The Cheshire Murders

I personally believe that the death penalty is wrong but when you watch a documentary like this it's hard to argue that point as the two beasts that committed these crimes are the lowest of the low .

This documentary is about a brutal home invasion in Cheshire, Connecticut in 2007. In the quiet suburb of Cheshire, Connecticut, Jennifer Petit and her two young daughters were killed in a horrific home invasion; husband and father William Petit was the only one who escaped alive.

It's difficult to rate a documentary like this for entertainment purposes because nobody should be entertained by what they are seeing here . The details are horrific but the film makers do hold back for the viewers and families sake .

The film could have been much more informative If the Cheshire police had not refused to take part or there were cameras in the court but because these aren't available the film makers rely mainly on family footage and press coverage and its far too long a film to be just filled with these scenes . It would have been easier to watch if it could have been cut by half an hour at least .

The main thing I got out of this film is how the family dealt with their tragedy. It's truly amazing how they seemed to cope. I'm pretty sure it would have finished me.

This documentary explores some compelling subjects around The Cheshire home invasion murders. 1) Police cover-up. The police were outside the residence for a full half hour and took no action until the criminals fled the home. They could have prevented most of the crime. Why? We can only speculate. 2) Death penalty. Death penalty is a controversial subject. One thing that's stressed in the movie, regardless of whether you're pro- or anti- , is that it's a very lengthy and expensive process. The system is broken. 3) Background of the murderers. We learn about their early lives, their motivations, etc. The conclusions that I've made: a history of mental illness and child abuse played a crucial role. They don't justify any of the crimes, but does bring into light the importance of treating mental illness and about the consequences of child abuse.

We also learn, in as much detail as possible, how the entire incident played out. We also learn about the victims and victims' family. This is all through interviews with many people. It's tragic, emotional, and from a documentary film perspective it's informative, interesting and somewhat impartial.

Last words: People who already know all about the Cheshire murders may not get the interviews and new information they expect. So if that's you, then maybe this documentary will be a disappointment. I'd never heard of these murders before, so it was all very interesting. There was not a moment in those 2 hours when I felt bored.

"The Cheshire Murders" (2013 release; 118 min.) is a documentary about the vicious murders committed in Cheshire, CT in 2007. As the documentary opens, it is "July 23, 2007", and it is chaos. A bank teller has called 911 that a woman named Jennifer in the bank claims her husband and 2 daughters are being held hostage at their home. Shortly thereafter, we see the cops at the home, confirming there are 3 fatalities and that they have apprehended 2 suspects. We then step back and get to know Cheshire better. "A phenomenal town", says one. We then switch to "Chapel Hill, NC", where the parents and sister of Jennifer start commenting about what happened in 2007. At this point we are 15 min. into the film.

Couple of comments: this is another true crime documentary, looking at the gruesome murders committed by 2 savage men. There never is any question that they done what they have done, so this documentary is different from, say, the recent "Who Killed Garrett Phillips?", where we literally didn't know who did what. Instead, this documentary looks at the issue of death penalty vs. jail for like without a chance for parole. In an liberal-leaning state like Connecticut, one would expect that the death penalty is not well regarded, and indeed the Connecticut legislature passed a law banning the death penalty in 2009 but the governor vetoed it, citing the Cheshire murders. Here is the kicker: within weeks of their arrest, the defense lawyers of the murderers offer a plea bargain of life in jail without a chance for parole, and the prosecutors REJECT the plea bargain, instead deciding to go for the death penalty. This sets into motion a series of events that you'll just have to see for yourself in this gripping documentary... As a complete aside, the Cheshire police's role in how the events played out on July 23, 2007 looks shady, to say the least, hinting of incompetence. But the documentary never really pursues that angle (and notes that the Cheshire police department declined any and all requests for interviews).

As you may know, HBO has been showcasing a batch of brand new true crime documentaries this summer, all of which are worth seeking out ("I Love You , Now Die", "The Talwars: Behind Closed Doors", "Who Killed Garrett Phillips", just to name those). It was while watching these that I saw "The Cheshire Murders" mentioned. Even though this documentary is now 6 years old, it is still very relevant, and of course you can get an update on what has happened since then from many sources (including Wikipedia). If you like documentaries, and true crime in particular, I'd readily suggest you check this out on VOD, and draw your own conclusion.

Any typical Forensic Files episode is an order of magnitude more interesting, at less than a quarter of the running length. This doc doesn't add anything to what we already find out in the 1st 5 minutes, nothing surprising or new, and takes 2 hrs not doing that. As such, not clear why this was made, just looks like an something originating on a list of pitches that a documentary film maker would make to HBO so they can pick up a pay check

The movie presents chilling portraits of evil. Two career criminals commit capital crimes against innocent victims who are described with respect and sympathy. After setting fire to the crime scene, the murderers flee but waiting police capture them almost immediately. Viewers learn the murderers' backgrounds but are left to weigh factors that might have contributed to wilful depravity.

The documentary suggests that police could have done more to avoid the deadly outcome. For almost 30 minutes, police observed the victims' home but took no actions. They chose not to enter the house, despite knowing the woman and her two children were captive. A victims' relative thought police intended to keep an intact perimeter to ensure capture of the criminals. Rescuing victims seemed secondary.

Whether police actions were excusable or not is uncertain but it is certain that officials refused to be accountable for their decisions. Transcripts of conversations involving police were almost entirely redacted and, according to the filmmakers, officials would not respond to family letters nor make comments that were anything more than tasteless self-congratulations.

Ultimately, the program turns to capital punishment. Suffering family members take positions in the film in favour while other voices counter the arguments. This not a definitive examination of the death penalty but filmmakers note that a possibility of death sentences, while failing to deter the killers, was a complicating factor at trial. But for it, the case would have been resolved in weeks instead of years.

The film is a balanced examination of the crime, the criminals, the victims and the justice institutions. I was intrigued also by the subtle review of religion. It offered comfort to victims but was shown as a contributor to the personal disintegration of a youthful killer whose adoptive parents had refused him recommended therapy, opting instead for bible camp, hoping prayer would be corrective.

A solid and moving effort.