The only episode of Forensic Files where the forensics DON'T add up?

Peter Thomas

Lola Cator

Sandy Maloney

Investigators sifted through the ashes of a fire that had killed a 40-year-old woman, the estranged wife of a police officer. At first glance, the fire appeared to have been started by an unattended cigarette. But when forensic sc...

Burning Desire

The only episode of Forensic Files where the forensics DON&apos;T add up?

I&apos;ll get straight to the point- the weak &quot;evidence&quot; in this episode doesn&apos;t support the conclusion, and thus showcases a possibly innocent man being victimized by a corrupt justice system and then further degraded by the unfair representation of the episode. The entire time I found myself becoming increasingly uneasy about some blatant flaws in the investigation and the way the show describes the case, and it becomes a very frustrating episode to watch. To the show&apos;s credit, we have seen many episodes of Forensic Files where these exact same forms of evidence have been proven to be &quot;junk science&quot; and investigator error and the forensic review is actually what frees a falsely convicted person. However, that makes it all the more jarring to see this show do a 180° and present the supposed evidence of this case (which we have learned from other Forensic Files episodes to be faulty or incomplete forensics), as if they are irrefutable interpretations and we as viewers should feel satisfied with the science and that this man is in prison based on these apparent facts. They show a tape of an alleged confession in which the accused is under duress and still does not confess, and questionable tactics were used. I was left with such an intensly bad feeling after the episode that I did further reading on this case, and I was disappointed to find a plethora of additional evidence and information that the show omitted which make it even more clear that the science and investigating the show reported were incomplete and highly questionable and the convicted man received a biased and unfair trial. In fact, it isn&apos;t clear there was a crime committed at all. The only saving graces for the episode is that they included interviews from both the accused and his children and allowed them to state that they believed the investigators were wrong, and that it is still bringing attention to this case. Very disappointed that this episode of a show which is supposed to be about science and justice feels more like propaganda and misinformation. Love Forensic Files, but skip this episode.

I'll get straight to the point- the weak "evidence" in this episode doesn't support the conclusion, and thus showcases a possibly innocent man being victimized by a corrupt justice system and then further degraded by the unfair representation of the episode. The entire time I found myself becoming increasingly uneasy about some blatant flaws in the investigation and the way the show describes the case, and it becomes a very frustrating episode to watch. To the show's credit, we have seen many episodes of Forensic Files where these exact same forms of evidence have been proven to be "junk science" and investigator error and the forensic review is actually what frees a falsely convicted person. However, that makes it all the more jarring to see this show do a 180° and present the supposed evidence of this case (which we have learned from other Forensic Files episodes to be faulty or incomplete forensics), as if they are irrefutable interpretations and we as viewers should feel satisfied with the science and that this man is in prison based on these apparent facts. They show a tape of an alleged confession in which the accused is under duress and still does not confess, and questionable tactics were used. I was left with such an intensly bad feeling after the episode that I did further reading on this case, and I was disappointed to find a plethora of additional evidence and information that the show omitted which make it even more clear that the science and investigating the show reported were incomplete and highly questionable and the convicted man received a biased and unfair trial. In fact, it isn't clear there was a crime committed at all. The only saving graces for the episode is that they included interviews from both the accused and his children and allowed them to state that they believed the investigators were wrong, and that it is still bringing attention to this case. Very disappointed that this episode of a show which is supposed to be about science and justice feels more like propaganda and misinformation. Love Forensic Files, but skip this episode.

Investigators sifted through the ashes of a fire that had killed a 40-year-old woman, the estranged wife of a police officer. At first glance, the fire appeared to have been started by an unattended cigarette. But when forensic scientists looked closely, they discovered the cause was far more complicated. Originally aired as Season 9, Episode 6.

bappamtv

Burning Desire

🎭 Top Cast

🎬 Technical Specs

🎯 Categories

⭐ Featured Review

📖 Synopsis