Exhibit A

The concept behind this mini series is interesting, but the case studies lack depth and background. The science was well explained and gave both sides of the story, however the stories didn't feel complete. Either the focus needed to be on the science and how it can be used to in case trials or the focus needed to be on the supposed wrongful convictions.

The show in interesting and easy to watch, but it makes little to no effort in clarifing that the problems presented are not within the science itself, but people manipulating and miss undestanding results. Every episody shows problems with prosecutors, jury and judges not been able to understand basic scientific methodology and using tests for the wrong purposes. To be honest, just the video evidence episody shows a case of bad science, the other ones are bad judicial system.

If you are familiar with Loudenberg's other Netflix show The Confession Tapes, you know that there is going to be some bias toward the accused (sorry to burst your bubble but ALL documentaries are biased). However, there is no satifactory conclusion in these episodes because the point is to make viewers think about the real grey area in sciences that are generally considered reliable. If all we ever see is CSI and the like we will just assume that the investigators are always in the right and that is simply not the case. Loudenberg is trying to raise awareness about the questionable use of science to get convictions and I think she nails it in a way that keeps you interested.

I watched the first two episodes. The first episode starts out in what looks like a backyard in Florida, then jumps to Texas, with absolutely no coherent connection.It seemed like both episodes presented opposing opinions regarding different types of crimes. Then, each episode just stops. No sort of conclusion, resolution, opinion, whatever you want to call it.There are completely mixed messages for both cases where each side accuses the other of pseudo science. I seriously thought episode two would pick up where episode one left off, but completely unrelated.

When I found this on Netflix I thought it was going to be a series that debunks forensic science to then show the person found guilty of the crime has their conviction finally overturned. That is not what this is all about. It's loosely based around different types of forensic science however, there doesn't seem to be a real point to it. They don't delve into the science nor the crime committed. There are far better shows out there than this one.