Sunday, February 7, 2016

The Battered Bastards Of Baseball

The Battered Bastards Of Baseball is simply, a fun documentary. If you are a baseball fan, you will love this movie. It takes us to a time when sports was simpler. No huge contracts, just the willingness to play ball for the love of the game.

The movie itself is sort of a time travel to Portland Oregon back in the 1the Portland Mavericks. Typical of Portland, the city takes a chance on an independent team. What happens after the decision to host a "not so typical" franchise is what makes the movie so fascinating.

Because the movie is so unique, I do not want to give too much away. However there is a strange twist in the ownership that would surprise many watching the movie. The owner's son is a future Hollywood celebrity. The movie provides insight why this celebrity comes across so genuine. It is fascinating to have such insight into a person's life.

The Mavericks were literally the Bad News Bears of adult professional baseball. Rich in humor and diversity, you feel like you missed a part of baseball history. I found myself wanting to be a part of the time period.  Intriguing to watch, as we may never see a future franchise with such colorful characters, I highly recommend you watch this documentary.

Monday, February 1, 2016

Making a Murderer - Social Inequalties On Trial

Making a Murderer is a documentary on Netflix. An intriguing examination into a complicated murder case in Wisconsin. The documentary focused on the false imprisonment of Stephen Avery that sent an innocent man to jail for 18 years. Once he won his freedom, he was accused of a murder charge shortly before an 18 million dollar verdict was going to trial. The evidence suggest that the County Sheriff was quick to draw to conclusions without due process procedures being followed.

While the false imprisonment is the central theme, there is another underlying theme to this documentary that I feel carries more weight. This documentary demonstrates that our judicial system, like most systems in our society benefits the rich. The poor have a much higher likelihood of social injustice.

Spoiler Alert - (If you have not watched the documentary, you may want to skip this paragraph)
A key part of the documentary is the settlement. Due to the second arrest,  Mr. Avery settles for 400.000 dollars so that he can afford a defense team. He would have a multi-million dollar settlement, however his arrest forced his hand to settle for less.

Without the settlement, Mr. Avery would have been given little attention from the media. His connection to the innocence project helped to bolster attention to both projects. While watching things unfold, one has to wonder, how many people do not get the benefit of the doubt that money gave Mr. Avery. Most of our citizenry has to rely on a public defender, which the documentary shows is practically worthless.

The documentary provides an interesting examination of Public Defenders. The problem for public defenders is quite simple. Public defenders do not have the resources that the prosecution team will be able to access. This leaves the client of a public defender vulnerable. In fact, some public defenders may have conversations with the DA without their client knowing that a plea bargain is in the works. A very dangerous precedent for people in poverty. You get the feeling this happens more often than people realize.

Money makes all the difference. When you do have money, you can analyze the evidence and mount an argument for your defense. The documentary clearly demonstrates this by allowing you insight into multiple trials. The trial of the 16 year old was very telling. The lawyers that were public defenders were outplayed by the judicial system. The young man never had a chance, because the public defender had very little to rely on to proved the innocence of their client.

Making a Murderer provides an interesting look into the inequities of our judicial system. A system that needs reforming and a return to Constitutional principles that a man/woman is presumed innocent and it is up to the prosecutor to prove without a shadow of a doubt that someone is guilty. There is a blurred line between prosecuting the right person versus who the state thinks did the crime.