The Unsolved Murder of Beverly Lynn Smith

If I ever hear one more Leaf come at the US again about our legal system, this is getting tossed in their smug face.

This poor guy is mentally deficient, was duped by unscrupulous officers with ridiculous behavior and tactics that would make the most insidious mob bosses squirm, but they're willing to stand by this insane practice as being legitimate?

Between this, the wife's friend who somehow knows how to coax confessions (she should be imprisoned), the family that somehow cannot fathom innocent people confessing (although it's hard to be too angry with her family, but still, this is now well documented fact that innocent people have and will confess given certain circumstances) the lead investigator with about as much of a moral compass as a sea squid, and the idiot himself WHO WAS TOLD BY HIS ATTORNEYS TO TRUST NO ONE, and it's a catastrophic failure of jurisprudence of epic proportions.

I'd say their best bet and most likely suspect is the husband, and more emphasis should have been placed there- this simple minded guy IS NOT the killer, and all of these officers should be reprimanded and forced to admit their incompetence. But given that this is occurring under one of the most inept PMs I've ever seen, it's certainly no surprise.

This could have been a single episode, two at most. Four was far too drawn out and labored for effect.

What a story. I think this could have been done with fewer episodes and not so much repetition. The case itself is interesting with twists and turns and kooky characters, but in the end there was no resolution. This is fine if they were just trying to bring a cold case to light and get some justice.

It also felt as if the family and others were all holding back information. This could have been the fault of the doc makers though.

I do suggest watching it if you like true crime and unsolved crimes.

You will understand that a Cop that thinks you did a crime will do just about anything ( even illegal actions) to prove you guilty. This was an egregious case and I've been in front of a multitude of Narcissist Cops who believe they should be worshipped as ABOVE EVERYTHING. I'm a reformed former criminal and I know my fair share of how the dark side goes, how things are done.. Why things are done.. Why cops go Dirty.. how law enforcement are flipped.. Outlaw bike clubs have been flipping Cops and Prison guards for as long as there have been cops and prison guards... If I were to add my own view on this case as opinion only.. When your dealing drugs, and you don't connect any way with any organized group.. your going to get hurt.. drug dealers don't want competition they want expansion and sales.. Selling anything is still about Hierarchy... if Doug didn't have permission it may be under the radar for some time, but eventually he'd get big enough to get noticed. Probably warned.. and then probably dealt with. So my direction would be to look into the bigger dealers in the area, and who they work for... that's where I would look. Doug might even know, but is too scared to say anything. The "Mister Big" stings are flawed... the flaw is most of these are ordinary citizens put into extraordinary situations.. they will say something only because this might have been the only crime they've been in contact with in their lives... so it ends up being the first thing they bring up when they're looking for "DIRT" It's so egregious that most countries WONT ALLOW IT... how about you? Tell the truth OPP Durham police botched the criminal investigation in this case and you didn't have any way of fixing it besides trying to frame a man that you knew didn't do it.

With all due respect to the victim's family and friends, it's a story that should be told but it's a shame it was this gang who told it. This is another 'gibney' type clone where the producers seem to think that splashing a lot of images and using quick edits you won't notice that the film is dragging way behind the story. You could write the whole story down in 100 words or less but they take 3 hrs to tell it in film. I won't give away the story because that would be unfair to those who want to waste 3 hrs watching this but trust me, you can use fast forward and you won't miss a thing. Don't look for the plot twists they promise at the beginning because they're not there, and there's no closure at the end either despite the interviews.

There's hundreds of hours of audio and evidence of Al talking about the murder, but the producers cherry-picked and left important facts out to fit their narrative.

Why didn't they have anyone that actually knew Al in the doc from before the age of 10? Just his sister that hadn't seen him in 25 years, 4 defence lawyers, and a journalist that's friends with his lawyer?

Why didn't they have Bev's sisters read the parts of the judge's decision where he said that Al lost his temper with "Jack" and threatened him after Jack had cancelled a meetup for payment? Or the part where Al went and dug up the boots he had buried of Jack's, took a picture of them, then wrote on it "Pay up, you dig?" Or the part where he said he doesn't believe the police had tunnel vision and only evidence led them to suspect Al and that the confession was "without prompting"?

They didn't even spell Bev's name right in the title.

Do your own research, please.