Evidence of Truth

The story line could have been good but this movie was clearly written by someone who has absolutely no knowledge of forensics or police procedure. The over use of a magnifying glass and using a flashlight with the lights on? seriously? It was too predictable and the secondary characters were not developed enough. The camera direction/cinematography was actually the best part of this movie. I like a lot of the Lifetime crime drama movies, but not this one!

A Wife's Suspicion/Evidence of Truth (TV movie 2015) 5 out of 10 stars Time to Read: 2:45 min

BASIC PLOT: Forensic investigator, Renee Murphy, Andrea Roth, has been working on a spate of serial homicides, where the killer likes to bind his victims, and take a piece of their hair as a trophy. As time goes on, she begins to suspect those around her, instead of just some random stranger. Could it be her new husband, Jack Murphy (Woody Jeffreys)? She's discovered he has a dark past he's told her nothing about. She's also seen him with another woman, deepening her distrust.

Being a good cop, she doesn't limit her suspicions to just one person. Her ex, Detective Kyle Ferguson (Sebastian Spence), is also a suspect. He's told her he'd do ANYTHING to get her back, but just how far would he go? She believes Kyle is a fine man, and a good father, but his wife was the killer's first victim. Is that just a coincidence?

Maybe it's fellow Officer, Jade Winters (Hilary Jardine), who Renee caught snooping around her house. She also glimpsed Jade looking at her with disdain, almost hatred . What was that look, and what was Jade hoping to find, when she was looking through their things?

She even has to consider her least likely suspect, fellow CSI technician, Tim Watson (Luke Camilleri). He seems harmless enough on the surface, but he does have an obsession with Jade... Could that fixation spill over, and create an undeniable anger, which drives him to kill?

Renee must use all her instincts and skills to uncover the killer, hunting from the shadows, while under suspicion herself.

WHAT WORKS: *ANDREA ROTH IS ALWAYS FUN TO WATCH, SO IS SEBASTIAN SPENCE Andrea Roth & Sebastian Spence are fun to watch, no matter the roles they are playing. They can only work within the bounds of the script though, and it's pretty lean.

*THE KILLER IS A MYSTERY TILL THE END I am very good at figuring out mysteries. It takes talent to stump me, but this did. That's why I'm giving it such a high rating. The killer could equally be Jack Murphy, the disgraced husband, Kyle Ferguson, the jilted ex, Morgan Knox, the jealous co-worker, Tim Watson, the obsessed lab assistant, or even one of the ancillary characters from the drug rehab. Their motives are all equally weighted, and so are their odd behaviors. It makes for a tough decision, and therefore a better mystery.

*LUCIA WALTERS SHOULD HAVE BEEN NAMED DETECTIVE PAM CHERFILS like on the movie, A Murderer Upstairs (2017). They are basically the same character, and it's one she portrays well.

WHAT DOESN'T WORK: *RENEE & JACK DON'T SEEM TO LIKE EACH OTHER Renee (Andrea Roth) and Jack (Woody Jeffreys) don't seem to like each other very much, even though they're supposed to be married. The exception is one scene at the beginning of the movie, but that's it. The whole rest of the movie they seem to, at best, tolerate each other. She supposedly left a good guy like Kyle (Sebastian Spence), whom she appears to like more, for Jack. But she never appears close to Jack, or even to like him very much. It's bizarre.

*WHAT MAKES HER SUSPICIOUS OF HER HUSBAND JACK, AS A CRIMINAL? Because she suspects him of having an affair? If she was going to run his prints, she'd have done it BEFORE they were married, not after. And just because you suspect your husband of having an affair, doesn't mean you'd suspect him of being an arch criminal.

*DELIVERY FROM EVERYONE IS PRETTY STIFF That's unusual from Andrea Roth, she normally carries these TV movies.

*SERIAL MURDER IS RARE thank God for that, but the police in any town where there was a "stranger killing," would remember the crime scene, whether they worked it or not. Especially, if one of the victims was a cop AND a cop's wife.

*SHE'S CSI, BUT WITH NO PROTECTIVE GEAR I don't watch CSI: Crime Scene Investigation (2000), so I don't know if they do this on that show or not, but on most American police procedurals, they don't wear protective gear while at crime scenes. This movie is no different. Andrea Roth has her Sherlock Holmes magnifying glass, looking for trace evidence on the body, while her own hair is touching the body! C'mon! It doesn't take away from her loveliness to see her in protective gear! It just makes the movie MORE believable. This is the one area the British always succeed in their TV filmmaking. Their crime scenes look real, and we should follow their lead.

*SAME B-ROLL IN FRONT OF POLICE STATION We see the same two cops walking to their cars over and over...

*I KNOW THIS IS LOW BUDGET, BUT... Couldn't we have put some make-up on these victims, to make them look dead? It's clear these girls are alive and healthy, and there's no excuse for that.

TO RECOMMEND, OR NOT TO RECOMMEND, THAT IS THE QUESTION: *There are lots better TV movies out there, but there are also worse ones too. This is pretty middle of the road. If you're a fan of Sebastian Spence or Andrea Roth, then definitely give it a try. If you just need to shut your brain off, and veg, you could do much worse.

CLOSING NOTES: *This is a made-for-tv movie, please keep that in mind before you watch/rate it. TV movies have a much lower budget, and so your expectations should be adjusted.

*I have no connection to the film, or production in ANY way. This review was NOT written in full, or in part, by a bot. I am just an honest viewer, who wishes for more straight forward reviews (less trolls and fanboys), and better entertainment. Hope I helped you out.

There are so many things not right with this film.

Perhaps I am being a bit pedantic here, but as a forensic scientist is she not supposed to be wearing protective coverings head to toe ? For fear of contamination of the crime scene ! And yet she was very happy to put on a lab coat the second she entered the lab !

But then I suppose when its all about how you look , then these trivial matters don't apply !

And all the personal stuff going on between all of them was dragged out for way too long , when it should have been focusing on the murders .

Not convincing for me ,I lost interest, but saw it through to the end anyway.

It did have potential , but was spoiled by poor detective work , and a fairly predicable end .

Watchable , but not great .

Average Lifetime movie flick. Poor quality, obvious plot, and creepy, but not in a good way.

Woman is basically torn between two lovers. She has had a relationship with both, but now she is married to guy number 2. He is very good looking, but has a mysterious past.

No spoilers here. The husband is creepy, and no advanced forensic degree is needed to figure out whodunit.

Despite twists and turns and red herrings, this is a boring movie. Everyone speaks in a monotone. Unbelievable and implausible.

Skip it.