The first thing that makes clear true crime Trial of the devil of Netflix, is that the most popular version about the case it details is false. Especially the one shown in the movie Warren File: Forced by the devil, based on the case. According to the plot of Michael Chaves’ film, the allegation of possession was taken into account by the Connecticut Superior Court in Danbury. But, in reality, the possibility was never admitted in the judicial process that began on October 28, 1981.
In the 1980s, criminal trials in the US were limited by very precise and conservative jurisprudence. Which included what strategies could be to mitigate the maximum sentences for homicide. Therefore, the context surrounding the Alan Bono case immediately became a cause for debate and controversy.
Arne Cheyenne Johnson, accused of murdering the victim, claimed to be possessed by the devil. In fact, his lawyer Martin Minnella tried to have his client presented as not guilty, based on the intervention of demonic forces. A tactic destined to cause scandal, so the judge in charge, Robert Callahan, immediately rejected it.
Trial of the devil
Netflix’s Trial of the Devil, tries to unravel a mystery of a supernatural nature through the format true crime. But the experiment turns out to be unsuccessful. The documentary is unable to sustain its main premise about how credible a testimony about possession can be.
The legal scandal that implicated the devil
Director Christopher Holt tries to make all of the above the 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. So much of its first hour is dedicated to showing how the mere idea of satanic possession impacted the community of Brookline, Connecticut.
Time and time again, the film returns to the idea that a supernatural event is in the middle of an important legal event. But not as part of the litigation or an element to take into account in the search for justice, but rather the belief of human beings in the inexplicable.
A documentary with nothing to offer
A premise this complex has trouble sustaining itself with a script that leans toward trying to explore apparently macabre events. That, without any other proof than testimonies from third parties. Trial of the devil, shows interviews, analysis and especially, all the media and newspaper attention that the case obtained. However, it has no other hypothesis than to demonstrate that the controversy was based on an unclear circumstance. One, moreover, that originated amid speculation about an alleged possession.
In fact, the documentary demonstrates almost by accident that the trial was traditional. In particular, by emphasizing that the judge refused to admit the probability of a paranormal circumstance influencing a trial. The real controversy was that, at first, Martin Minnella tried to present a not guilty plea based on demon possession. All due to a previous circumstance involving Arne’s girlfriend Cheyenne Johnson. A year earlier, Debbie Glatze and her family faced a series of terrifying events surrounding their youngest son, David. The boy, eight years old, claimed to be being terrorized by a demon.
The law and an unprecedented case
With a sober aesthetic and a journalistic appearance, Trial of the Devil strives to be credible. But it does not detail any circumstance or fact that has not been debated. Perhaps its greatest point of interest is access to audio recordings of some of the terrifying events. Specific, those who surrounded David Glatze and who caused, according to the Warrens’ testimony, a diabolical entity to possess Johnson.
The documentary demonstrates that the events were frightening enough for both the Catholic Church and the Warrens to intervene. Which led later and in the middle of the trial, the press and a series of tabloids to believe that Johnson had been possessed. At least, the murder was a consequence of the alleged exorcisms, which the pair of investigators claimed to have carried out.
A tortuous case based on scandal
But if something points out Trial of the devil, is that what happened around the murder of Alan Bono was a series of unclear conjectures. On the one hand, once the magistrate rejected the intervention of evidence that could not be objectively demonstrated, the trial was based on self-defense. To the other endthe discussion of verisimilitude is left to the audience, which must decide whether to take the recordings of screams and growls presented as true. Even more complicated, if you accept the possibility that any unexplained event is due to supernatural necessity.
The film spends its final minutes questioning the Warrens. Throughout 1980, Glatzer herself insisted that the events at her home had been exaggerated by the couple. But Judgment to the Devil is more interested in fostering doubt than in exploring an obviously questionable event. A problem that makes it a minor product in the midst of documentaries true crime from Netflix.