🔗 Share this article

The true crime genre has an innovative format, or perhaps even a whole new language and structure: officer-worn camera recordings. Faces of victims, witnesses and potential offenders appear suddenly to the cameras, at times in the harsh glare of vehicle beams or torches as the police arrive, their expressions and tones expressing wariness or fear or anger or suspiciously contrived innocence. And we often catch sight of the faces of the law enforcement personnel, one waiting impassively while the other asks the questions with what occasionally seems like remarkable hesitation – though maybe this is because they know they are being recorded.

An Emerging Pattern in Non-Fiction Cinema

We have previously seen the Netflix real-life crime film The Gabby Petito Case, about the slaying 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 suspect. There is also Bill Morrison’s Oscar-nominated short Incident, made exclusively of officer footage. Now comes Geeta Gandbhir’s documentary about the grim case of a Florida mother in a city in Florida, a African American woman whose children reportedly bothered and tormented her white neighbour, Susan Lorincz. In 2023, after an escalating series of neighborhood conflicts in which the authorities were summoned multiple times, Lorincz fatally shot Owens through her locked door, when Owens went to Lorincz’s house to confront her about hurling items at her children.

The Investigation and State Laws

The arresting officers found evidence that the suspect had done internet searches into Florida’s “stand your ground” laws, which allow householders and others to use firearms if there is a significant presumption of threat. The documentary constructs its narrative with the officer recordings generated during the repeated police visits to the scene before the shooting, and then at the horrific and chaotic crime scene itself – prefaced by 911 audio material of the caller contacting authorities in a melodramatically shaky voice. There is also jail video of the individual which has a disturbing, unsettling appeal.

Portrayal of the Accused

The film does not really imply anything too complicated about the neighbor, or any mitigating factors. She is obviously disturbed, although the children are heard calling her “the Karen”, an hurtful taunt. The film is presented as an illustration of how self-defense regulations lead to senseless and tragic violence. But the fact of gun ownership and the second amendment (that historic American constitutional privilege that a late commentator notoriously said made gun deaths a price worth paying) is not much highlighted.

Police Interrogation and Firearm Norms

It is feasible to watch the officer questioning segments here and feel astonished at how little interest the police took in this aspect. When did she buy her gun? 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? Was it just on the couch, loaded and ready? The police aren’t shown asking any of these undoubtedly important questions (though they could have inquired in recordings that didn’t make the edit). Or is possessing a firearm so normal it would be like asking about microwaves or bread heaters?

Arrest and Aftermath

For what appeared to her neighbors a extended period, Lorincz was not even arrested and charged, only held and even offered a hotel stay away from home for the night (another point of comparison, incidentally, with the Gabby Petito case). And when she was finally officially taken into custody in the detention area, there is an extraordinary sequence in which the individual simply declines to rise, refuses to put her wrists out for the cuffs, not hostilely, but with the courteously pathetic demeanor of someone whose mental health means that she is unable to comply. Did the gentle handling up until that point led her to think that this might actually work?

Final Outcome and Judgment

It didn’t; and the panel's decision is saved for the closing credits. A very sombre portrayal of U.S. justice and consequences.