La desaparicion de la familia McStay

Shame on the producers for letting Merritt have the last words in this series.

He is quite obviously guilty of these crimes. It requires bending over backwards to not only explain the evidence against him, but also to somehow explain that he and others supporting him lied. Thru all his whining and pontificating that literally everyone around him but him failed, and/or is crooked and responsible for his being convicted, he never once actually provides anything substantive that supports his claims. Believing him requires a truly laughable amount of mental contortions to explain away all the circumstantial evidence that places him at the scenes of the crime, with motive, means and opportunity. And his own lies for context.

At the time of the murders, he was in a status of active probation violation. After having been a repeat offender in that regard for years.

He was a criminal who had been in and out of prison for decades. He owed money for gambling debts to who knows who, and had just been caught stealing money from his employer by his employer..

It's another one of those "documentaries" sacrifices credibility for "intrigue".

Merritt is where he belongs.

Two disclaimers: 1) I'm a yearly subscriber to Discovery+ for True Crime only. This channel's ability to provide gut-wrenching multi-episode documentary coverage of investigations never ceases to amaze or unsettle me. "Unsettled" is what you'll come away from "Two Shallow Graves" feeling. 2) People whose lives have been touched by unsolved cases *may* tend to react more favorably to one side of the story or the other (victim's versus eventual defendant's, and vice versa). The two final episodes of "Two Shallow Graves" were body-blows to anyone familiar with how a defendant's own attorneys can turn a back to small matters, like the fact their client is on trial for his life.

To say more about Chase Merritt's decision in the final episodes would require spoilers. I went slack-jawed at the twenty-fifth-hour production of a particular witness, as well as at the judge's indifference to Merritt's defense throughout.

But IMDB is a place to review film productions, not to discuss merits of cases, so-- Production values and decisions: A+. Text-explanation graphics extremely helpful and time-conserving. Any viewer with a working brain will ask about everything left out (motive for such overkill, motive for the choice of weapon). This is a good thing and to a reasonable juror should have brought about reasonable doubt. The producers don't attempt to whitewash Merritt; viewers will be informed immediately that they "inherited" the series when a first production team got turned down by various protagonists for interviews. These refusals seem based on the perception that the series would be (direct quote) "another Making of The Murderer." That assumes "Making a Murderer" was an obscene interference with the good prosecutors of Wisconsin's precious time... unlike...

"Two Shallow Graves" doesn't drag. I wondered in the middle episodes the point of prolonging the story, but a reason arrives in spades in the series' penultimate and then final episode.

It did not answer why Chase Merritt would have been driven to carnage this bad. Maybe that was its point. I came away not convinced this man was treated any more fairly than Steven Avery or his tragic nephew.

Both prosecution and defense attorneys are ridiculous. Botox Raj and Mental Case Jim seem to be working two different cases. Chase Merrit is full of himself, but he is right about one thing: his legal team sucks. Smirky Britt Imes looks like he is going to burst out laughing at different points. And Melissa R is no better. Why are they so confidant? They have stepped on landmines left and right too. If you tried to sell this as a fictional legal drama, no one would buy it. The incompetence is too unbelievable. That being said, it did keep me watching. Like watching a train wreck, I guess.

This would have been a great documentary. The presentation is awful. It's comes off boring, found myself being distracted and rewinding. It could have flowed better in my opinion.

Really well done doc, though the timelines and pertinent points are out of order, teased for dramatic purposes.

Combining earlier doc footage (never finished), then reediting with new interviews is unique, skillful and captivating.

But I am bothered (though I haven't seen the conclusion) by implications that the brother, McFadden, or Dan K had anything to do with it...Do they have any recourse to sue, because their lives have been undoubtedly adversely affected?

I believe tonight we will learn of Chase's attempt to close McStay's business account (after forging checks), the cell phone pings, etc, etc.

Yes, lack of blood in the house is unusual (maybe it was done outside), but to anyone with half a brain he is obviously guilty.

Sorry this defense team looks like total jerks, and all social media opinions - people who know nothing about it - is pure speculation and means nothing.

I do think this doc calls into question our judicial system. Chase is obviously as guilty as the day is long, but people were given access to produce this? Reminds me of OJ.

Other than a very captivating documentary, what's the point? Other than to ruin people's lives and attempt to make the defense team seem like heroes?

And oh yeah, he was found guilty by a jury of his peers.