Only from a fingerprint on the clothes, a classmate’s guess, a curious porn in Jacob’s computer, the fact that he was bullied by Ben, and the "Kill Ben" he released three days after the murder, even the murder weapon was not found. Can Jacob go to court to force him to plead guilty? In court, neither the prosecution nor the defense submitted key physical evidence, but only cross-examined the witnesses, combined with testimony and some evidence that was insufficient to prove their guilt or innocence to "make up stories" to "incitate" the jury. The whole process Almost all are inferences, not facts.
In fact, it doesn't matter who the real culprit is. This series mainly wants to show the parents who have unconditional trust in their sons, after seeing the dark side and suspicious behavior of their sons, they change their views on their sons and their inner struggles. In addition, the psychological activities and behavioral responses of Laurie, who was kept in the dark by her husband and constantly shocked by her husband’s life experience and son’s sexual addiction, are also worthy of scrutinizing (I even think Laurie’s role is so important that the title of the play can be changed to "Defending Jacob -" A Deceived Mother").
If the ending is like the original novel—Hope died, but Jacob still got rid of suspicion due to lack of strong evidence, and the couple’s suspicion about Jacob became more and more serious—then it would really suit my taste—"We are very Doubt you, but you are our child, so we have to believe in your innocence and love you", praise.
It was the first time I watched an Apple TV+ series, and it was also the first time I found out that Chris Evans's acting skills were average.
View more about Defending Jacob reviews
