The negative reviews on here are hung up on the editing and how the information was presented. Sure, there is some confusion on the way certain eveidence and POVs are presented but that just totally emphasizes the confusion of the case. The case itself was handled poorly as was the physical evidence, confession, etc. Dave Raccuglia had to sift through personal anecdotes, towns people accounts, official documents, and countless interviews to try and present the case. Raccuglias closeness with the case adds to the documentary more than it subtracts. Sure I can see the criticism with this, but it is enjoyable this way. The only criticism is how you are led to believe he is innocent and the last 20 mins presents how he is guilty.
Time has tainted this case in unimaginable ways and the audience is left with confusion, an aspect that cannot be avoided unless the documentary was released post DNA results. Weeger himself cannot remember as a result of 60 years behind bars and being asked to recount the case thousands of times over the decades. An interesting, creepy, eerie case that True Crime lovers will enjoy. As a True Crime fan myself, I enjoyed it but left with more confusion and questions than answers. (But perhaps that's not a bad thing)
Time has tainted this case in unimaginable ways and the audience is left with confusion, an aspect that cannot be avoided unless the documentary was released post DNA results. Weeger himself cannot remember as a result of 60 years behind bars and being asked to recount the case thousands of times over the decades. An interesting, creepy, eerie case that True Crime lovers will enjoy. As a True Crime fan myself, I enjoyed it but left with more confusion and questions than answers. (But perhaps that's not a bad thing)