Clear agenda to cast doubt.

catsgarden

Although it's very careful to appear 'fair', 'impartial' and just stating (so-called) facts, it is very clear after a couple of episodes that the agenda of this documentary is to cast doubt on Peterson's obvious (and proved) guilt. Some clear evidence that he was guilty is not included at least as of episode 4), and their (desperate) attempts to cast doubt include Peterson's sister's strong beliefs that he's innocent; one 'reporter' who claims a robbery (that was PROVED to have occurred AFTER she was reported missing) couldn't have occurred during the time police claim it had occurred; and two female "chat room commentators" who, in very dreamy demeanors while speaking of Peterson (you can almost see them swoon when they mention his name), BELIEVE that he is innocent. (Uh huh. And so do a few love interests of Charles Manson and Paul Bernardo.) My gut is that the agenda is to garner enough conspiracy theorists' support to stop Peterson's execution (at the least) and perhaps even order a new trial (at best). If his current (which I think is his last) appeal fails, he's finally going to face execution.

This 'documentary' is quite slick and unbiased-appearing at first glance, but as more and more 'evidence' is presented, for anyone who followed the case and remembers the facts, it is clear that the documentary is skewed and has been created to cast doubt on his innocence.

For anyone who has read ALL of the facts that were revealed at trial--not just the edited and skewed ones delivered in this television show--his continued ability to charm others into believing his lies is fifteen years too much. His wife and son haven't had the privilege to live these past fifteen years, let alone any more years, and neither should he.

score 3/10

catsgarden 14 September 2017

Reprint: https://www.imdb.com/review/rw3805678/