L'Affaire Yara: sans le moindre doute ?

This show is TERRIBLE to watch. Not because of the story. The story is sad. The production is terrible. It goes back and forth in time. Why??? It's pointless. Tell the story chronologically. Why not?

Plus, either do it all in ENGLISH or don't do it!! Do a version for Italy if you want to hear Italian. It's terrible to hear both English and Italian at the same time. Very hard to listen to.

They flash who the people are for one tenth of a nanosecond in Italian. Put it in ENGLISH. That is who the customers are in THE USA.

The news reporters are in Italian. Why?? Just do it all in one language. This really takes away from the documentary.

The kidnapping and murder of 13 year old girl Yara Gambirasio could turn out to be one of the most important cases in international criminal history. As one of the pioneers of DNA evidence, Peter Gill has said - 'DNA should never be used alone to convict a criminal, but with a combination of other evidence.'

Never before has a better case been made than in this tragic case, where a very likely probability is that there is currently an innocent man languishing in an Italian for a crime he may well not have committed.

Despite almost shooting itself in the foot, by presenting the facts of the case with two non linear time lines, this documentary never the less presents a balanced view of a case that Italy was so desperate to have an answer for, an innocent man may well have gone to prison for the crime.

The more likely scenario is that a serial killer is still on the loose in Italy who may have been responsible for more than one murder.

The victim, who quite rightly is often at the forefront of this story, was a bright dance student from a normal middle class Italian family. Yara disappeared on a cold winters evening while walking back from the local sports hall to her house, a walk which only would have taken 10-15 minutes.

From the word go several vital mistakes were made in the case. A proper search was not carried out of key premises, nor key potential witnesses including the janitor of the gym until some time later. The victim herself wasn't found for three months, in an area that was already searched several times, suggesting it was highly probable she was placed there at a later date.

A DNA profile was completed from a sample found on the victims body but the way in which was constructed appears to be flawed and convoluted, it was also evidence which later denied to the defence, and an order was given that would effectively destroy the last remaining samples. Other potential scenarios and perpetrators were not followed up, and the entire prosecution was flawed and evidence was manufactured to favour their case.

You really need to see this series for yourself and draw your own conclusions, but I have a feeling history will not be kind to those in this case who have put a local brick layer in prison.

But please, enough with the non-linear narratives.

The reason i didn't give this a 10 is that I don't really like the way it is arranged. The timeline is confusing and keeps bringing you forward and back many times. I would have preferred a more linear narration. The soundtracks are a little bit offbeat, and it's such a mess because I think that visually a good job has been done, and the sound accompaniment should be fundamental to give authenticity and power to a work of this kind.

This show fulfills a fundamental role, which is to bring to the attention of the general public a version of the facts that is not the institutional one.

Sometimes institutions make mistakes, and sometimes, rather than admitting their mistake, they continue to act wrongfully. This is a pattern that has been repeated many times in history and which could correspond to this tale.

The thing i appreciated most about this miniseries is that it does not try to convince you of Massimo Bossetti's innocence, but simply gives you all the possible elements to doubt the institutions. Doubting institutions is essential to avoid being dominated by them.

This documentary should just be called "A one sided case for the defence of an obviously guilty man". Because that's what it is. I didn't pick up on it until the end of the third episode just how formulaic it was. It's like this: 1) bring up a point that makes Bossetti look clearly guilty or just plain bad. (Which he is. And which he is.) 2) have the defence lawyer and other advocates explain it away. Oh it's nothing. Could happen to anyone. 3) quote the prosecution to make them look incompetent. 4) quote the defence again to explain what a farce it all was and how biased the media is. 5) we, the viewer, are supposed to be shocked and outraged at Italy's legal system, and are meant to somehow feel sorry for the utter psycho Bossetti and his wife.

One of these 5-step cycles lasts about 8 mins. So repeat it for about 25 different points. Most of which make him look very guilty, but we are meant to feel sorry for him because of the media storm. Or something. The documentary makers even try to muddy the waters and divert blame to completely innocent people just because some touch dna (not blood!) of a woman was found on the dead girl's jacket sleeve. (Umm hello. Bossetti's dna was found on her underwear. I think this counts for more.)

Netflix has done it again. You think people would have learnt after being sucked in by Making A Murderer. This one is just as deceptive. But it seems to be working with people who cannot think critically about what they're watching.

This documentary cought my attention, it is heartbreaking as any similar case would be and I was really interested in finding out what happened but on the half of second episode I had to stop watching because of disturbed timeline. Constant back and forth between various years is making me nervous and I can't follow any more what is happening when. Don't understand the reason behind this but I see it often in documentaries lately especially true crimes. It's purpose is I suppose to make dynamics which is fine but should be made moderately. This just confuses, iritates and makes documentary impossible to follow.