Indictment: The McMartin Trial

It is 1983, and Ray Buckey- a teacher at his grandmother's preschool- is arrested after numerous children accuse him of sexual assault. Awaiting trial, Buckey is assigned fast-talking defence attorney Danny Davis, who isn't interested in whether he in innocent or not; only caring about the mechanics of the law. As the trial unfurls, however, Davis becomes increasingly disturbed by the way social worker Kee MacFarlane extracted the children's confessions of abuse, and starts to believe in Buckey's innocence. Will Davis be able to convince the jury, or will Buckey be found guilty on all counts?

Directed by Mick Jackson from a screenplay by Abby and Myra Mann, 'Indictment: The McMartin Trial' is a riveting retelling of a sadly true story that is prescient and relevant- perhaps even more so now than when it was first broadcast. A frightening and gripping court-room procedural, the Mann's narrative moves at a brisk pace and is brimming with strong dialogue, both humorous and dramatic. They raise interesting questions about the reliability of memory, the validity of testimony and the ethics of investigation, while their examination of the McMartin case exposes a multitude of flaws, in the world of social care work, the legal profession and- particularly- society in general.

The Mann's use the McMartin case to shine a light on one of the more troublesome aspects of modern society: the rush to judgement after an accusation is made. The media controlled the discourse around Buckey, painting him as a criminal before his trial even started, dictating the opinion of the masses in regards to same. The film criticises the idea that accusations should be- and are- considered as fact before proper investigation, and that accusers should always be believed. Though in the 90s, when the film was made, this was certainly topical; in the era of MeToo it feels even more so.

While the filmmakers lean on the side of Buckey, they don't take a simplistic or one-sided view of the case, rather exploring the complexities and ambiguities of the evidence and relating testimonies. In addition, the procedural elements are well-realized, with the scenes involving Davis preparing Buckey for court being especially grounded and believable. Furthermore, Jackson's inclusion of actual archival footage and real-life interviews adds a sense of stark realism to proceedings that bolsters the overall narrative impact.

Moreover, Rodrigo García's muted cinematography is subtle, contributing to the mood of the piece but never distracting or dominating scenes. His use of close-ups and artificial lighting in the court-room sequences is particularly effective, while he manifests suspense with his utilisation of low-angles and wide shots. He creates a realistic and immersive atmosphere, which is only compounded by Peter Rodgers Melnick's subdued score and Howard Cummings's unobtrusive production design.

'Indictment: The McMartin Trial' finds James Woods starring as Danny Davis, delivering a typically energetic performance both engaging and entertaining. Woods handles the comic and dramatic with equal aplomb, never appearing as anything other than authentic, whether in court or out of it. He carries the film, and works well alongside co-stars Mercedes Ruehl and Henry Thomas. Ruehl, for her part, does strong work as the prosecuting attorney, who has her own stake in the game; while Thomas's performance as Ray Buckey is nuanced and sympathetic. Also worth mentioning is Lolita Davidovich, who steals all her scenes as the sinister and saccharine Kee MacFarlane with ease.

A powerful and pointed made for TV Movie, 'Indictment: The McMartin Trial' retells an important chapter of modern history that should never be forgotten. An indictment of society and those who rush to judgement, it is both relevant and compelling, featuring punchy dialogue, sharp cinematography and a fine score. Boasting strong performances from the likes of James Woods, Henry Thomas and Lolita Davidovich, Mick Jackson's 'Indictment: The McMartin Trial' is a film innocent of irrelevance and guilty of greatness.

Indictment is a movie showing how untested pop psychology and bad (circular) reasoning can still produce witch hunts in this day and age, and an appeal to both the viewer and the public in general to always keep a critical eye towards the facts like a laser beam.

Nor was this case a one-off. In fact, when I saw the announcement for this movie, I thought it was about the "Little Rascals Day Care Center" in Edison, NC. Only a year before the McMartins were released from jail, an almost cloned incident happened in Edison, when the owner, Robert Kelly jr. and his wife were charged with massive child abuse - as well as satanism, cannibalism, abductions... they were also accused of taking the children along in space ships, killing animals, sacrificing babies in the middle of the day care center during open hours, etc (although no children were ever reported missing). There too, the case started out with a single vindictive mother with an agenda of her own, and was built upon "recovered memories", etc.

However, unlike the McMartins, who spent up to half a decade in jail awaiting trial, the Kelly's were actually convicted and sentenced to twelve consecutive life sentences. Their convictions were later quashed on appeal.

What is also shown out in this movie is the way "true believers" think. Kee, played by the gorgeous Lolita Davidovitch, doesn't look for corrobable evidence, but simply affirmation of her already drawn up conclusions. Here is where the circular thinking comes in. When a child is asked if it has been abused, and the answer is yes, then it must be telling the truth. However, if the answer is no, then something must be keeping them from telling the truth, in this case, "they're in denial". And so they will be cojoled, even threatened, until the answer is yes. They how's, when's and even who's are less important, and as a result many of testimony becomes fantastical, even impossible. Or, to quote from an article on False Memory Syndrome:

"When the victim responds, " but I get along fine with my parents, they aren't perverts". - the trusted advisor responds, "Wow, they must have been really horrible for you to have repressed it that deep. If you won't recall, you won't get better." "

Also, Gerardo and OJ trial regular Ira Reiner (who gravely described OJ's gloves as "loosely fitting, working man's gloves") don't come off very well at all, not surprisingly.

Nor have these modern witch hunts limited themselves to North America - there have been similar mass arrests after allegations of satanic abuse in the north of Scotland, recently in the UK the daily mail undertook a campaign of publicly naming child molesters, many of whom were confused with other people, one man had a neckbrace like one of the men in the newspaper and needed police protection after both his and his neighbors house had been stoned, and a PEDiatrician needed protection after children had painted "PEDo" on her house. Nor is mass hysteria and mass psychology limited to child abuse - recently in Holland a scuzzy politician tried to whip up public support by claiming as "outrageous" the number of middle aged citizens of Maroccan and Turkish descent claiming disability - totally and conveniently ignoring the fact that among the physically demanding and dangerous industries, like steel, chemicals, and the cleaning industry, these groups were hugely over represented in the decades after WWII and still are today.

This movie is an indictment of mass hysteria, and is an appeal for every citizen to think for him or herself, and be very critical, even cynical of whatever news is presented to them on a platter every night at six.

See it.

Indictment really catches the mind and makes you think. How one day, everything is normal and fine, but then it is instantly turned upside down. Of course for the McMartin family, there world is turned upside down in the most horrifying way: they, who ran a child-care facility, are accused of child molestation. With exception of Danny Davis (brilliantly played by James Woods) and the defense, the McMartin family is friendless and the issue of wheter they did it or not is lost on the public. They make the assumption they did it and treat them like dirt. It's like a modern Salem witch hunt. People like to be optimistic and think something like this will never happen in the US and people accused of a crime will never be treated this way, but this movie really proves the notion of 'Innocent until proven guilty' can be lost on people when the crime is big enough. See this movie.

Tremendously disturbing and well-acted film. What is most troubling is the fact that this episode really occurred. Remarkable portrayal of how easily something like this can get so totally out of control. It is hard to imagine this feeding frenzy among, supposedly, educated and sophisticated people. James Woods is dead-on perfect as an initially slimy, opportunistic attorney, who finds himself slowly horrified by what he finds himself in the middle of. His courtroom questioning of Dr. McFarlane (Lolita Davidovich)is riveting. An impressive, well-done movie, but extremely troubling for what it says about our justice system.

Because I don't! I defy anyone who has ever been involved in a serious legal trial to state that western nations have a great and just legal system. The Mcmartin trial represents a real failure of our system and should be a warning of what can happen.

Similar trials happened in Australia, England and here in New Zealand. We had an innocent man here put in prison on the basis of hysteria. Although, many conspiracy nuts would state that abusive satanic cults exist and are covered up by the highest levels of government.

The actors that play the Mcmartin's are very good and you real feel sorry for them as they are caught in a nightmare not unlike Kafka's, the trial. James Woods is also good playing the motor mouth defence lawyer. Oliver Stone is also involved as the producer, which is no surprise. I bet both of these guys know whats up and want to expose the stupidity that was America's longest and most costly legal battle. Remember this trial went for 10 years!

The film explores all the things that made this trial a joke. The highly leading questions asked by social workers to children. The fact that Mcfarlane pressured the children to admit to sexual abuse. The politicians using this as a spring board to getting elected. The fact that the children even identify Chuck Norris as one of the villains. The correctly defined anatomical dolls. Judy Johnson and her bizarre alcoholic, schizophrenic ravings. The children giving bizarre confessions where they would be flown out to places to be abused. Then came satanism. The children stating that they were brought through tunnels and abused underground. No physical evidence of tunnels were ever found under the Mcmartin pre-school. The Mcmartins apparently dressed in black robes, chanted and ritually abused the children according to the victims.

Does anyone find any of this highly unlikely?

Normally if you are going to sexually abuse children, by the time you get to Peggy Buckey's age you have a major history. Child molesters do not just fall out of the sky. This case is about cultural anxiety. At this point in history the two genders had become more equalized. Both mom and dad were working. So more and more parents were dropping off their kids at daycare centers. The problem was that many people felt very nervous about their kids being at these centers. An actual book came out reporting abuse that went on in daycare centers. I have not read this book but I would imagine only a minority of centers would be abusive to kids. As things become more equal the divorce rates were also increasing as woman were walking out of bad marriages. This just increased the uncertainty felt at this time.

The problem is that there are still people who think that the Mcmartins are guilty. I am all for stopping molesters but this is just getting hysterical. It is exactly the same as the Salem witch trials. We think that we have changed since then. Well we haven't really! We can still just as easily deceive ourselves. If you look around the web you will still find websites that claim that the tunnels existed and there was a huge government cover up. Why would the government bother? Even if the Buckeys were working for a satanic pornography ring that is connected to the government, which I highly doubt. Why wouldn't the government then hang the Buckey's out to dry if they were caught? If they stated that they were satanic molesters working for the government then they would look crazy.

The other pet peeve I have about this case is that Kee Mcfarlane and her ilk were never held accountable for their actions. Social workers and mental health workers should be held more accountable. Mcfarlane's poor interview techniques caused children to believe that they were victims of a satanic cult. It seems the higher up in the food chain that you are. The more likely that you'll never be held accountable for your actions. It is a sad fact but in my experience and observations, it is a true fact.

Satanic ritual abuse has been proven to be false. The whole thing collapsed when the FBI, lead by Kenneth Lanning, COULD NOT FIND ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER of the existence of any satanic cults. Lanning's official report is available online. However the conspiracy nuts state this is just more evidence of a cover up. That the FBI are part of this satanic cult or that the cult is so extraordinarily tricky that they avoid detection. I don't know about you dear reader but this sounds ridiculous to me! Lanning used the sound logic that the bigger the cult the more physical evidence that they would leave. None was ever found.

The infamous Laurence Pazder was even involved in this trial. The man who with Michelle Smith gave us Michelle remembers. The book that started the whole SRA hysteria. Why satanism? If you ACTUALLY read Anton Lavey he states that you should treat animals and humans with respect. His writings are also a rip off of Ayn Rand. Some ultra right wing people will be disturbed and not very happy about that fact!

I would also like to add that this hysteria still goes on. The case of the West Memphis three to me is the most infamous. You have three young men convicted of child murder. Why? Because they dared to dress in black, explore alternative belief systems, such as Wicca and listened to heavy metal. Most notably Metallica. Madness! All of this is dangerous madness!

The last peeve I have is that because of this mess. The teaching profession has taken the most major blows. Here in New Zealand there are few male teachers, 90 percent of teachers are now female. This issue is one of the major factors of why men no longer want to become teachers. They are afraid of being accused of child molestation. Men who want to work with children, especially young children, are considered to be strange. No real man wants to work with kids! This modern hysteria has only added to this cultural stereotype. As a result our school system suffers as boys struggle to find male role models. Boys are failing but girls are succeeding.

Some films have to be watched so we can learn from them and not repeat our own mistakes. This film is also a critique of the legal system. To me it illustrates that some fundamental changes have to happen for our legal system to function adequately. I give this 10 out of 10 and think everyone should have to watch it. All those who have never had dealings with the courts, well this is an education and a half.