Moment of Truth

This is a multi-faceted story - of a young man who did not have a voice in his trial, of the corruption and racial tension in Robeson County, and of a justice system that is unjust. Well documented and well-researched, the series presents compelling, newly seen evidence that provides background for Daniel Green's efforts to gain a new trial.

Whether you believe Daniels claims of innocence or not....this is another documentary which shows the growing need for criminal justice reform in our country. As well as the idea that not all people convicted of violent crimes are incapable of reform. Being a teenager and then 27+ years in prison...it's amazing to watch Daniels persistence. Captivating series...

This series suffers from it's lack of focus on the victim and a very poorly presented timeline of the crime or the evidence. I wanted to know more about the victim, the police investigation and the trial. From episode 2, but the docuseries fails to present a cogent telling of what happened, or present a timeline of the crime as well as the corruption in the community.

At it's heart, the series attempts to tell a more important story about justice reform, but does so in a way that's very insulting to the viewer. I expect socially minded documentaries to tell a factual story that leads the viewer to the same high minded conclusions as the directors/editors. This documentary fails to do this, from Epsiode 2 on they tell us what to think, and as a critical viewer it feels preachy. Justice reform is an obvious conclusion, however the constant, repetitive heavy handedness takes away from the impact and importance of the message.

This could have been smart and thought provoking, but instead it comes off as sanctimonious, uncaring about the victim, unfocused and unsatisfying.

There were some very interesting points in this documentary, and there were certainly some irregularities with the trial, though none of the trial irregularities were smoking guns that swayed his and Larry Demery's clear involvement in James Jordan's murder. It's possible to have a bad police department and still have someone guilty as hell. Much of what he and his attorney want the viewers to believe is downright insulting. He knew exactly who James Jordan was either before they killed him or immediately afterwards - certainly by the time he robbed him of his jewelry which he then wore in that ridiculous homemade rap video. This is the problem I have with this moment in time of revisionist history where we are more focused on criminal rights than humanity toward victims and their families. There was absolutely no remorse shown in the several hours from Daniel Green, which I find remarkable in and of itself. If you are already that void of humanity by 18 years of age, you're already gone. Neither of these men should ever be released from jail because they would probably do it again. The only reason they're muddying the water now is to create reasonable doubt for both of them. That's what criminals do.

If the point of this show is to examine the guilt or innocence of Daniel Green or irregularities in his trial then it was poorly conceived. They waste an entire episode talking about unproven accusations of police corruption and the unproven assertions of racism that occur prior to this trail and are, utterly, unrelated to Green's case. They go so far as to ascribe "White privilege" to an Indian. If I were Daniel and I really was innocent of 1st degree, I'd be a bit disappointed by the circus sideshow. He's no angel for sure. But, is he the guy that pulled the trigger? I'm not too sure about that.