🔗 Share this article

The true crime category has a new medium, or perhaps even a whole new language and structure: police body cam footage. Faces of victims, witnesses and possible perpetrators appear suddenly to the cameras, sometimes in the harsh glare of vehicle beams or torches as the officers approach, their faces and voices expressing caution or panic or anger or suspiciously contrived innocence. And we often 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 are aware they are being recorded.

A Growing Trend in Documentary Filmmaking

We have previously seen the streaming service real-life crime film The Gabby Petito Case, about the killing of an Instagram influencer by her partner, whose primary focus was officer recordings and in which, as in this film, the law enforcement seemed extraordinarily lax with the suspect. There is also Bill Morrison’s Oscar-nominated short Incident, composed entirely of body cam film. Now comes Geeta Gandbhir’s documentary about the grim case of a Florida mother in Ocala, Florida, a African American woman whose children reportedly bothered and antagonized her neighbor, Susan Lorincz. In 2023, after an increasing number of neighborhood conflicts in which the police were repeatedly called, the accused shot Owens dead through her closed front 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 the suspect had done online research into the state's self-defense statutes, which allow residents and others to use firearms if there is a reasonable belief of danger. The movie constructs its narrative with the body cam footage generated during the repeated police visits to the location before the shooting, and then at the disturbing and disordered crime scene itself – introduced by 911 audio material of Lorincz calling the police in a melodramatically shaky voice. There is also jail video of the individual 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 kids are heard calling her “the Karen”, an ugly jibe. The film is presented as an illustration of how self-defense regulations lead to unnecessary and heartbreaking violence. But the reality of gun ownership and the second amendment (that historic American constitutional privilege that a late commentator notoriously said made gun deaths a price worth paying) is not much emphasized.

Police Interrogation and Gun Culture

It is possible to watch the officer questioning segments here and feel surprised at how little interest the police took in this point. When did she buy her gun? Did she receive any instruction on handling it? Had she ever had occasion to fire it before? Where did she store it in the house? Was it just on the couch, loaded and ready? The authorities aren’t shown asking any of these surely relevant questions (though they may have done in recordings that didn’t make the edit). Or is possessing a firearm 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 taken into custody and indicted, only detained and even provided accommodation away from home for the night (another point of comparison, incidentally, with the a prior incident). And when she was finally formally arrested in the detention area, there is an extraordinary sequence in which Lorincz simply declines to rise, refuses to put her wrists out for the cuffs, not hostilely, but with the courteously pathetic demeanor of someone whose mental health means that she just can’t do it. Did the gentle handling up until that point led her to think that this might actually work?

Conclusion and Verdict

It was not successful; and the panel's decision is revealed in the end titles. A deeply sobering picture of U.S. justice and consequences.