El caso Yara Gambirasio: Más allá de toda duda razonable

This documentary should just be called "A one sided case for the defence of an obviously guilty man". Because that's what it is. I didn't pick up on it until the end of the third episode just how formulaic it was. It's like this: 1) bring up a point that makes Bossetti look clearly guilty or just plain bad. (Which he is. And which he is.) 2) have the defence lawyer and other advocates explain it away. Oh it's nothing. Could happen to anyone. 3) quote the prosecution to make them look incompetent. 4) quote the defence again to explain what a farce it all was and how biased the media is. 5) we, the viewer, are supposed to be shocked and outraged at Italy's legal system, and are meant to somehow feel sorry for the utter psycho Bossetti and his wife.

One of these 5-step cycles lasts about 8 mins. So repeat it for about 25 different points. Most of which make him look very guilty, but we are meant to feel sorry for him because of the media storm. Or something. The documentary makers even try to muddy the waters and divert blame to completely innocent people just because some touch dna (not blood!) of a woman was found on the dead girl's jacket sleeve. (Umm hello. Bossetti's dna was found on her underwear. I think this counts for more.)

Netflix has done it again. You think people would have learnt after being sucked in by Making A Murderer. This one is just as deceptive. But it seems to be working with people who cannot think critically about what they're watching.

Talented thirteen year old teenager Yara Gambiraso disappears from her home in a small Italian village. Yara is tragically found dead a few days later, and DNA links local man Massimo.

It's a very well made, balanced and thought provoking series, it makes you Talented thirteen year old teenager Yara Gambiraso disappears from her home in a small Italian village. Yara is tragically found dead a few days later, and DNA links local man Massimo Bossetti.

It's a very well made, balanced and thought provoking series, it makes you question all sorts of points and supposed evidence?

Is an innocent man languishing in a prison, or was some sort of science withheld, and a dodgy conviction brought in to condemn an innocent man? I can't answer that, but one thing is very clear, the trial was a farce all sorts of points and supposed evidence?

Is an innocent man languishing in a prison, or was some sort of science withheld, and a dodgy conviction brought in to condemn an innocent man? I can't answer that, but one thing is very clear, the trial was a farce.

If I had one criticism, it's this, at one point it talks about the glamorisation of those left behind, the victim forgotten, I felt there was an element of that here. At times it does jump about a little, the final two episodes are a lot easier to follow than the first two.

8/10.

The reason i didn't give this a 10 is that I don't really like the way it is arranged. The timeline is confusing and keeps bringing you forward and back many times. I would have preferred a more linear narration. The soundtracks are a little bit offbeat, and it's such a mess because I think that visually a good job has been done, and the sound accompaniment should be fundamental to give authenticity and power to a work of this kind.

This show fulfills a fundamental role, which is to bring to the attention of the general public a version of the facts that is not the institutional one.

Sometimes institutions make mistakes, and sometimes, rather than admitting their mistake, they continue to act wrongfully. This is a pattern that has been repeated many times in history and which could correspond to this tale.

The thing i appreciated most about this miniseries is that it does not try to convince you of Massimo Bossetti's innocence, but simply gives you all the possible elements to doubt the institutions. Doubting institutions is essential to avoid being dominated by them.

This documentary cought my attention, it is heartbreaking as any similar case would be and I was really interested in finding out what happened but on the half of second episode I had to stop watching because of disturbed timeline. Constant back and forth between various years is making me nervous and I can't follow any more what is happening when. Don't understand the reason behind this but I see it often in documentaries lately especially true crimes. It's purpose is I suppose to make dynamics which is fine but should be made moderately. This just confuses, iritates and makes documentary impossible to follow.

The continuous back and forth between multiple time lines is extremely confusing and irritating. At one point in the 3rd episode I just didn't know what part of the sequence of events was I even seeing anymore.

If you want to go back and forth, then just keep it to 2 timelines OR better just go in a sequential order.

The editor has made a mess of things completely destroying the documentary.

Also wassup with the subtitles and audio translation? Every scene starts off with the original Italian audio and then the English audio cuts in, the screen at the same time shows the original Italian text (name of the person talking on screen), and the subtitles then randomly shows the person's name in between what is being said.

I still completed the series because I really wanted to find out what happened. But my god, the production of this thing is a complete mess.

STOP inserting the original audio language in translated versions.

STOP inserting the original language words on-screen in translated versions.

STOP with the multiple timelines if you don't know what you are doing. You are NOT Nolan.