User Reviews

A detailed look at the trial of Jessica Wongso, who was arrested and charged for murdering her best friend, Mirna Salihin, by spiking her iced coffee with cyanide.

It's a little over long, this could have been edited down into less than an hour, at times it's very slow and padded, which is a shame, as there's some good content.

It's a fairly interesting documentary, the case itself is pretty interesting, bud it's more of a study of Indonesia's legal system, being from The UK, it seems totally alien, one thing that doesn't differ around the world however, the scrutiny of the public and media.

I have actually been to Indonesia, I don't actually think this does anything to promote the country, it pretty much takes aim, and fires two barrels at the country, detailing the country's legal system failings, as well as the bias that exists.

Was Jessica guilty? I'm not convinced that this case was black and white.

6/10.

This film is very good at dissecting the intricacies of the Indonesian legal system and add laying there its flaws. While the Indonesian legal system is certainly unique within the world, it seems that this case is problematic for the reason that many other cases in the world are problematic - media attention. Sometimes I wonder if it would be a better system when you were accused, charged, tried of a crime in secret. That way if you were innocent no one would ever know that you had been accused of a crime, and if you are guilty then your trial has more of a chance to be a fair one without the glare of the media. Of course that system also would probably lead to abuses of power as well. This is an interesting documentary that plays more like a sensationalistic film.

"The (Indonesian) criminal justice system needs to be reformed." That was probably the truest statement made in this documentary, which could also summarize the entire movie.

Their "expert" witnesses were highly dubious to say the least. They literally brought in a physiognomist (a sort of pseudoscientist judging someone's character based on their facial features) to testify in court! I was flabbergasted! I will not reveal the verdict in my review, so as to avoid spoilers. I have my own suspicions and probably agreed with the outcome. But suffice to say the methods they used to reach that outcome were shockingly backwards and therefore I think the verdict should have been different.

Obviously there are many beautiful aspects of the diverse Indonesian culture and people, but after watching this documentary I will not be planning a trip there anytime soon. No place is perfect, certainly not my own country (United States). But this documentary revealed some serious and frightening flaws in their society. I think it's worth a look, especially if you have even a passing interest in Indonesia.

Ungornately, this is a real live crime.

When I was watching it, I almost forgot that that happened for real.

It seemed to me that I was warching a B movie with a nad script and argument that nobody would believe. Unless you were a Indonesian Justice Member.

What a shame.

Everytime I see this kind of situation, I confirm the ideia that we have to much to evolve yet.

Here in Brazil we have these kind of justice as well.

The specialists that are more interested in look good in pictures than protect the truth.

Nobody cares about the other people as long as they can perform their futile show.

If you go by this, everyone in Indonesia is insanely vain and vapid. Their legal system is an absolute joke, with everyone involved believing and relying on science and arguments that would be laughed out of any other court in the world. The attention seeking father of the deceased woman was allowed to bring a gun into the court room, as well as place a doctored photo into evidence that was only at the last second discovered and removed. Every high school debate tournament I've seen has been head and shoulders above this country's highest court. Looks like there's a new entrant in the way too crowded race to see who can recreate the world from Idiocracy first.

Being from a legal family (American), I watched to see how it's done in Indonesia.

Now that country is off my bucket list!

The two things I took away from this documentary is: The family dictates how far a coroner can go in an autopsy. In this one, the police wanted a full autopsy, but the family didn't allow that. In this instance, they allowed only small blood samples. Nothing in depth.

Second - If you are not beautiful (and in the definition of Indonesian beauty), you are guilty - automatically in the eyes of everyone observing the trial!! Innocence is being beautiful! OMG! You can't make this stuff up!

What's unfair is that it (probably) gives a bad and unfair view of an entire country.

But back to the documentary, it's odd and long. The film clips are often the same.

If you need something to pass the time, or to iron to (Google it!), pay bills, do dishes, this is it.

In Indonesia where you can be sentenced to 20 years without any evidence. Absolutely disaster for Indonesian judicial system. You can listen yourself from the father saying: "This is the longest, the most explosive the most historical ever, Killing without evidence, they put in jail for 20 years i convinced the prosecutors and the judges. Thats how it ended, happy ending. I win.". For those who still supports Jessica to stay in Jail, please wake up. One day if this case were to happen to you and yet authority had no evidence and yet you were blamed and yet you were sentenced for 20 years. Welcome to Indonesia. Be very careful.

Just to long and it speeds through like an electron on heat. Your met with variety of different characters all talking one hundred miles an hour and multiple cuts to all sorts of things going on. It seems Asian people are on the wrong speed setting. Its also noted that the supposed killer Jessica has a strange face and was put in prison on that basis she wasnt particulary attractive and that people with money can corrupt the justice system. Overly though Jessica wasnt a celebrity so you wonder why the interest to make this documentary although it might have been big news in Jakarta. Why did I watch it? I have no idea and perhaps I wish I hadnt bothered.

I would say that i'm quite a big fan of Netflix Documenteries.

But this one is really bring it down, i could say like that just because im that intense following this case since day one

And there are so many important details information during court is unrecorded in this Netflix film😩

First questions, is why is Hani the one who's sit together with them ( Mirna & Jessica ) didnt get interviewed at all?!

I think its really important to asked her, because she is the one who's in that emergency situation.

For me this is more likely a youtube documenter instead of Netflix,

Overall, i regret to watch this, cause its just waste a time😔

This movie is to show on how corrupt Indonesia law system is. It doesnt matter if Jessica ordered coffee prior, or showed no emotion or her facial shape or her chinese western zodiac etc, as long as the fact that the cause of death was not firmed, no autopsy and non cyanide evidence in dead body and yet Jessica was still sentenced to 20 years in jail. It just showed Wow wow wow and wow to Indonesian law system. Be caution foreigners. Make sure to think twice to come to Indonesia and pray you dont get in trouble with the law or authority. It looked like money talked a lot and can buy law in Indonesia.

The documentary falls short in several aspects, leaving viewers disappointed.

One major flaw is the bad editing, which disrupts the flow of the narrative. The documentary fails to provide a clear explanation of the murderer's motives and actions, leaving viewers puzzled.

Moreover, the unnecessary and potentially misleading explanations throughout the film can be frustrating. For example, portraying the victim's father as a mafia figure without sufficient context can be misleading and irrelevant to the central story.

The most concerning aspect is the documentary's potential to inadvertently glorify the murderer, as it seems to give her undue attention and fame. Overall, it leaves much to be desired and may not be worth your time.

Let me save you your time. This documentary is not worth to watch.

Not only was it poorly edited, it was also very draggy. If you heard about this case once, you probably already know it better than what this show is giving you. The documentary was to confuse the audience with unreliable and unnecessary opinions. Asking random people on the street about the case makes it look like the production are trying too hard to put content in the show. Too much fluff, not enough gist. 30 minutes of this was more than enough.

It's more like a battle between the father and Otto the lawyer rather than a commemoration of the victim. Otto was just saving face for losing the case, and for him it was never about fighting for justice or truth; it's just for him to win. The father was on the show just to be on the show. Very little regard, or even respect of the deceased.

Remember who is the real villain here; the production house took advantage on a 7 year old story, disregarding anyone who cares about the deceased, all the while reaping the profits. It's truly shameless.

This show is giving Jessica, the killer, the 15 seconds spotlight she has been craving all this time. If you'd like to contribute to that, you might enjoy this circus shitshow.

I love true crime, I've seen most docs out there. This was a very hard watch - not because of a traumatic crime, but because this is a horrendously made documentary. A very interesting case, but I genuinely learnt nothing from this documentary. The actual victim, Mirna, was barely mentioned - however her intensely unlikeable father was in it waaaay too much. He was smug, arrogant and genuinely seemed to believe that he was a hero and worldwide celebrity. He forged and planted evidence, brought a gun to court and seemed to thrive on his overinflated ego. Why did they give him so much air time??

The editing of the timeline of the murder jumped around so much and the facts of the case were so poorly presented. It seems like the actual case was barely spoken about; it was all about the trial and far too much focus on random people's opinions. No background info on the victim or killer, no real interviews with witnesses of the crime, no explanation as to why cyanide was apparently proven not to be the cause of death... Why was there more information on the defence lawyer's golf course (?) name and the prosecutor's new car than a possible motive for the murder (which they all bizarrely say isn't that important) or how Jessica actually got cyanide in the first place??

The courtroom footage itself was absolutely disgusting and shocking. That's not necessarily the documentary maker's fault, but why was there such a focus and so much footage of the horrible circus of a trial..? People clapping, cheering, laughing continuously throughout was really jarring. And WHY were there so many 'experts' but they all seemed to testify as if they'd just rolled out of bed? I genuinely was shocked hearing the man present evidence of Jessica being the killer because of the shape her eyes made, and how his scientific basis came from watching movie stars. Why did the documentary not lean into that angle, about the absolute farce of the trial?

I still don't know what relevance half the interviewees really had to the story. I still don't know what the prosecution argued in order to get a conviction, or why all of sudden after the defence's expert witness was deported that the lawyer went from "we are 100% winning this" to "we knew we would lose now". What..? Because of one random 'expert'?? What was the bit about with opening the bottle in court? There'd been zero information about a bottle leading up to that, then a brief mention that the coffee was transferred to the bottle. Still no idea why it was opened in court. What was the bit about a bribe too??

I'm going to read up on the case as the tiny bit of information the documentary *did* provide was intriguing, but the documentary was a waste of time.

Also, Netflix - don't create a trailer that says "there was a rumour of a love triangle between Jessica, Mirna and her husband" and "there were alleged ties to the mafia" and then not mention it ONCE in the doc. There was like one line on Mirna and Jessica being lovers but that was never explained.

The one thing I learnt is that there are some people in the world stupid enough to take a sip of discoloured, sharp-smelling coffee that your customer just drank and is now convulsing on the ground. My jaw literally dropped at that. I need a full documentary on this woman tbh.

Totally not a fair and well-balanced documentary (if we can call it documentary 😏). Too many leading opinions, bad framing on Mirna's father and prosecutor team, even showing piece of gossips and character judgement. What is this?

I also keep wondering why should they only involved experts from Jessica's side? There were many strong experts' arguments from the other side as well. This one, indeed, lowering-down the quality of netlix documentary!

And now, many people talking about this in social media. Influenced by their framing, defending Jessica, questioning judge's decission without seeing the case comprehensively from all sides. Congrats beach house! Congrats Jessica! You made it!

Well that was 90 minutes I'll never get back. My partner and I actually started laughing at how terribly put together the whole documentary is which leaves viewers with more questions than answers. It sounds like a very interesting case and it was disappointing that the documentary was made so poorly. Basic information, interviews with key witnesses and potential explanations were not covered. So many irrelevant interviews and opinions from the public covered in this. Why was there no interview with the other friend at the table? Why was the victim's husband not interviewed? How did they rule out that the wait staff weren't responsible for the poisoning?

Now Netflix ought to be ashamed to be associated with this piece of garbage. This is bad journalism. You only get to hear the sides from the defendants team.

All facts from CCTV was not presented or discussed. She was there 3 days before the crime, planning her execution. You can see she was visibly scanning all the CCTVs and planning where to sit. She was interviewed by one tv station where she claimed she didnt know where the restaurant is and dont know anything about coffee.

They also omitted the part where there can only be 1 of the 4 people who had direct contact with the coffee is the culprit. The barrista who made the coffee, the waiter, the manager and Jessica.

One by one was eliminated because of the fact that the poisoned was only introduced into the drink from 4 - 4.15pm when the coffee is ice cold.

The only person close by the ice coffee is none other than J Wongso.

Every one knows this but this docu producer does not. Why??