Burden of Proof

I would give this a 6.5 if I could. Burden of Proof avoids most of the pitfalls of the genre, with the exception of padding. It could've been a tight three episodes just by cutting repetitive and meandering content. Which might have helped nudge Jennifer Pandos, the missing 15-year-old whose brother relentlessly pursues justice here, more squarely into the center of things.

From the start, the Pandos parents hurt themselves in the investigation. Until Stephen has to suspect their involvement, becoming estranged from them after hiring investigators and experts in an attempt to tell Jennifer's story.

Increasingly, though, the focus is on Stephen's agonizing over his sister's fate, setbacks in the case and his mother's honesty. I question whether the documentary team had free rein...or if they were beholden to Stephen Pandos for funding.

To wit, one question I waited for: In an abusive home, with a violent, controlling father who isn't getting along with his increasingly troubled teenage daughter, was there also sexual abuse?

It would explain Jennifer's emotional issues and her parents' unfathomable choices and behavior during the investigation. For an outspoken kid, I noticed none of her friends knew exactly what was going on in the house where she felt unsafe.

Without spoilers, I think the issue of the note is far from settled and the final testimony we hear raises as many questions as answers. Possibly more.

This series reminds me of several Discovery Network (History Channel, NatGeo, etc.) shows. You know, the ones where the hosts go on expeditions to find lost treasure, ancient civilizations, evidence of paranormal activity, etc. And along the way, they sometimes discover the random coin, ancient tool or artifact, and maybe even a skeleton or two. But at the end of the show, you end up right back where you started - nothing solved, no huge treasure found. Case in point - "The Curse of Oak Island." They've milked this treasure hunt for 10 years and almost 170 episodes, and found the square root of diddley. This is what you have here, only it's FOUR hours long. This could have easily been condensed into an hour, maybe less. I could have given this production a pass for taking an hour of my time, but I really feel cheated about losing the other three hours. Its only redeeming quality is that it highlights how easily "investigators" from our law enforcement agencies can screw up a wet dream.

Whilst the events surrounding Jennifer's disappearance and strange and intriguing the main thing I took away from watching this is the awful way Margie was treated both by the police and Stephen, her own son.

The officers in the 2006-2009 investigation were disrespectful, obnoxious, accusatory and borderline abusive. The way the spoke to Margie was appalling and downright out of line, they should be ashamed.

As for Stephen he was nothing but mentally abusive towards Margie. He was so obsessed with the notion that his father murdered Jennifer and that Margie was complicit in covering it up that he veered of the path of justice to that of pure vengence, he just wanted his mother to pay whatever the cost. In my view he was cruel and abusive to his mother. He dangled promises of reconciliation and the prospect of allowing Margie a relationship with his daughters like a carrot. She could have these things but only if she (Margie) told him (Stephen) what he wanted to hear regardless (in my opinion) of what was true.

Margie was nothing but consistent in her denial of involvement or that of Ron's involvement and yet Stephen, so blinded by his obsession, was determined to break her down and get her to confess. He comes out of this badly, very badly. He ruined his relationship with Margie and denied her and his daughters any kind of relationship. He doesn't deserve forgiveness for his treatment and abuse of Margie. Shame on him and respect to Margie for somehow remaining decent and dignified through out.

Put simply, and without a doubt: it's remarkable.

I don't watch much true crime, and yet I'm not sure that label really fits here. "Burden" is deeply humane, entirely un-sensational, and far more artful than anything I know of in that genre.

It's a special and gripping work, with a haunting though subtly conveyed reminder of the pervasiveness and elusive justice around partner violence.

And in terms of filmmaking craft, it's an impressive display of both endurance (the project stretches over nearly 8 years) and skill (cinematography is deft and compelling throughout).

It's worth your time. And you'll be thinking about it.

If you're expecting to watch 42 minutes and get the answers you're seeking, you're probably going to be this a '3'. This is more about a glance inside the agony of a brother trying to find answers to his sister's murder, than it is about satisfying the viewer's need for instant gratification.

If you appreciate exceptional film-making that captures raw emotion, ranging from hope to complete hopelessness, give it a shot. If you're looking for another true crime 'hit and run' then skip this one because it might be a waste of 4 hours for you.

I can't wait for a follow up to this documentary as the story is compelling.