The first two episodes were fine, although you could see Piers be a little nervous with the first interview it seems. The first two killers had their say, Piers goes over the evidence, does a good background on both of them, gives key information and evidence that actually proves they were the killer and eventually builds up all this emotion and evidence providing it to the killer, building it piece by piece. His hope is to basically make them angry or come clean after they are presented it in a nice logical rational manner to us the viewers; and he always saves his ace up his sleeve of damning evidence for last.
However, on the third episode with Henriquez Alejandro, Piers you did a real job mate. First you shouldn't have a "time limit" to which you can only talk to these killers for your show...if you haven't come to a conclusion or if there is still conversation and dialogue that isn't boring and is interesting, you don't just cut the episode and say "WELL, WERE ALL OUT OF TIME FOR THIS ONE, GO BACK TO YOUR CELL NOW". Do you know how frustrating that is for all the viewers? Like I had to google this serial killer to get more information that you didn't even mention or present in your background of him! Your episode had me on the fence that he was even guilty!!!!! But after reading more articles after a google search it was exceedingly more than likely that he was in fact the killer, and it seemed like there was some DNA evidence that you didn't even bring up, nor fake phone calls he told his nephew to make to police among other things etc. This is my first review on IMDB because this episode was aggravating to watch, and then you just cut it by calling him a liar and ran out of time.
Please do better on future episodes <3. The show is still very good everyone, it doesn't deserve a 2/10, its a solid 6.
1 out of 5 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink