Killer Cases

First of all, the diversity complaints are preposterous. Frankly I can't tell if they're doing satire or not. My problem is with the ongoing almost total absense of scientific evidence underscored in these cases. A & E can't help it if most people believe that interpretation of human reactions and body language is reasonable grounds for deciding guilt. They can help it if they choose to include that information as though it seals the deal. If you want to watch a show where the vast majority of cases are based on circumstantial evidence and unchallenged "mind reading" assertions from the people making important legal decisions, then this is the show for you.

Hi. I can't emphasize enough that Killer Cases is either "The Best" true crime TV series, or at least in the top 3. I live in Australia so apparently we down under are not as addicted to the True Crime genre as the American (mostly women) are. BUT I love them and since getting hooked I find I prefer watching and hearing real people rather than professional actors.

Killer Cases manages more than most other True Crime shows to present the 3 part stories exceptionally well. Then I love it when we get to see the suspects or certain persons of interest hauled into the Cop's Office for the interview which is one of my favourite parts. Finally we get to see the final Courtroom scenes as well, where we get treated to some excellent lawyers' presentations (mostly) and find out who the killer is. I watch a lot of these types of shows and would give this one a very high score of 8/10 because I could not stop watching it and can't wait for Season 7 to begin.

Every episode that I have seen is a case already profiled on CBS' 48 Hours. Why rehash the same cases that have already aired on another show and try to package it as something new? Brian Ross is a good reporter, but he's not Peter Thomas or Bill Kurtis. Those two can make even the most moribund cases seem compelling. Killer Cases is by no means the worst true crime show, but it's nowhere near the best, either. It does a good job of presenting actual recordings and footage from the cases. It also features a lot of newer cases, not ones from the 1970's and 1980's that have been discussed ad nauseam.

Really thought this was fake or slapped together by using other documentaries on the same case from different sources - just all conveniently leaving out the damming evidence that proves these cases should have any convicted humans. After watching two I am unsure why Hulu is having a hard time doing what every type of social platforms been doing for well ever.

This crime documentary series has a very basic, very dumbed down formula for each episode. ( as opposed to "Forensic Files" Homicide Hunter" and literally tens of other QUALITY crimes documentary shows) There is very little actual scientific/logical evidence presented to us as viewers. I just hope the juries were presented with overwhelming evidence that we the viewers were not shown, otherwise the detectives,lawyers and juries are failing miserably and shockingly and innocent people are going to Prison.

The only half way interesting parts are extremely edited and reduced actual footage. (Not even crucial footage!!) We get footage of what the lawyers say in the actual courtroom but again without any mention of any actual scientific evidence. Its just a very ODD way of presenting a documentary.

There is no time showing any police or good detective procedure.

At the end of each episode there is a few minutes of the closing arguments that also does not reveal any evidence.

These suspects/defendents most likely ARE guilty but the way their cases are presented in this show they weren't proven beyond a reasonable doubt. I'm left feeling like justice is NOT served.

Bland, boring, mindless, superficial unintelligent. Very miniscule in information.

Hated it.