Erreur judiciaire

This was the last of the great miniseries. And I had the privilege of watching it with the author. A little stressful, but on the money as far as telling the story of that horrendous crime -- and how the local police department got their sites set on one person and used only the evidence that could back up what they wanted. This has happened over and over again in our justice system, and it is the reason why the death penalty should not be in effect. Too often, the ones on death row are those who either don't have the money for a good lawyer (Hennis' parents took out a second mortgage on their home to pay for his) or are in the tunnel vision of the local police department.

"Innocent Victims" is riveting in its dramatization of a real-life murder mystery that, through the years, has only deepened. In 1985, a young mother, whose last name was Eastburn, and two of her three young daughters were brutally attacked and killed by person or persons unknown. The murders occurred in the young woman's home near Fort Bragg, North Carolina. A twenty-something soldier, named Tim Hennis was charged. The plot carries us from the point in time when the victims were found by a neighbor, all the way through the court trial of Hennis, and even further, when the case takes a bizarre twist.

The book on which the script is based does convey an unmistakable point of view. And that point of view may, or may not, be justifiable. Some of the court evidence and testimony may, or may not, be relevant. The only certainty about this case is its ambivalence, amplified by razor-sharp and profuse detail that comprise the film's three-hour runtime.

This is a TV-movie, and it shows. Plot breaks occur where TV commercials were inserted. Background music sounds canned and nondescript, suitable as elevator music. But the acting is generally credible. Tom Irwin gives a convincing performance as the senior lawyer for Hennis. John P. Connolly also adds credibility as a good-old-boy private investigator. The main problem here is the casting of baby-faced Rick Schroder as a too-youthful lawyer, who requires reading glasses. Cinematography is conventional and unobtrusive.

Most real-life murder cases are solved fairly easily. This one is altogether different. "Innocent Victims" is mesmerizing as a 1990s interpretation of a decade-old crime. Yet, the film carries even more dramatic weight because of its unforeseen irony.

In 2010, fourteen years after this film was shown, and 25 years after the crime, the case was re-opened. The new outcome is one that confounds and re-twists previous resolutions. The Eastburn murder case of 1985 seemingly is ongoing, unending.

Depending on how the current phase plays out, the 1985 crime may eventually rival The Black Dahlia murder case in ambiguity and lack of resolution. For viewers with an interest in true crime, "Innocent Victims" is a good place to begin a study of this most fascinating case.

This movie is 4 hours long, but is worth every minute of your time!! You will be glued to your seat. Realistic litigation and court room scenes and through detective work from the Defense. It really makes you think about just how people in power (the District Attorneys) that are close minded can literally ruin an innocent man's life through their arrogance. The accused man's Defense Attorneys are the kind that ALL attorneys SHOULD BE: caring and determined to get to the truth. Great movie, great script and great acting!! I recommend this movie to all. As mad and frustrated as you might get through out the movie, the end is Fantastic. It is really a shame that this is based on a TRUE story. I have seen this movie three times and each time is just as good as the first.

The actual events of this crime film are very well documented, and the actors, (Rick Schroeder, Rue McLenahan, Hal Holbrook,) are entirely believable in their characters. The miscarriage of justice that transpired,here, is only more horrifying when you realize that other "rush-to-judgment" convictions are still occurring. The fact that the final scenes and updates do not complete the story, leaves one unsatisfied, and wondering why more has not been pursued.Current forensic and technological advances, (as well as legal and courtroom proscriptions) might never have caused this case to advance as it did.This cold case should definitely be re-examined in light of today's knowledge.

Whenever I see a "based on a true story", I know that liberties will be taken with the facts, to fit the agenda of the film maker. For instance, "Voices from the grave" was a good movie, but if you've ever seen the documentary it was based on, the disclaimer should read." loosely based on actual events".

It's hard to believe a polygraph was never suggested here. And the fact that no one was ever convicted for the crime, usually means they had the right suspect to begin with. Just remember when you're watching a "true court drama", most of the time, you won't get all the facts. Chances are, this guy WAS guilty.