Fundamental flaws reveiled
Watching this series, and similar Netflix-series like Making a Murderer and The Confession Tapes fulfill me with sadness, as it reveals a broken justice system. My diagnosis based on these documentaries. 2 fundamental flaws:1. The Distric Attorney and the Judge are elected officials and therefore find it hard to make unpopular decisions. You see it in this documentary where the DA after a new trial is granted to Michael Peterson, is first inclined to accept a deal, and then backs down from it after talking to the sisters of the victim. The same in Making a Murderer: the reaction of the victim's family dictates what the DA does. This does not help finding the truth, as you have to be able to look to the facts objectively in order to find the truth.
2. The adversarial nature of the proceedings: all series mentioned before are a testament to the fact that putting two parties opposite each other and let them fight with all legal available means does not further the truth. It only leads to a competetion of who is going to win and who is going to lose. All parties involved are forced to choose sides: am I for the DA or for the defendant? As is evident from the Staircase Series this applies to law enforcement officials too. The CSI-techs were more interested in proving their theory, than following the evidence, wherever it may lead.
Solutions?
I hope this series will lead to a debate about improving the system. My thoughts? Start with depoliticizing the justice system by appointing judges and DA's not through elections, but independently by the Supreme Court or any other judicial body.
Watching the series is very instrumental in understanding the US justice system. And in seeing the consequences it has for anyone being accused of a crime and their loved ones. I can very much recommend it. The documentary maker has had unprecedented access to the defendant, his lawyer, to the lawyer-client discussions and to the jail where Michael was held. This makes it unique. As making a documentary of only 11 hours involves making choices what footage to use and to disregard, and is in that sense subjective, there is a lot of court room material in the series to allow you to get a good picture of what the case was about.
Disclaimer: as you might have guessed I am a European lawyer and this is just my personal opinion.
score 10/10
willemavisser 20 November 2018
Reprint: https://www.imdb.com/review/rw4469785/15057
Pages:
[1]