The Cheshire Murders

This documentary explores some compelling subjects around The Cheshire home invasion murders. 1) Police cover-up. The police were outside the residence for a full half hour and took no action until the criminals fled the home. They could have prevented most of the crime. Why? We can only speculate. 2) Death penalty. Death penalty is a controversial subject. One thing that's stressed in the movie, regardless of whether you're pro- or anti- , is that it's a very lengthy and expensive process. The system is broken. 3) Background of the murderers. We learn about their early lives, their motivations, etc. The conclusions that I've made: a history of mental illness and child abuse played a crucial role. They don't justify any of the crimes, but does bring into light the importance of treating mental illness and about the consequences of child abuse.

We also learn, in as much detail as possible, how the entire incident played out. We also learn about the victims and victims' family. This is all through interviews with many people. It's tragic, emotional, and from a documentary film perspective it's informative, interesting and somewhat impartial.

Last words: People who already know all about the Cheshire murders may not get the interviews and new information they expect. So if that's you, then maybe this documentary will be a disappointment. I'd never heard of these murders before, so it was all very interesting. There was not a moment in those 2 hours when I felt bored.

I personally believe that the death penalty is wrong but when you watch a documentary like this it's hard to argue that point as the two beasts that committed these crimes are the lowest of the low .

This documentary is about a brutal home invasion in Cheshire, Connecticut in 2007. In the quiet suburb of Cheshire, Connecticut, Jennifer Petit and her two young daughters were killed in a horrific home invasion; husband and father William Petit was the only one who escaped alive.

It's difficult to rate a documentary like this for entertainment purposes because nobody should be entertained by what they are seeing here . The details are horrific but the film makers do hold back for the viewers and families sake .

The film could have been much more informative If the Cheshire police had not refused to take part or there were cameras in the court but because these aren't available the film makers rely mainly on family footage and press coverage and its far too long a film to be just filled with these scenes . It would have been easier to watch if it could have been cut by half an hour at least .

The main thing I got out of this film is how the family dealt with their tragedy. It's truly amazing how they seemed to cope. I'm pretty sure it would have finished me.

Any typical Forensic Files episode is an order of magnitude more interesting, at less than a quarter of the running length. This doc doesn't add anything to what we already find out in the 1st 5 minutes, nothing surprising or new, and takes 2 hrs not doing that. As such, not clear why this was made, just looks like an something originating on a list of pitches that a documentary film maker would make to HBO so they can pick up a pay check

The movie presents chilling portraits of evil. Two career criminals commit capital crimes against innocent victims who are described with respect and sympathy. After setting fire to the crime scene, the murderers flee but waiting police capture them almost immediately. Viewers learn the murderers' backgrounds but are left to weigh factors that might have contributed to wilful depravity.

The documentary suggests that police could have done more to avoid the deadly outcome. For almost 30 minutes, police observed the victims' home but took no actions. They chose not to enter the house, despite knowing the woman and her two children were captive. A victims' relative thought police intended to keep an intact perimeter to ensure capture of the criminals. Rescuing victims seemed secondary.

Whether police actions were excusable or not is uncertain but it is certain that officials refused to be accountable for their decisions. Transcripts of conversations involving police were almost entirely redacted and, according to the filmmakers, officials would not respond to family letters nor make comments that were anything more than tasteless self-congratulations.

Ultimately, the program turns to capital punishment. Suffering family members take positions in the film in favour while other voices counter the arguments. This not a definitive examination of the death penalty but filmmakers note that a possibility of death sentences, while failing to deter the killers, was a complicating factor at trial. But for it, the case would have been resolved in weeks instead of years.

The film is a balanced examination of the crime, the criminals, the victims and the justice institutions. I was intrigued also by the subtle review of religion. It offered comfort to victims but was shown as a contributor to the personal disintegration of a youthful killer whose adoptive parents had refused him recommended therapy, opting instead for bible camp, hoping prayer would be corrective.

A solid and moving effort.

On July 22, 2007, William Petit was a successful doctor, living the dream with his wife and two daughters in the Connecticut town of Cheshire, population circa 29,000. By the following night he was lying in a hospital bed battered and beaten. Far, far worse, he was a widower, the lives of his wife and both daughters snuffed out by two lowlifes whose crime was as shocking as any we have come to see in this at times cruel world. Even his home had been burned out, and the psychological trauma he and his immediate family suffered does not bear thinking about.

This HBO documentary begins with the aftermath of the crime and ends with the trial of Joshua Komisarjevsky; both men were sentenced to death. It contains some unpleasant footage but no autopsy photos or reconstructions. Remarkably it manages to cover the case from all angles speaking to the father of Jennifer Hawke-Petit, the daughter and both brothers of killer Steven Hayes, and the youthful girlfriend of his partner-in-crime along with the defense attorneys of both men and the prosecution. The latter's love interest spoke candidly; she said Komisarjevsky liked to tie her up. In this day and age there is nothing shocking about this revelation, but tying up an 11 year old girl, raping her and setting her on fire is no sane person's idea of kinky sex.

The family of Hayes have mixed feelings, his young daughter Alicia feels sorry for him while his brothers believe he should be executed. Although Hayes is the older man, there is little doubt that Komisarjevsky has earned himself a hotter spot in Hell; he was said always to have had a preference for young girls; one contributor to this film said he told Komisarjevsky he was a paedophile; if he were not then, he is now. At the penalty phase of his trial, the claim was made that he was sexually abused as a child; this claim appears to be true, but it mitigates how? More interestingly, Komisarjevsky is said to have a photographic memory and to be a talented artist, the drawings displayed here are certainly evidence of such talent; it's just a pity he had to squander it.

It seems unlikely now that either man will be executed. Not mentioned here is the fact that Hayes has boasted of committing many other murders, but this may simply be bravado.

There is a lot more in this documentary, and some people may find it too much for their sensibilities, but it is a remarkable work that deserves a wide audience.