🔗 Share this article

The true crime category has an innovative format, or perhaps even a whole new language and structure: officer-worn camera recordings. Faces of victims, observers and potential offenders loom up to the cameras, sometimes in the harsh glare of vehicle beams or torches as the police arrive, their faces and voices expressing wariness or fear or anger or dubiously feigned naivety. And we frequently catch sight of the faces of the officers themselves, one standing by blankly while the other asks the questions with what occasionally seems like extraordinary diffidence – though maybe this is because they are aware they are being recorded.

An Emerging Pattern in Documentary Filmmaking

We have already had the streaming service true-crime documentary American Murder: Gabby Petito, about the slaying of an Instagram influencer by her partner, whose primary focus was body cam footage and in which, as in this film, the law enforcement seemed surprisingly lenient with the suspect. There is also Bill Morrison’s Oscar-nominated short Incident, composed entirely of body cam film. Now comes a new film by Geeta Gandbhir about the tragic incident of Ajike Owens in Ocala, Florida, a woman of colour whose four young kids reportedly bothered and tormented her neighbor, Susan Lorincz. In 2023, after an escalating series of neighborhood conflicts in which the police were summoned multiple times, the accused fatally shot Owens through her locked door, when Owens went to Lorincz’s house to address her about hurling items at her children.

The Police Inquiry and Legal Context

The investigating authorities found proof that Lorincz had done online research into the state's self-defense statutes, which allow residents and others to shoot if there is a reasonable belief of threat. The movie constructs its narrative with the body cam footage generated during the multiple officer calls to the scene before the shooting, and then at the horrific and chaotic crime scene itself – introduced by emergency call recordings of the caller calling the police in a dramatically trembling voice. There is also jail video of Lorincz which has a disturbing, unsettling appeal.

Depiction of the Suspect

The documentary does not really suggest anything too complex about the neighbor, or any mitigating factors. She is clearly unstable, although the kids are heard calling her a derogatory term, an hurtful taunt. The film is showcased as an example of how self-defense regulations generate senseless and tragic bloodshed. But the reality of gun ownership and the constitutional right (that longstanding U.S. legal right that a deceased pundit notoriously said made gun deaths a necessary cost) is not much emphasized.

Police Interrogation and Firearm Norms

It is possible 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? Did she receive any instruction on handling it? Was this the first time she discharged the weapon? How was the gun kept in her home? Could it have been easily accessible and prepared? The police aren’t shown asking any of these undoubtedly important questions (though they could have inquired in footage that didn’t make the edit). Or is possessing a firearm so commonplace it would be like asking about kitchen appliances or toasters?

Detention and Consequences

For what seemed to her neighbors a extended period, Lorincz was not even arrested and charged, only detained and even offered a hotel stay away from home for the night (another parallel, incidentally, with the Gabby Petito case). And when she was finally officially taken into custody in the holding cell, there is an remarkable scene in which the individual simply declines to rise, refuses to put her wrists out for the cuffs, not hostilely, but with the courteously pathetic demeanor 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?

Final Outcome and Judgment

It didn’t; and the jury’s verdict is saved for the end titles. A very sombre picture of U.S. justice and consequences.