On one side I was intrigued by this 3 part series on the investigation and trials of the horrific crime that is the subject. While watching it was quite irritating to go through all the repetitions (partly by recaps after commercial breaks) of what has happened and what actually has been secured as evidence. And in the end there are too many questions that remain unanswered. Not only is it disappointing to notice that the British press played such a toxic role throughout the years, pointing out the guilty one before the trial and buying false testimonies. The filmmakers chose not to discredit them in any way.
I would have preferred less repetition and overlapping information from one episode to the next. Why didn't the filmmakers put down all forensic evidence in perspective and point out what was done with that. They pointed out that at the time of the crime DNA tests were not that well developed still, but one could have expected more information on that part to come out in the 23 years that followed. What about the fingerprint on the lunchbox? I missed the filmmakers dedication to find out the truth from experts that were introduced. Near the end a forensic expert was supposed to look into the matter, but after that there is no clear report on what she discovered or not. I also found the way they showed the current status particularly disappointing. No more voice over, no people talking about what happened, just a simple set of short titles on a black background depicting the (open) end conclusions, as if the time and money had run out.
This terrible crime that was followed by such an appalling investigation and trials deserve a more clear and structured conclusion.
