Die DNA eines Mordes - mit Paul Holes

His fresh eyes add to the investigations. This show is great but disappointing that there is no update on whether the crimes are solved. I'd like to see a follow-up, showing that his suggestion produced an actual resolution.

The title should be called "Reenactment of Murder". The entire show is just about the story of what might of happened, but there's no discussion of how they used DNA to find the killer or how they found out who did the crime via DNA. They should be discussing how they took the DNA and used familial DNA to find the killer like they did the Golden State Killer, but instead the show is nothing about that. They end the show making you wonder what was the conclusion - will it be shown in the next show -the answer is no, just more of the same open ended crime scenes with no resolution.

I am sure i'll keep watching, not sure yet if because of my crime, psychology or paul holes fetish. .. 2nd episode in now i am left hanging regarding the first case. i initially assumed the case will stretch over to other episodes? the second one however did not resolve nor even mention the last case? huge plus points for: being informative & not using dramatizations. it could be more scientific.

in the 2nd ep. when he went through the case with a mysterious dark haired lady ( who wasn't introduced & whose role i still couldn't figure out) it seems like they are talking to themselves and not bouncing off of each others thoughts.. strange communication dynamic... felt a little too acted.

**Edit since first reviewed. So now that the second episode has aired, it's about a totally separate case, but the first episode's case was never conclusively closed. Nothing was ever mentioned about the DNA results from further testing. It makes no sense. Who gave this a green light? Stars going down to 5. Second episode ends the same way. No conclusion or DNA results. Very odd way to present a show.

For now can only give it 6 stars. The analysis used by Mr. Paul Holes & his associates is informative and well-structured. If each case were wrapped up within one episode, then it would be better. I write this with the caveat that since it's only the first episode, it certainly has the potential to be one of, if not the best crime show specifically related to the use of DNA-analysis to solve crimes.

Currently it seems the show is going to stretch each case out longer than necessary.(multiple episodes for a single case, or series of cases with the same perpetrator) The second sit-downs with victim's family members should be saved for the case's conclusion. Will definitely watch at least one more episode once it airs, before forming a final review and updating this written one.

Pros: -Excellent step by step analysis from seasoned and articulate investigators. -Explores if other similar cases occurred in other places before dogmatically pursuing a single lead.

Cons: -Seemingly unnecessary repetition at times. (some conveyed information could be wrapped up much quicker) -A slight sense of attempting to dramatize the show instead of keeping it 100% scientific, real-life and straight forward. (involving talks with family members past the initial interviews)

I have worked in Forensic Science for over 15 years, and I can say that this series is nothing except a money grab from the curious members of victims of unsolved homicides. I don't think this gives them any closure. Instead, this seems to just aggravate their agony.

Since those people are on camera, they can't say any negative comments about, the so-called, investigation. This also sends a message that the law enforcement agencies, that ran the investigation, were who overlooked those evidences.

Such shows are ran after hundreds of disclosures from the parties involved. I find this show as just capitalizing on people's liking of crime scenes investigation and scandals.