‘The Devil’s Trial’ Review: Netflix’s True Crime That Fails When Trying to Tell a Supernatural Event

The first thing that makes it clear true crime Trial of the Devil from Netflix, is that the most popular version of the details of this case is false. Especially the one shown in the film. Warren File: Compelled by the Devil. based on the case. According to the plot of the film by Michael Chavez, the possession charge was taken into account by the court. Connecticut Supreme Court in Danbury. But in fact, this possibility was never recognized in the trial that began on October 28, 1981.

In the 1980s, criminal trials in the United States were limited to very precise and conservative jurisprudence. Including what strategies there might be to reduce maximum penalties for murder. Therefore, the context of the Alan Bono case immediately became a reason for discussion and controversy.

Arne Cheyenne Johnson, accused of killing the victim, claimed to be possessed by the devil. In fact, his lawyer Martin Minnella tried to get his client found not guilty based on the intervention of demonic forces. The tactic was bound to cause a scandal, so the judge in charge, Robert Callahan, immediately rejected it.

A legal scandal involving the devil

Director Christopher Holt tries to make all of the above a context through which Trial of the Devil tell the story of a controversial event. However, the documentary is more interested in being sensational than neutral. Much of the first hour is spent showing how the very idea of ​​Satanic possession affected the community of Brooklyn, Connecticut.

Time and time again, the film returns to the idea that a supernatural event is at the center of an important legal event. But not as part of a trial or an element to be taken into account in the search for justice, but rather as people’s belief in the inexplicable.

A documentary with nothing interesting in it

The premise is that this complex can’t sustain itself with a script that leans toward trying to explore overtly creepy events. And this is without any other evidence other than the testimony of third parties. Trial of the Devil, shows the interviews, analysis and especially all the media and newspaper attention the case has received. However, he has no other hypothesis than to demonstrate that the dispute is based on an unclear circumstance. Moreover, one of them arose amid speculation about the alleged ownership.

In fact, the documentary almost inadvertently demonstrates that the trial was traditional. In particular, emphasizing that the judge refused to acknowledge the likelihood of paranormal circumstances influencing the course of the trial. The real controversy was that Martin Minnella initially tried to justify himself on the basis of demonic possession. All because of a previous circumstance involving Arne’s girlfriend Cheyenne Johnson. A year earlier, Debbie Glatze and her family were faced with a horrific series of events involving their youngest son, David. An eight-year-old boy claimed he was being terrorized by a demon.

Law and unprecedented case

With a sober aesthetic and journalistic appearance, The Devil’s Trial strives to inspire trust. But it does not detail any circumstances or facts that were not discussed. Perhaps of greatest interest is access to audio recordings of some of the horrific events. Specific, those who surrounded David Glatze and caused, according to the Warrens’ testimony, the diabolical entity to take possession of Johnson.

The documentary demonstrates that the events were frightening enough for both the Catholic Church and the Warrens to intervene. This later led the press and a number of tabloids to conclude, midway through the trial, that Johnson was possessed. At the very least, the murder was the result of a supposed exorcism that two investigators claimed to have carried out.

A twisted case based on a scandal

But if something indicates Trial of the Devil, is that what happened around Alan Bono’s murder was a series of vague guesses. On the one hand, as soon as the magistrate refused to admit evidence that could not be objectively demonstrated, the trial was based on self-defense. To the other enddiscussion of plausibility is left to the audience’s discretion, who must decide whether the presented recordings of screams and growls are considered truthful. It is even more difficult if we accept the possibility that any inexplicable event is caused by a supernatural necessity.

The last minutes of the film are devoted to the interrogation of the Warrens. Throughout 1980, Glatzer herself insisted that events in her home were exaggerated by the couple. But “Judgment of the Devil” is more interested in stirring up doubt than in exploring an obviously dubious event. A problem that makes it an afterthought among documentaries. true crime from Netflix.