🔗 Share this article

The true crime category has an innovative format, or perhaps even a completely fresh vocabulary and grammar: officer-worn camera recordings. Faces of victims, witnesses and potential offenders appear suddenly to the cameras, at times in the intense brightness of headlights or flashlights as the officers approach, their expressions and tones eloquent of wariness or panic or indignation or dubiously feigned naivety. And we often incidentally glimpse the faces of the officers themselves, one standing by blankly while the other conducts the inquiry with what occasionally seems like remarkable hesitation – though perhaps this is because they know they are being recorded.

An Emerging Pattern in Documentary Filmmaking

We have previously seen the streaming service true-crime documentary American Murder: Gabby Petito, about the slaying of an social media personality by her boyfriend, whose main point of interest was body cam footage and in which, as in this film, the law enforcement seemed surprisingly lenient with the perpetrator. There is also Bill Morrison’s Oscar-nominated short Incident, made exclusively of body cam film. Now comes Geeta Gandbhir’s documentary about the tragic incident of Ajike Owens in a city in Florida, a woman of colour whose children reportedly bothered and antagonized her white neighbour, Susan Lorincz. In 2023, after an increasing number of neighbour-dispute incidents in which the authorities were repeatedly called, Lorincz shot Owens dead through her closed front door, when Owens went to Lorincz’s house to address her about hurling items at her children.

The Investigation and Legal Context

The investigating authorities found proof that Lorincz had done internet searches into Florida’s “stand your ground” laws, which permit householders and others to shoot if there is a significant presumption of danger. The documentary builds its story with the body cam footage captured during the multiple officer calls to the location before the killing, and then at the horrific and chaotic incident site itself – introduced by emergency call recordings of the caller contacting authorities in a melodramatically shaky voice. There is also police cell footage of the individual which has a disturbing, unsettling appeal.

Portrayal of the Accused

The documentary does not really suggest anything too complicated about Lorincz, or any mitigating factors. She is obviously disturbed, although the children are heard calling her a derogatory term, an ugly jibe. The production is showcased as an illustration of how self-defense regulations lead to unnecessary and heartbreaking bloodshed. But the fact of firearm possession and the constitutional right (that historic American constitutional privilege that a deceased pundit famously claimed made gun deaths a necessary cost) is not much highlighted.

Police Interrogation and Gun Culture

It is feasible to watch the officer questioning segments here and feel surprised at how little interest the officers took in this aspect. At what time did she purchase the firearm? Where (if anywhere) did she train in its use? Was this the first time she discharged the weapon? 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 surely relevant questions (though they may have done in footage 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 local residents a very long time, Lorincz was not even arrested and charged, only detained 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 handcuffs, 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 could be effective?

Conclusion and Verdict

It didn’t; and the panel's decision is saved for the closing credits. A deeply sobering picture of American crime and punishment.