User reviews

Was it the they filmed it? Because Imes and Ambitious Blondie were so nasty and holier than thou in so many ways, that I just hated them. Even if he is a sick sociopath you might think he would be treated better by tax paid professionals.

Both prosecution and defense attorneys are ridiculous. Botox Raj and Mental Case Jim seem to be working two different cases. Chase Merrit is full of himself, but he is right about one thing: his legal team sucks. Smirky Britt Imes looks like he is going to burst out laughing at different points. And Melissa R is no better. Why are they so confidant? They have stepped on landmines left and right too. If you tried to sell this as a fictional legal drama, no one would buy it. The incompetence is too unbelievable. That being said, it did keep me watching. Like watching a train wreck, I guess.

I had seen this covered fairly thoroughly on Dateline and 20/20, but this goes well beyond what I'd previously known- I'm not sure I needed more information, but decided to give it a go.

One thing I'll say for sure, this defense team is just incompetent; you can absolutely see what they thought they were getting when they signed on for the documentary, but I have a feeling the crew 'noped' out like the lead attorney when they realized what everyone else already knew. I would have hated to see the final product with their strong confirmation bias, so I think things happened this way for a reason.

No good attorney would ever agree to an ounce of footage by a client prior to trial ending, because it's always an incredibly high risk- but it's also pretty blatant how highly they view themselves when we witness one receiving plastic surgery, and the other having to go far too in-depth regarding his presence at a wedding. Excuses are like jokes- if you have to draw me a map to explain yourself, it's not a good one. The more you protest and feign outrage, the more you are perceived as guilty, and incredibly desperate. He should have never gone to the wedding, ESPECIALLY knowing the prosecution team would be there, and you were supposedly so ill you needed to be excused from courtroom duties. You're either sick or you aren't; it doesn't matter if the pope himself performed the ceremony and you'd be suspended from puppet strings so you could dance- you can't have it both ways so pick a side and stop trying to walk a tightrope.

I do agree that there's definitely a considerable amount of questionable associates involved here, but I believe law enforcement did their job (not the original officers, who-boy did they mess up......how was it treated as a voluntary absence) but San Bernardino did a very extensive investigation into who/what/why and the right person went on trial.

Overall a good cleanup of what would likely have been an abomination of a doc series, with good evidence offered and some good peeks into an inept defense team.

This would have been a great documentary. The presentation is awful. It's comes off boring, found myself being distracted and rewinding. It could have flowed better in my opinion.

Unprofessional prosecutors at their best, the defense team was embarrassing. The judge looked bored. This guy needs a new trial. Finally meeting the business partner Dan Kavanaugh, he could not sit still, very fidgety. He was a creep. His body language was way off.

A really sad "justice" system.

Really well done doc, though the timelines and pertinent points are out of order, teased for dramatic purposes.

Combining earlier doc footage (never finished), then reediting with new interviews is unique, skillful and captivating.

But I am bothered (though I haven't seen the conclusion) by implications that the brother, McFadden, or Dan K had anything to do with it...Do they have any recourse to sue, because their lives have been undoubtedly adversely affected?

I believe tonight we will learn of Chase's attempt to close McStay's business account (after forging checks), the cell phone pings, etc, etc.

Yes, lack of blood in the house is unusual (maybe it was done outside), but to anyone with half a brain he is obviously guilty.

Sorry this defense team looks like total jerks, and all social media opinions - people who know nothing about it - is pure speculation and means nothing.

I do think this doc calls into question our judicial system. Chase is obviously as guilty as the day is long, but people were given access to produce this? Reminds me of OJ.

Other than a very captivating documentary, what's the point? Other than to ruin people's lives and attempt to make the defense team seem like heroes?

And oh yeah, he was found guilty by a jury of his peers.

Two disclaimers: 1) I'm a yearly subscriber to Discovery+ for True Crime only. This channel's ability to provide gut-wrenching multi-episode documentary coverage of investigations never ceases to amaze or unsettle me. "Unsettled" is what you'll come away from "Two Shallow Graves" feeling. 2) People whose lives have been touched by unsolved cases *may* tend to react more favorably to one side of the story or the other (victim's versus eventual defendant's, and vice versa). The two final episodes of "Two Shallow Graves" were body-blows to anyone familiar with how a defendant's own attorneys can turn a back to small matters, like the fact their client is on trial for his life.

To say more about Chase Merritt's decision in the final episodes would require spoilers. I went slack-jawed at the twenty-fifth-hour production of a particular witness, as well as at the judge's indifference to Merritt's defense throughout.

But IMDB is a place to review film productions, not to discuss merits of cases, so-- Production values and decisions: A+. Text-explanation graphics extremely helpful and time-conserving. Any viewer with a working brain will ask about everything left out (motive for such overkill, motive for the choice of weapon). This is a good thing and to a reasonable juror should have brought about reasonable doubt. The producers don't attempt to whitewash Merritt; viewers will be informed immediately that they "inherited" the series when a first production team got turned down by various protagonists for interviews. These refusals seem based on the perception that the series would be (direct quote) "another Making of The Murderer." That assumes "Making a Murderer" was an obscene interference with the good prosecutors of Wisconsin's precious time... unlike...

"Two Shallow Graves" doesn't drag. I wondered in the middle episodes the point of prolonging the story, but a reason arrives in spades in the series' penultimate and then final episode.

It did not answer why Chase Merritt would have been driven to carnage this bad. Maybe that was its point. I came away not convinced this man was treated any more fairly than Steven Avery or his tragic nephew.

I enjoyed this documentary but I still do not know who murdered the McStay family. One thing is clear to me. There was more than reasonable doubt to the guilt of Merritt. There was very poor police investigation and the prosecutors were more interested in getting a conviction than in finding the truth. The justice system is in sad shape.

Why didn't the authorities do more in depth investigation of the four other suspects. Even the brother Michael is very suspicious. How could the jury find Merritt guilty with no real evidence. The are just so many holes all over this case.

I am happy that there is a stay on executions. Perhaps some new evidence will come to light to save Merritt from a life in jail. His defence team did a fairly good job but they did make some mistakes but they were up against a brick wall.

Woe is the person that is charged with a major crime because the state has endless resources to bring to the case whereas the average person has nothing to fight with really and their life is ruined no matter what the verdict.

Prosecutors should not have been allowed to make faces and smirk. Nor should the judge keep going to sleep. Even if they were actors they were awful. If t&<s was indeed the way the trial went then everyone was unprofessional.

Like other people watching this series.. they see that the prosecutors are pompous and full of themselves. They really don't seam they are concerned with who did it but how people are going to portray them as a prosecutors. Winning should never be the most important thing but finding innocence in the people that are truly innocent. Having a family and never having a smidge of range or anger should be evidence. Why do so many watchers want to write a review but they want to them to write a mini novel. Hopefully they will change this!!!!!! Frustrating series for sure! All parties involved are thought of every day.