‘True Crime Story: Indefensible’ Review: A comedy about the injustice of our justice system

0
True Crime Story Indefensible review

Comedian and writer Friedman has spent much of his career satirizing society. She was a field producer on The Daily Show. Wrote the next film for Borat and hosted the soft-focus swimming series for adults with Jena Friedman. Indefensible combines sophisticated comedic skills with investigative reporting. And the result is a true-crime series that uncovers insane flaws and loopholes in the US justice system.

In the first episode, Friedman covers the Steinberg as mentioned above murder:

What happened in 1991. Stephen’s husband stabbed his wife Elana 26 times with a knife from the kitchen. They are a forensic psychiatrist who painted a picture of Elana as a woman. They did not have sex with him for quite a lot of time also spent a lot of money. And not enough to care for her husband. In short, they claimed he was slowly provoking him over time, and one day he just clicked.

If the “he wants it” defence sounds crazy. To wait for Friedman to interview forensic psychiatrist Martin Blinder. Who was in charge of the acquittal. Blinder further described Stephen as a victim of “battered man syndrome” – not physically but mentally beaten. Resulting from working with a husband who shopped and only gave him one job a week. At one point, Blinder also admitted that his own bias could tarnish his testimony.

Episode two discusses protection from so-called “abusive sex” in many female deaths. More specifically, the event deals with the death of a Florida woman, Francisco Marquez, whose body was found in her apartment a few days after her death. However, her boyfriend Richard Patterson was also in the apartment the entire time. Patterson reportedly admitted to strangling Markines but was acquitted on a plea. Suggesting that he choked on his enormous penis during oral sex.

The fact that this witness and defence sound ridiculous:

What was even used was questionable, and they were carefully separated from Friedman and his subject but what was even more worrying was that the jury bought them, and they worked. As Friedman said in a press release for the series. “I hope this show gives viewers an idea of ​​how the system breaks down so they can at least be a little more prepared if they ever find themselves back.” to the jury. “

“Indefensible” definitely follows in the footsteps of satirical news programs like “The Daily Show”. Still, there’s also an element to podcasts like “You’re Wrong About” and “NPR’s Throughline” covering events that seem apparent at first glance. Can discern which gaps in reporting are left out or so sensational that only part of the story is presented to us. It’s informative but fun, annoying but necessary.

A quality that every good reporter should have, whether satirical or not, is empathy for many interviewees and victims of crime. Friedman is as bright and brave as he should be when interviewing people like him; he didn’t give up, he wasn’t afraid of them, and he wasn’t worried about hurting their feelings. There are times when he talks to Francisco Marquines’ granddaughter in the second episode where there is no wise answer when he learns that the whole process of killing Marquez only took three days to sit still in anger.

Indefensible feels familiar because the format isn’t new, but it feels fresh due to the underrated subject matter and Friedman’s ability to switch between serious and absurd.

While it may seem like another entry into the actual crime genre;

A true-crime story: The unjustified is funny and disturbing and, I dare say, even instructive. While each episode covers only one aspect of the legal system that needs review, in this shortcoming, the series shows a pattern that shows how easy it is to play the system (Eg: if you know the right people). 

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

7 − two =