One of the things I love the most about this show is how it has the balls to ask the questions and…
Erik Carlstrom
132

I think the difference between this and Making a Murderer (I haven’t listened to Serial) is that there was reason for hope in Making a Murder, as there was sufficient evidence for reasonable doubt. That does not exist in this show. From the very first episode I was convinced that Naz committed the murder but would get off on a technicality (I am an attorney and they packed that first episode with so many criminal procedure issues and only called attention to about half of it). But as the show has gone on and the noose has tightened the viewer should no longer have any hope. Instead of looking hard at the investigation itself the defense team is too busy looking for the real killer that doesn’t exist.

Yet, the viewer has been trained that there is something that is on the outskirts that is about to snap into focus. I am fascinated to see what the reaction will be when that something turns out to be that Naz’s attorneys with hearts of gold just aren’t very good at their jobs.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.