West Of Memphis Summary

The documentary West of Memphis, directed by Amy J. Berg in 2012, is about the Murder of three eight-year-old boys. The evolving of the story positions the audience to accept that the West Memphis three were the victims of personal greed, and a miscarriage of justice cause by upbringing as “trailer trash”. Which is soon shown to allegations and not based off solid evidence. Growing up I was taught to be honest a helpful and obviously treat people with respect, but I was taught that the authorities should also have the same morals. By doing so it causes a rejected reading as I disagree with the actions of Assistant Prosecutor Fogelman, and Damien Echols as I cannot relate to either of them as Fogelman demonstrated self-interest at the expense …show more content…
By using this compels the audience and makes them blinded and automatically come to a guilty conclusion causing the audience to be overwhelmed with images of the crime scene and the boys dismembered bodies. This is also used to show the timeline of events as time is moving so quickly throughout showing how long the West Memphis three have been sitting in jail after a biased trial causing them to spend the entirety of life behind bars. The documentary uses cuts of traffic moving over bridges and driving along showing how the complex nature of the case unravels and shows the constant battle to free the West Memphis three showing how they are venturing an moving forward by reaching the other side of the bridge is like proceeding and coming closer to freeing them, Also shows how the evidence against the decision is mounting up as it gains momentum to change and appeal the decisions made which ruined and halted the life’s of three 18 year-old boys from experiencing their lives. The use of snippets shows the audience the turning point in the case where finally the campaign for the west Memphis three has been gaining followers to overturn the decision and expose the misuse of …show more content…
During the film in the first trial, they are found guilty by Jessies Testimony and the proclaimed murder weapon “a fishing knife”. From my personal upbringing, I would have expected a higher ethic displayed by Fogelman as throughout the trial he was blatantly biased against the west Memphis three as he saw them as white trailer trash so no one on earth would care about misjustice that they in fact didn’t commit the crime. The only reason Fogelman took on the case as that it would have been the case to lose, the most important part was that he solely would look like a hero putting three murders behind bars and being able to progress in the corporate ladder. Having such self interest in the case cases corruption between choices and decisions on guilty or innocent verdicts causing unrestrained biased against the evidence shown in the Ali bias. From being brought up honest and not greedy, when a personal in power can gain of a decision it is found to be invalid and caused me to disagree and form hatred towards Fogelman as he doesn’t care what he effects with his own