🔗 Share this article

The true crime genre has an innovative format, or perhaps even a whole new language and structure: police body cam footage. Countenances of those harmed, witnesses and potential offenders appear suddenly to the cameras, sometimes in the intense brightness of headlights or flashlights as the police arrive, their expressions and tones expressing caution or fear or anger or suspiciously contrived innocence. And we frequently catch sight of the expressions of the officers themselves, one standing by blankly while the other conducts the inquiry with what sometimes seems like extraordinary diffidence – though perhaps this is because they know they are being recorded.

A Growing Trend in Documentary Filmmaking

We have already had the Netflix true-crime documentary The Gabby Petito Case, about the killing of an Instagram influencer by her partner, whose primary focus was officer recordings and in which, as in this film, the law enforcement seemed extraordinarily lax with the perpetrator. There is also the acclaimed short film Incident by Bill Morrison, composed entirely of officer footage. Now comes a new film by Geeta Gandbhir about the grim case of Ajike Owens in a city in Florida, a woman of colour whose four young kids allegedly harassed and tormented her neighbor, Susan Lorincz. In 2023, after an escalating series of neighbour-dispute incidents in which the police were repeatedly called, the accused fatally shot Owens through her locked door, when the victim went to the neighbor's residence to address her about throwing objects at her children.

The Police Inquiry and State Laws

The investigating authorities found proof that Lorincz had done online research into Florida’s “stand your ground” laws, which permit residents and others to shoot if there is a significant presumption of threat. The documentary constructs its narrative with the officer recordings captured during the multiple officer calls to the location before the killing, and then at the horrific and chaotic incident site itself – introduced by 911 audio material of the caller calling the police in a melodramatically shaky voice. There is also jail video of Lorincz which has a chilly, queasy fascination.

Depiction of the Suspect

The documentary does not really suggest anything too complicated about the neighbor, or any mitigating factors. She is clearly unstable, although the kids are heard calling her a derogatory term, an hurtful taunt. The film is presented as an illustration of how self-defense regulations lead to senseless and tragic bloodshed. But the reality of gun ownership and the second amendment (that historic American constitutional privilege that a late commentator famously claimed made firearm fatalities a necessary cost) is not much emphasized.

Officer Questioning and Firearm Norms

It is feasible to watch the officer questioning segments here and feel astonished at how minimal concern the officers took in this point. At what time did she purchase the firearm? Where (if anywhere) did she train in its use? Had she ever had occasion to fire it before? Where did she store it in the house? Could it have been easily accessible and prepared? The authorities aren’t shown asking any of these undoubtedly important questions (though they could have inquired in footage that didn’t make the edit). Or is gun ownership so commonplace it would be like asking about microwaves or toasters?

Detention and Consequences

For what seemed to her neighbors a extended period, the suspect was not even arrested and charged, only held and even provided accommodation away from home for the night (another point of comparison, incidentally, with the Gabby Petito case). And when she was ultimately formally arrested in the holding cell, there is an extraordinary sequence in which Lorincz simply declines to rise, refuses to put her wrists out for the cuffs, not aggressively, but with the politely self-pitying air of someone whose psychological state means that she just can’t do it. Had the kid-gloves treatment up until that point encouraged her to think that this might actually work?

Conclusion and Verdict

It didn’t; and the jury’s verdict is saved for the end titles. A very sombre picture of U.S. justice and consequences.