The Hillside Strangler

But as a true crime documentary its solid work on the archive news material etc, you really take a trip to the past and beyond, but as mr bianchi said himself ''i dont know if i lied or not'', that is really what confuses most when binging 3.30 hrs of tv snack.

I shall not conclude anything than say ... the hillside stranglings took the day after bianchi was arrested...

a pinpointed documentary about kingpins of strangulations, grumpy old man recommends a look.

Between October of 1977 and February of 1978, a serial killer terrorized women in Southern California, known as the Hillside Strangler. Originally preying upon sex workers in Los Angeles, this offender began to target young women regardless of race or background, before simply vanishing for good. It wasn't until a year later that police were able to link a separate crime to this spree, and from there, began to track down the culprit or, in this case, culprits... Between October of 1977 and February of 1978, a serial killer terrorized women in Southern California, known as the Hillside Strangler. Originally preying upon sex workers in Los Angeles, this offender began to target young women regardless of race or background, before simply vanishing for good. It wasn't until a year later that police were able to link a separate crime to this spree, and from there, began to track down the culprit or, in this case, culprits...

This could easily have been 2 episodes or one 2-hour documentary.

Episode 1 and 2 were good, but episode 3 ruins the entire program (in my opinion.)

I'm not sure the logic or mindset of the producers, but episode 3 completely ruined the program by giving us a third hour of confused, jumbled, contradicting interview clips, one after another.

I've never seen a more disarranged collection of conflicting, contradicting clips of people going both ways on the truth and involvement of Bianchi's abetting cousin and accessory Angelo Buono.

From the beginning of episode 3, they give us an hour of assembled, contradicting interviews from Buono's attorneys, saying opposing things left and right. Buono's attorney says "There's no evidence he was involved." Next, Bianchi's girlfriend describes Buono's home where he tortured and raped women, no doors on any rooms, including his bathrooms.

He's innocent. He's guilty. He's innocent. He's guilty. Innocent. Guilty. Every scene.

They give us Buono's defense lawyers saying he's innocent, followed by witnesses who testify Bianchi and Buono were in it together. Then annoying attorney turned Superior Court Judge Katherine Mader tells us there was no case supporting Buono's guilt. Next, clips of Bianchi's interrogation where he attests Buono planned most of the torture and killings.

The producers of Episode 3 seem as confused and disoriented as the killers themselves.

What is wrong with you people? Make up your mind.

Of course they should present both sides, but there should be a main theme to the program.

Not offense, defense, offense, defense, minute by minute like a soccer game.

But that's just my opinion.