Cocaine Bear · Lie Detectors · Sig Sauers
Plus: Will you be having a Waco weekend?
the true crime that's worth your time
Rewatching the trailer for Waco: The Aftermath for this item, I’m suddenly wavering in my commitment to watch it this weekend. The five-ep series drops its first episode on Showtime today, so I guess it’s not as big an ask as the full season at once. But, still, there’s that shot of Michael Shannon (who, of course, I think is fantastic) in the trailer, where he’s looking grief-stricken as he stands in front of a Confederate flag, and all I can think is “30 years later, we’re even more fucked.”
This isn’t a criticism of the show, which is getting fair-to-positive reviews:
Waco: The Aftermath [Roger Ebert.com]
“The series' larger problem is that the execution does not rise to meet the ambition of its story—it asks for a surprising amount of nuance in how it paints angry Americans going up against the government; to see the difference between the peaceful and non-peaceful way of fighting for one's rights.”
Waco: The Aftermath review: This might be the scariest show on television [AV Club]
”Within these worlds, it is easy to feel the rage, paranoia, for and from both sides. To feel disgust for a nation where leaders are offered up out of a rotating stable of conmen and cosplayers. For a government composed of those who repeatedly refuse to act on our gun violence epidemic, while at the other end, a militia plans the kidnapping of a governor.”
‘Waco: The Aftermath’ chillingly connects the standoff’s past to the present [CNN]
”Directors/producers Drew Dowdle and John Erick Dowdle make a compelling argument that the legacy of Waco is still very much alive and integrated into US politics, a point underscored by former president Donald Trump’s recent decision to hold a rally there.”
WTA is characterized as a “sequel” to 2018’s Waco, which doesn’t sit quote right with me — like, are we building a Waco Cinematic Universe now? (Did I hear this joke on a podcast, forget, and repeat it here like it was my own idea? If so, I apologize!) But I also get why they call it that: Shannon and John Leguizamo are playing the same folks they did in that show. David Koresh — who on paper should not appear in the “aftermath” to the Waco disaster, given his death during it — is apparently depicted by Keean Johnson, though Taylor Kitsch played the cult leader in the earlier property.
(“How can Koresh be in the Aftermath,” I crabbily asked my husband yesterday. “Soft-porn dream sequence?” my husband, a horrible person, responded.)
A lot of my discomfort comes from wondering if watching this is just going to make me feel like helpless crap, especially given the refrain that 30 years later, this story remains “more timely than ever.” Does the high-caliber cast and likely great set of performances outweigh how depressed this series might leave me? Will I do better with it if I pop a gummy before I press play? Should I watch shows I need to pop a gummy to endure given my limited time on this earth? Respond to any of those questions, as well as share what true crime you’re planning to consume this weekend, in the comments. — EB
As I was typing all that stuff about WTA, a press release hit my inbox that solved ALL my weekend watch problems. Peacock, those sneaky devils, just dropped a previously-unannounced doc called Cocaine Bear: The True Story, ostensibly a companion piece to the I’ll-bet-it’s-funnier-on-paper-than-IRL-sort-of-like-how-Snakes-On-A-Plane-was fictional film Cocaine Bear, which is also released on Peacock today.
The story of parachuting drug dealer Andrew Thornton has been told by many a print outlet since he (and a nameless bear) died in 1985, with the NYT, Washington Post, National Geographic and others hastening to point out that the Elizabeth Banks-directed feature is a fairy tale, but that a bear did indeed get up to something in the woods. Here’s the Peacock doc’s logline:
Cocaine Bear: The True Story is the bizarre, stranger than fiction tale behind the hit Hollywood movie Cocaine Bear. It involves international drug smuggling, murder, mayhem, and a mysterious dead body in a suburban driveway wearing a watch that shoots tear gas. How a Georgia bear on cocaine and a Kentucky blueblood soldier of fortune will be forever linked is a modern-day legend.
I have no idea how hastily this was constructed or how much quality we can expect, but I can’t blame Peacock for trying to rub every last speck of Cocaine Bear on its gums. I’m not mad it exists, and I might even turn it on while I’m on the treadmill, because why not? — EB
Want to join Thursday Evening Money as a Best Evidence sponsor? Drop us a line at editorial@bestevidence.fyi.
I’m surprised at you folks. In this week’s discussion thread, we asked what true crime has taught you that the rest of the world doesn’t seem to know, and no one mentioned what a load of crap lie detectors are, including me. [“I mentioned one favorably yesterday, so I’m part of the problem, despite knowing full well that they’re a load!” — SDB]
Seminal sitcom Barney Miller took the polygraph machine on nearly 45 years ago (as you see above), but that show was the exception that proves the rule. Instead, pop culture and law enforcement have continued to push the devices as legitimate, even as everyone from the American Psychological Association to CNN to Popular Science explain why their results are inconclusive at best.
Amit Katwala’s recent book, Tremors in the Blood, is the latest effort to debunk polygraph beliefs, described by its publishers as:
A thrilling account of the creation of the so-called lie detector, exploring shocking murders and dramatic trials to uncover the true nature of the polygraph. This tense true crime story is perfect for fans of American Predator and The Invention of Murder.
Reason wrote about Katwala’s book (which is available at Sarah’s bookshop, Exhibit B.) last month. The piece isn’t a review — it doesn’t give any insight into the book’s pacing or quality — but it does give some nice context on the history of the polygraph that balances the James Patterson-level marketing copy TitB was saddled with:
In the preceding decades, new policing techniques had become standard (from mug shots to fingerprints) and the "science" of law enforcement had been growing apace. The lie detector looked like yet another leap forward. The era had already brought the telephone and the radio; what new magic would be next? It was the same mindset that led people to embrace the eugenic ideas of the Italian criminologist Cesare Lombroso—that there were criminal "types," detectable by their appearance. If some people were just undesirables, the thinking went, wouldn't it be all the better to flush them out with scientific proof?
The only "lie detector" available up to that point was a sharply wielded nightstick, so the mirage of an accurate, efficient, and peaceful truthfinder held an understandable appeal. The same impulse led investigators to try and then abandon various versions of "truth serum" over the decades.
But the lie detector is just the 20th-century version of witch pricking, revealing a "truth" that isn't there.
It would be nice if in our lifetime, polygraphs moved to only be used to torture celebrities eager to promote a product. I’d be cool with that. But until then, perhaps Katwala’s book can become another tool in our true-crime arsenal that we can use to combat crime-related misinformation. — EB
And finally, your weekend longread. We all know the name SIG Sauer, a German/American company that’s manufactured guns since 1976. One of its creations, the SIG Sauer P320, is a favorite among gun owners (if you want to feel your stomach lurch, google its reviews), but according to the Washington Post, it also has a serious problem: it allegedly fires on its own.
Reporters Champe Barton and Tom Jackman spoke with a slew of gun users who say they’ve been injured by the guns, which allegedly fired without anyone pulling the trigger. Over 80 victims have come forward, they report. Here’s a snip:
“The number and frequency of injuries are strongly suggestive of a design flaw versus a human performance error,” said Bill Lewinski, a behavioral scientist, executive director of the Force Science Institute and one of the nation’s leading experts on accidental shootings. “What we’re seeing is highly unusual.”
The injured included both casual and expert firearm owners whose guns fired in their homes and offices and in busy public places such as casinos and parking lots. In two cases, the guns went off on school grounds.
Interviews with more than a dozen victims, video recordings, and a review of thousands of pages of court documents and internal police records reveal a pattern of discharges that were alleged to have occurred during routine movements. These have included the holstering or unholstering of the P320, climbing out of vehicles and walking down stairs. In several cases, records and videos show, the gun fired when a victim’s hand was nowhere near it.
The gun company responded to the paper with a written statement that suggested that the over 100 people reporting those discharges were engaged in “improper or unsafe handling,” and that “unintentional discharges occur with several types of firearms and are not unique to the P320.” OK, then maybe we should just get rid of them all! That sure would solve the problem!
Even if you’re an advocate for gun ownership or use, this article is important reading, as it suggests a automotive-industry-level of denial from a company that makes a very dangerous product. It’s also a good education on gun mechanics for those of us less familiar with firearms, or those who are on the fence about their casual usage and/or where they should be allowed. Even if you’re not a Post subscriber, this link should get you in. — EB
Next week on Best Evidence: Alex Mar and moving scams.
What is this thing? This should help. Follow Best Evidence @bestevidencefyi on Instagram, email us at editorial at bestevidence dot fyi, or call or text us any time at 919-75-CRIME.