🔗 Share this article

The true crime genre has a new medium, or perhaps even a whole new language and structure: officer-worn camera recordings. Countenances of those harmed, observers and potential offenders appear suddenly to the cameras, at times in the intense brightness of headlights or torches as the officers approach, their expressions and tones eloquent of wariness or panic or indignation or suspiciously contrived innocence. And we often incidentally glimpse the expressions of the law enforcement personnel, one waiting impassively while the other conducts the inquiry with what sometimes seems like remarkable hesitation – though perhaps this is because they are aware they are being recorded.

A Growing Trend in Documentary Filmmaking

We have previously seen the Netflix true-crime documentary American Murder: Gabby Petito, about the killing of an social media personality by her partner, whose main point of interest was officer recordings and in which, as in this film, the law enforcement seemed extraordinarily lax with the suspect. There is also the acclaimed short film Incident by Bill Morrison, made exclusively of officer footage. Now comes a new film by Geeta Gandbhir about the grim case of Ajike Owens in Ocala, Florida, a woman of colour whose children allegedly harassed and antagonized her white neighbour, a local resident. In 2023, after an increasing number of neighbour-dispute incidents in which the authorities were summoned multiple times, the accused fatally shot Owens through her closed front door, when the victim went to Lorincz’s house to address her about hurling items at her children.

The Investigation and State Laws

The investigating authorities found proof that the suspect had done internet searches into Florida’s “stand your ground” laws, which permit residents and others to use firearms if there is a reasonable belief of danger. The documentary builds its story with the officer recordings generated during the repeated police visits to the location before the killing, and then at the disturbing and disordered crime scene itself – prefaced by 911 audio material of Lorincz contacting authorities in a melodramatically shaky voice. There is also police cell footage of the individual which has a disturbing, unsettling appeal.

Portrayal of the Accused

The film does not really imply anything too complicated about Lorincz, or any mitigating factors. She is obviously disturbed, although the children are heard calling her “the Karen”, an hurtful taunt. The production is showcased as an example of how self-defense regulations generate unnecessary and heartbreaking bloodshed. But the reality of firearm possession and the constitutional right (that historic American constitutional privilege that a late commentator notoriously said made firearm fatalities a price worth paying) is not much highlighted.

Officer Questioning and Firearm Norms

It is feasible to watch the police interrogation scenes here and feel astonished at how minimal concern the police 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? Could it have been easily accessible and prepared? The authorities aren’t shown asking any of these undoubtedly important questions (though they may have done in footage that were not included). Or is possessing a firearm so commonplace it would be like asking about microwaves or toasters?

Detention and Consequences

For what seemed to her neighbors a extended period, Lorincz was not even taken into custody and indicted, only detained and even provided accommodation away from home for the night (another parallel, incidentally, with the a prior incident). And when she was ultimately officially taken into custody in the detention area, there is an remarkable scene in which the individual simply declines to rise, refuses to put her wrists out for the handcuffs, 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 led her to think that this might actually work?

Conclusion and Verdict

It didn’t; and the jury’s verdict is saved for the closing credits. A very sombre picture of American crime and punishment.