🔗 Share this article

The real-life crime genre has an innovative format, or perhaps even a whole new language and grammar: officer-worn camera recordings. Countenances of those harmed, observers and possible perpetrators appear suddenly to the cameras, sometimes in the harsh glare of vehicle beams or flashlights as the officers approach, their expressions and tones expressing caution or panic or anger or suspiciously contrived innocence. And we frequently incidentally glimpse the expressions of the law enforcement personnel, one standing by blankly while the other conducts the inquiry with what occasionally seems like extraordinary diffidence – though maybe this is because they know they are being recorded.

An Emerging Pattern in Documentary Filmmaking

We have previously seen the streaming service real-life crime film The Gabby Petito Case, about the killing of an social media personality by her partner, whose primary focus was officer recordings and in which, as in this film, the law enforcement seemed surprisingly lenient with the perpetrator. There is also the acclaimed short film Incident by Bill Morrison, composed entirely of officer footage. Now comes Geeta Gandbhir’s documentary about the grim case of Ajike Owens in a city in Florida, a African American woman whose children reportedly bothered and tormented her neighbor, Susan Lorincz. In 2023, after an increasing number of neighborhood conflicts in which the police were repeatedly called, Lorincz fatally shot Owens through her locked door, when Owens went to Lorincz’s house to confront her about hurling items at her children.

The Police Inquiry and State Laws

The arresting officers found proof that Lorincz had done online research into Florida’s “stand your ground” laws, which allow householders and others to use firearms if there is a reasonable belief of danger. The documentary constructs its narrative with the body cam footage captured during the multiple officer calls to the scene before the killing, and then at the disturbing and disordered crime scene itself – prefaced by emergency call recordings of the caller calling the police in a melodramatically shaky voice. There is also police cell footage of Lorincz which has a disturbing, unsettling appeal.

Portrayal of the Accused

The documentary does not really suggest anything too complicated about Lorincz, or any mitigating factors. She is obviously disturbed, although the children are heard calling her “the Karen”, an ugly jibe. The production is presented as an illustration of how self-defense regulations generate senseless and tragic violence. But the reality of firearm possession and the second amendment (that longstanding U.S. legal right that a late commentator famously claimed made gun deaths a necessary cost) is not much highlighted.

Police Interrogation and Firearm Norms

It is feasible to watch the officer questioning segments here and feel surprised at how little interest the officers took in this point. At what time did she purchase the firearm? Where (if anywhere) did she train in its use? Was this the first time she discharged the weapon? Where did she store it in the house? Was it just on the couch, loaded and ready? The police aren’t shown asking any of these undoubtedly important questions (though they could have inquired in recordings that didn’t make the edit). Or is gun ownership so commonplace it would be like asking about microwaves or bread heaters?

Detention and Consequences

For what seemed to her local residents a extended period, Lorincz was not even arrested and charged, only held and even provided accommodation away from home for the night (another parallel, by the way, with the Gabby Petito case). And when she was ultimately officially taken into custody in the holding cell, there is an extraordinary sequence in which Lorincz simply refuses to stand, refuses to put her wrists out for the cuffs, not hostilely, but with the politely self-pitying air of someone whose psychological state means that she is unable to comply. Did the gentle handling up until that point encouraged her to think that this could be effective?

Final Outcome and Judgment

It didn’t; and the jury’s verdict is revealed in the end titles. A deeply sobering picture of U.S. justice and consequences.