Sometimes it's not easy to solve a murder. In this series, a much discussed crime from 20 years ago is re-investigated. Viewed from a distance, it's certainly true that a lot of the story told by the prosecution feels vulnerable. But I disliked the series. Endlessly repetitive, it makes hits in every direction, but without commitment to any alternative hypothesis. For example, someone is certain they saw the victim alive after his supposed death; the program presents his assertions, then just moves on, asking us to suggest the convicted man should not have been found guilty, while doing nothing to reassure us he is actually innocent. Meanwhile, it attacks the dead man's girlfriend by repeating the charge of the press at the time that her refusal to cry in public was a sign of her own guilt. It's an indictment of the series that the vileness of a certain sort of journalism is inadvertantly demonstrated far more clearly than Bradley Murdoch's innocence or guilt.
Review of Murder in the Outback
