Going beyond the murder of landscape architect Joanna Yeates, on December 2010, under mysterious circumstances, the special delivers an insightful
case against the UK media and tabloids with their insane frenzy against her innocent landlord Christopher Jefferies, the typical rush to judgment scenario
created by yellow journalism and the need to sell a story regardless of consequences. But at least, in this case, they paid a price.
It's a very detailed account on Yeates mysterious disappearance, the police search until her body was found on Christmas Day, far apart from where
she lived in a building flat where Jefferies was her eccentric landlord; then the murder investigation and the media circus around the case, the prime
suspect and how things were conducted by editors of big tabloids. Reporters who covered the case, the investigators and othes are the key people here, detailing
each fact they knew at the time and also the many rumours circulating on the internet and elsewhere. And for pathetic reasons, all the leads pointed out
to the odd man next door, who was detained for a brief period yet long enough to cause damage to his reputation with tabloids inquiring people who always
found him a suspicious man.
Crime stories are usually fascinating to watch just by itself with the mystery of it all,
its conclusions or questions raised. This one takes a step further as it shines a light over the media behind the scenes, the pressures from bosses and
editors in wanting to know more about a story, with sensational headlines destined to attract readers and viewers and form a narrative without thorough
research, throwing ethics down the window. It's the kind of issue that happens ever since the press and journalism was invented (even before, if we
consider mankind has a thing for gossip and slander). But it's also the kind of scenario that shouldn't happen anymore as the profession covers itself
under the armour of integrity, partiality, ethics and moral, and in the times of fast technology globally available it's a tragedy that major blunders
still get printed, posted and shown, without a chance for the offended part to defend himself.
Also worth noticing that the police investigation was very sloppy at points, with big figures leaking harmful and unsubstantial information to
the press. Gotta look further. Whenever there's a case against an innocent person accused of a crime or a wrongdoing, the question that hardly ever gets
asked by authorities, media and even the critical minds who follow such stories is about motivation. But apparently just looking suspicious is enough for
a mob condemnation. They got it wrong too, despite the successful result later on with the real guilty person.
I wasn't familiar with this actual case, so I got easily impressed and thrilled with everything; for those who followed it 15 years ago it'll offer
a wide and interesting scope of events that will make you question similar cases that, sadly, often happens wherever you live. 8/10.
