Plenty of murder trials inspire heated debate over guilt versus innocence, both in the jury room and in the court of public opinion. Over 20 years later, folks are still fighting over whether O.J. Simpson “did it.” But then there are all the other high-profile cases that, by the time the alleged killer is brought to trial, everyone seems to be in agreement on – the question isn’t if they did it, but how they’ll try to wiggle their way out of it and, when they fail, how serious their punishment will be.
In recent years, true crime has seen a resurgence in popularity, particularly with a focus on wrongful convictions, illuminating various failures of the justice system along the way. Ignored witnesses, faulty timelines, tunnel vision, a reliance on subjective circumstantial evidence and psychological profiling and plain old sloppy investigating – so when these same wrongful conviction hallmarks are also present in high-profile cases long perceived to be a slam dunk? Well, maybe they’re worth giving a second look too.