🔗 Share this article

The true crime genre has a new medium, or perhaps even a whole new language and grammar: officer-worn camera recordings. Countenances of those harmed, witnesses and possible perpetrators appear suddenly to the cameras, sometimes in the harsh glare of headlights or torches as the police arrive, their faces and voices eloquent of caution or fear or anger or suspiciously contrived innocence. And we frequently incidentally glimpse the faces of the officers themselves, one waiting impassively while the other conducts the inquiry with what sometimes seems like extraordinary diffidence – though maybe this is because they know they are being recorded.

An Emerging Pattern in Non-Fiction Cinema

We have already had the Netflix real-life crime film The Gabby Petito Case, about the killing of an social media personality by her partner, whose main point of interest was officer recordings and in which, as in this film, the law enforcement seemed extraordinarily lax with the perpetrator. There is also Bill Morrison’s Oscar-nominated short Incident, made exclusively of body cam film. Now comes a new film by Geeta Gandbhir about the tragic incident of a Florida mother in Ocala, Florida, a African American woman whose four young kids reportedly bothered and antagonized her white neighbour, a local resident. In 2023, after an escalating series of neighborhood conflicts in which the authorities were repeatedly called, Lorincz fatally shot Owens through her locked door, when Owens went to Lorincz’s house to address her about hurling items at her children.

The Police Inquiry and State Laws

The arresting officers found proof that Lorincz had done internet searches into Florida’s “stand your ground” laws, which allow householders and others to shoot if there is a reasonable belief of danger. The movie builds its story with the officer recordings generated during the multiple officer calls to the location before the shooting, and then at the disturbing and disordered incident site itself – prefaced by 911 audio material of Lorincz calling the police in a melodramatically shaky voice. There is also police cell footage of Lorincz which has a chilly, queasy fascination.

Depiction of the Suspect

The film does not really suggest anything too complex about the neighbor, or any mitigating factors. She is clearly unstable, although the children are heard calling her a derogatory term, an hurtful taunt. The film is presented as an illustration of how self-defense regulations lead to senseless and tragic violence. But the fact of gun ownership and the constitutional right (that historic American constitutional privilege that a deceased pundit famously claimed made gun deaths a necessary cost) is not much emphasized.

Police Interrogation and Gun Culture

It is possible to watch the officer questioning segments here and feel astonished at how minimal concern the police took in this point. When did she buy her gun? Did she receive any instruction on handling it? Was this the first time she discharged the weapon? How was the gun kept in her home? Could it have been easily accessible and prepared? The police aren’t shown asking any of these surely relevant questions (though they may have done in footage that didn’t make the edit). Or is possessing a firearm so commonplace it would be like asking about microwaves or bread heaters?

Detention and Consequences

For what appeared to her neighbors a very long time, Lorincz was not even taken into custody and indicted, only held and even provided accommodation away from home for the night (another point of comparison, incidentally, with the a prior incident). And when she was ultimately officially taken into custody in the holding cell, there is an extraordinary sequence in which the individual simply declines to rise, refuses to put her wrists out for the handcuffs, not hostilely, but with the politely self-pitying air of someone whose psychological state means that she is unable to comply. Had the kid-gloves treatment up until that point encouraged her to think that this could be effective?

Conclusion and Verdict

It didn’t; and the panel's decision is saved for the end titles. A deeply sobering picture of U.S. justice and consequences.