes
garnet-suss1 January 2021
The amount of useless filler and repetition is off the charts, but the story is interesting enough to sit through it. It's a bit confusing at times as the timeline is pretty scattered, which seems totally unecessary, but it's worth watching
Overly long, yet painfully fails to answer many key questions. FFW button is needed
Xavier_Stone16 November 2020
First of all with 8 episodes it looks like it's going to be another detailed and well thought out documentary with lots of amazing facts discovered. But it's not. From the first episode we can guess the outcome so it's not all that engaging.
There are plenty of shady details with the Boston Police and the corruption but it seems as though there is quite a bit of needless information. Having his mother in interviews over and over serves no purpose at all as she was a self admitted crack head at the time and had zero input. Episode 7 deals with a District Attorney race that again serves no purpose to the story as the winner will not be involved with the case.
This should have been 3 episodes. Too much filler and regurgitating details over and over. Plenty of questions that were strangely overlooked. A witness who is related to the detective is buying stuff at 3am? Sean Ellis is buying diapers with 2 of his friends at 3am? The details of the guns being found, but lets not ask those questions and instead focus on Sean meeting long lost friends and having BBQ's.
There are plenty of shady details with the Boston Police and the corruption but it seems as though there is quite a bit of needless information. Having his mother in interviews over and over serves no purpose at all as she was a self admitted crack head at the time and had zero input. Episode 7 deals with a District Attorney race that again serves no purpose to the story as the winner will not be involved with the case.
This should have been 3 episodes. Too much filler and regurgitating details over and over. Plenty of questions that were strangely overlooked. A witness who is related to the detective is buying stuff at 3am? Sean Ellis is buying diapers with 2 of his friends at 3am? The details of the guns being found, but lets not ask those questions and instead focus on Sean meeting long lost friends and having BBQ's.
A real story reminiscent from a 3rd world country
anca-apostoaei18 November 2020
Warning: Spoilers
People who still have questions should watch it again, because they explain everything, the gun, the fingerprints. How anyone can still believe the cops weren't corrupted I don't know, I guess sleeping with underaged girls doesn't matter as long as you're a decorated police officer. It really shows the mentality of how the police works and guilty or not it doesn't matter to them as long as they can use you to cover their shady stuff. I think if they would've made it shorter and the facts a bit clearer it would've been more straight forward; in the last 2-3 episodes they say about the gun, fingerprints and how the actual investigation of the murdered cop was done. It seems more cops were implicated than it seems, but I guess finding one of their own dead with their pants down doesn't make a pretty picture does it?
Only in America
Whoopz29 January 2021
My grandfather was a police officer. Stabbed and killed in 1975.
I often found myself asking whether or not they caught the right guy - sometimes I still do, but then I realised I live in the least corrupt nation in the world.
This is only something that happens in America.
The outcome of the series was a little bit too predictable. The fact that it took 3 trials in order to convict Sean to begin with is a travesty. Once you fail to convince a jury twice - a third time shouldn't be possible. Maybe he did do it, but clearly there wasn't enough evidence to convince a jury to begin with. It's a rushed case. It's literally everyones worst fear.
I thought the series was enjoyable to watch, and it's a story that needs to told.
The outcome of the series was a little bit too predictable. The fact that it took 3 trials in order to convict Sean to begin with is a travesty. Once you fail to convince a jury twice - a third time shouldn't be possible. Maybe he did do it, but clearly there wasn't enough evidence to convince a jury to begin with. It's a rushed case. It's literally everyones worst fear.
I thought the series was enjoyable to watch, and it's a story that needs to told.
Brilliant
littlestewart-0671620 November 2020
Boston Cell-Tricks
Lejink29 December 2020
It gets harder every time to watch another seeming miscarriage of justice in America where the victim is young and black. Indeed as a sort-of prologue the story is told here of another case which occurred in Boston a couple of years before this one, where a prominent white man murdered his wife, faked an injury to cover his guilt and almost got away with blaming her death on an anonymous black teenager. The murder victim in the case featured in this eight-part series was a Detective Mulligan, a career police officer, who in 1993 was fatally shot five times in the face while sleeping in his unmarked patrol car outside an early morning supermarket in Boston. When a young black man, Sean Ellis, voluntarily tells the police he was in the shop at around the time of the slaying, he little realises that he is unwittingly putting his head in a noose prepared for him by Boston police's finest, determined to charge and convict a cop-killer in double-quick time.
While the programme attempts to put the counter-argument that Ellis was indeed culpable, the prosecution case isn't helped by the lack of participation of many of the parties involved in building the case against Ellis. It takes three trials of the apparently ever more determined and single-minded police authorities from the District Attorney on down to finally convict Ellis and have him put away for life. Thankfully for him, a doggedly determined defence counsel, Rosemary Scappichio, took on his case and with her team of assistants proceed to methodically build up a legal argument that Ellis was indeed wrongfully convicted.
Defending the police action down the years was a retired senior officer who remains convinced that Ellis and his cousin did the deed. There is also no representation made by any of the deceased's own family for their reaction to developments although there is archive footage of the victim's brother reaffirming the same stance as the police. Of course, if Ellis was innocent, then it means that Mulligan's killer got away with murder and for me it's one of the weaknesses in the programme that no credible alternative suspects were seriously brought forward, although that probably wasn't helped by the police's strong belief that they had an open and shut case anyway.
Personally, I was certainly swayed in Ellis's favour by the evidence presented in the programme. Not only did Mulligan seem to be an above-the-law "dirty" cop in cahoots with three other senior detectives on the force and therefore not likely to be short of enemies in the criminal fraternity, but more convincingly, a detailed examination of the crime and the police conduct throughout seemed to strongly indicate that Ellis wasn't guilty of the shooting. Forensically it seemed impossible for the detective to be killed the way the prosecution said he was and there were also two very flimsy eye-witnesses putting Ellis in the frame, both of whom claimed police rewards and the main one of them proven to have strong personal connections to one of the lead detectives.
Although Ellis in the end wasn't acquitted but only reluctantly released (after 21 years imprisonment) by the city's stand-in D.A before the instalment of a newly-elected, more crusading D.A. who had promised to review the case, the man himself, with his personal comportment, dignity and unstinting determination to prove his innocence seemed to only bolster his argument. The wider issue of widespread systemic prejudice and wrongful arrest-procedure throughout the Boston police force is hard to ignore with no real evidence presented to show that much had changed in the succeeding near-thirty years.
The programme itself made use of that new device I've seen in similar documentaries, the back-and-forward floating timeline of which I'm not a fan and probably was about two episodes too long as some of the leads presented seemed inconsequential and inconsistent. The two most compelling individuals in the show, besides Ellis himself, were his indefatigable defence attorney and a retired female investigative reporter who early-on presented credible background to the events of the case but who we didn't see in later episodes.
Although a sometimes gruelling watch, in more ways than one, rather like the slow justice that Sean Ellis seemed to receive, this docu-series is worth persevering with, if only in the the end to see one more wrong righted in the chequered recent history of the American judicial system.
While the programme attempts to put the counter-argument that Ellis was indeed culpable, the prosecution case isn't helped by the lack of participation of many of the parties involved in building the case against Ellis. It takes three trials of the apparently ever more determined and single-minded police authorities from the District Attorney on down to finally convict Ellis and have him put away for life. Thankfully for him, a doggedly determined defence counsel, Rosemary Scappichio, took on his case and with her team of assistants proceed to methodically build up a legal argument that Ellis was indeed wrongfully convicted.
Defending the police action down the years was a retired senior officer who remains convinced that Ellis and his cousin did the deed. There is also no representation made by any of the deceased's own family for their reaction to developments although there is archive footage of the victim's brother reaffirming the same stance as the police. Of course, if Ellis was innocent, then it means that Mulligan's killer got away with murder and for me it's one of the weaknesses in the programme that no credible alternative suspects were seriously brought forward, although that probably wasn't helped by the police's strong belief that they had an open and shut case anyway.
Personally, I was certainly swayed in Ellis's favour by the evidence presented in the programme. Not only did Mulligan seem to be an above-the-law "dirty" cop in cahoots with three other senior detectives on the force and therefore not likely to be short of enemies in the criminal fraternity, but more convincingly, a detailed examination of the crime and the police conduct throughout seemed to strongly indicate that Ellis wasn't guilty of the shooting. Forensically it seemed impossible for the detective to be killed the way the prosecution said he was and there were also two very flimsy eye-witnesses putting Ellis in the frame, both of whom claimed police rewards and the main one of them proven to have strong personal connections to one of the lead detectives.
Although Ellis in the end wasn't acquitted but only reluctantly released (after 21 years imprisonment) by the city's stand-in D.A before the instalment of a newly-elected, more crusading D.A. who had promised to review the case, the man himself, with his personal comportment, dignity and unstinting determination to prove his innocence seemed to only bolster his argument. The wider issue of widespread systemic prejudice and wrongful arrest-procedure throughout the Boston police force is hard to ignore with no real evidence presented to show that much had changed in the succeeding near-thirty years.
The programme itself made use of that new device I've seen in similar documentaries, the back-and-forward floating timeline of which I'm not a fan and probably was about two episodes too long as some of the leads presented seemed inconsequential and inconsistent. The two most compelling individuals in the show, besides Ellis himself, were his indefatigable defence attorney and a retired female investigative reporter who early-on presented credible background to the events of the case but who we didn't see in later episodes.
Although a sometimes gruelling watch, in more ways than one, rather like the slow justice that Sean Ellis seemed to receive, this docu-series is worth persevering with, if only in the the end to see one more wrong righted in the chequered recent history of the American judicial system.
Crime documentary
riccardomantio28 November 2020
Very interesting case, could skip some episodes
vikiatanasova14 November 2020
The case itself is very interesting and definitely worth watching. However when I get to episode 4 I thought it is the last one and the story is coming to the end but then there were another 4 episodes so 8 in total. I have skipped some of them or just watched briefly. It is complicated case with a lot of stories and a lot to explain behind but it could have been better if the whole story was explained within 4-5 episodes so you do not lose interest and time to watch some unnecessary scenes.
Very Good
duku6517 February 2021
I thought this was really well done. I see other reviews that it was too long and I can see where they could have made it shorter but I was never bored with this story.
Listening to Edward McNelley.. What would it take for that man to even consider that the man might be innocent? I guess nothing. That can be the problem with those DA & police that instead of seeking justice they just want one in the win column. Why did they withhold information if they were so sure of their case?
I am not anti-police by any means but when the blue line is so strong that none of them want to step up and do the right thing by telling the truth. Something is amiss. I am sorry for the death of anyone but the Boston PD showed all this loyalty to a corrupt cop. It seems to me if you are a good cop and I know many who are, you would want the corrupt ones, the racist ones... gone.
Maybe a few people could watch this and still think that he might have done it but I don't see how anyone could not find reasonable doubt in this case.
I was looking for the he sued the Boston PD part and I guess that is still something that may occur. I hope so.
Listening to Edward McNelley.. What would it take for that man to even consider that the man might be innocent? I guess nothing. That can be the problem with those DA & police that instead of seeking justice they just want one in the win column. Why did they withhold information if they were so sure of their case?
I am not anti-police by any means but when the blue line is so strong that none of them want to step up and do the right thing by telling the truth. Something is amiss. I am sorry for the death of anyone but the Boston PD showed all this loyalty to a corrupt cop. It seems to me if you are a good cop and I know many who are, you would want the corrupt ones, the racist ones... gone.
Maybe a few people could watch this and still think that he might have done it but I don't see how anyone could not find reasonable doubt in this case.
I was looking for the he sued the Boston PD part and I guess that is still something that may occur. I hope so.
The cops in the documentary are too set in their ways.
xaaf_de_raaf14 April 2024
Warning: Spoilers
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.
Very long and drawn out
math-robs13 November 2020
Wrongfully accused by a corrupt police force or was it something different?
johnramsbottom-7957815 November 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Interesting documentary set around the trials and prison time Sean Ellis faced after admitting he was in the same area the night a Boston Police Officer was shot. Sean does not in any way look like someone capable of killing and does appear to be wrongfully convicted.
Very well done in the first few episodes uncovering the both sides of the story and the darker sides of the Boston Police Force in the 90s but I did get the feeling at times the documentary was always swaying towards the accused and his defence. It did leave as others have said a few questions unanswered about the gun, his friend and uncle.
Overall a very good watch and gripped by the first 6 episodes. Maybe could have been shortened but would recommend
Very well done in the first few episodes uncovering the both sides of the story and the darker sides of the Boston Police Force in the 90s but I did get the feeling at times the documentary was always swaying towards the accused and his defence. It did leave as others have said a few questions unanswered about the gun, his friend and uncle.
Overall a very good watch and gripped by the first 6 episodes. Maybe could have been shortened but would recommend
Great documentary
youngspud8520 November 2020
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
