🔗 Share this article

The true crime category has a new medium, or perhaps even a whole new language and grammar: police body cam footage. Faces of victims, witnesses and potential offenders loom up to the cameras, sometimes in the harsh glare of headlights or flashlights as the officers approach, their expressions and tones expressing caution or fear or anger or dubiously feigned naivety. 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 previously seen the streaming service real-life crime film American Murder: Gabby Petito, about the killing of an Instagram influencer by her boyfriend, whose primary focus was body cam footage and in which, as in this film, the police seemed extraordinarily lax with the suspect. There is also the acclaimed short film Incident by Bill Morrison, composed entirely of officer footage. Now comes Geeta Gandbhir’s documentary about the tragic incident of Ajike Owens in a city in Florida, a African American woman whose children allegedly harassed and tormented her neighbor, a local resident. In 2023, after an increasing number of neighborhood conflicts in which the authorities were repeatedly called, Lorincz fatally shot Owens through her closed front door, when Owens went to Lorincz’s house to address her about hurling items at her children.

The Police Inquiry and Legal Context

The arresting officers found evidence that Lorincz had done online research into Florida’s “stand your ground” laws, which allow householders and others to use firearms if there is a reasonable belief of threat. The movie builds its story with the body cam footage captured during the repeated police visits to the scene before the shooting, and then at the disturbing and disordered crime scene itself – prefaced by 911 audio material of Lorincz contacting authorities in a melodramatically shaky voice. There is also jail video of the individual which has a disturbing, unsettling appeal.

Portrayal of the Accused

The film does not really suggest anything too complicated about the neighbor, or any extenuating circumstance. She is clearly unstable, although the kids are heard calling her “the Karen”, an hurtful taunt. The production is showcased as an example of how self-defense regulations generate unnecessary and heartbreaking violence. But the reality of firearm possession and the constitutional right (that historic American constitutional privilege that a late commentator notoriously said made firearm fatalities a price worth paying) is not much emphasized.

Officer Questioning and Gun Culture

It is possible to watch the police interrogation scenes here and feel astonished at how minimal concern the police took in this aspect. At what time did she purchase the firearm? Where (if anywhere) did she train in its use? Had she ever had occasion to fire it before? 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 undoubtedly important questions (though they may have done in recordings that didn’t make the edit). Or is gun ownership so commonplace it would be like asking about microwaves or bread heaters?

Arrest and Aftermath

For what appeared to her neighbors a very long time, the suspect was not even arrested and charged, only detained and even provided accommodation away from home for the night (another parallel, incidentally, with the Gabby Petito case). And when she was finally formally arrested in the holding cell, there is an extraordinary sequence in which Lorincz simply declines to rise, refuses to put her wrists out for the cuffs, not aggressively, but with the politely self-pitying air of someone whose mental health means that she is unable to comply. Had the kid-gloves treatment up until that point encouraged her to think that this might actually work?

Final Outcome and Judgment

It didn’t; and the panel's decision is revealed in the end titles. A very sombre portrayal of U.S. justice and consequences.