Just finished. My gut feeling is there is reasonable doubt. The physical evidence leaves too many questions. The timing of finding the key. The key only had his DNA, but not hers. The tampered vial.
What angered me the most was that defense attorney's investigator who manipulated the kid into signing the "I'm sorry" stuff and drawing incriminating pictures. I'm no lawyer, but that was atrocious representation.
I remember watching Paradise Lost, and thought after seeing it that I felt pretty convinced that the guilty party was one of the family members. Then watched Paradise Lost 2 and thought it was someone else, and again after the third one thinking it was yet another person.
I recommend watching them all if you're interested in true crime stories, although they are heartbreaking because in real life, we don't always get to the truth. Innocent people are sometimes punished for crimes they didn't do. (My stance on the death penalty wavered a lot after finishing the Paradise Lost series. I still support it philosophically, but think the burden of proof needs to rise above what we use currently.)
What angered me the most was that defense attorney's investigator who manipulated the kid into signing the "I'm sorry" stuff and drawing incriminating pictures. I'm no lawyer, but that was atrocious representation.
I remember watching Paradise Lost, and thought after seeing it that I felt pretty convinced that the guilty party was one of the family members. Then watched Paradise Lost 2 and thought it was someone else, and again after the third one thinking it was yet another person.
I recommend watching them all if you're interested in true crime stories, although they are heartbreaking because in real life, we don't always get to the truth. Innocent people are sometimes punished for crimes they didn't do. (My stance on the death penalty wavered a lot after finishing the Paradise Lost series. I still support it philosophically, but think the burden of proof needs to rise above what we use currently.)