The first episode starts off well enough, giving out details, backgrounds, the story as it happens, etc. But where everything falls apart is in the early part of the 2nd episode, where they attempt to re-enact the drive from Gordon Road to the pub in Raleigh. The animation shows the car taking a left onto Broadmayne (ostensibly to the A175 and up to the A127) when a more direct route is to the right (up E Mayne to the A127). A left makes the trip at least 11 miles, a right makes it less than 8. At least half that trip is on an expressway, so an average of 30mph is reasonable. One way gets them to the pub in appr. 15 minutes (even in winter), the other way, not more than 25 minutes later, but their estimate is 35 minutes, which is convenient if you want your story to show that the rest of the trip (to the murder scene) can't be done in the time frame allowed, which it very clearly could have done if a direct route is taken. Even if the animation is a mistake in film making, their estimate is contrived.
It's a crock of clickbait designed to make you think the witness's story is implausible. Everything that follows is nothing but hearsay and "re-taped audio" and obscured witnesses. The whole thing smacks of whiny pleas to feel sorry for the convicted perpetrators using the very techniques of which they accuse the police of doing. And showing alternative theories which they discard is not proof that their theory is any more credible. It's just distraction from their own failings. Even the cell tower expert states that one version is unlikely (but not impossible), while the other is more likely. Of course, this can neither be proven or disproved and he's only there to feed the narrative.
And what about the guy who says another guy says he was "coached"? First off, hearsay. Not credible. And he might have just mentioned that the police reminded him to make sure he got his timeline straight for his testimony. That's not coaching. That's just making sure your witness has his story straight and lines up with what he originally said. That's why police ask people to repeat their statements. Standard operating procedure. And what makes this criminal's statement more reliable than the other criminal? Because he got paid to do it on camera?
I knew nothing going into this and am not unaware of police departments' misguided efforts to just get somebody, but there isn't anything here to prove that happened. And while that official story is not the strongest of cases, it is entirely plausible. Anybody can have theories, some may even have threads of truth, but it makes one wonder who paid for this obvious propaganda. And it's only obvious to those who would actually look into some basic facts of the physical world instead of relying on emotions, hearsay and misdirection.
It's a crock of clickbait designed to make you think the witness's story is implausible. Everything that follows is nothing but hearsay and "re-taped audio" and obscured witnesses. The whole thing smacks of whiny pleas to feel sorry for the convicted perpetrators using the very techniques of which they accuse the police of doing. And showing alternative theories which they discard is not proof that their theory is any more credible. It's just distraction from their own failings. Even the cell tower expert states that one version is unlikely (but not impossible), while the other is more likely. Of course, this can neither be proven or disproved and he's only there to feed the narrative.
And what about the guy who says another guy says he was "coached"? First off, hearsay. Not credible. And he might have just mentioned that the police reminded him to make sure he got his timeline straight for his testimony. That's not coaching. That's just making sure your witness has his story straight and lines up with what he originally said. That's why police ask people to repeat their statements. Standard operating procedure. And what makes this criminal's statement more reliable than the other criminal? Because he got paid to do it on camera?
I knew nothing going into this and am not unaware of police departments' misguided efforts to just get somebody, but there isn't anything here to prove that happened. And while that official story is not the strongest of cases, it is entirely plausible. Anybody can have theories, some may even have threads of truth, but it makes one wonder who paid for this obvious propaganda. And it's only obvious to those who would actually look into some basic facts of the physical world instead of relying on emotions, hearsay and misdirection.
