As someone who has already got some knowledge about her cases, I found nothing new here. The people working on this documentary apparently has no idea how to do second takes or understand sound at all, considering the background noises include loud splashes, wind and other things that ruin the experience. They also seem to have absolutely no idea what it means to cut out boring and irrelevant content. In this documentary, maybe 3/4 of the footage is actually relevant. A lot of focus on her adoptive mother and her lawyer, instead of the actual case.

**Aileen had such terrible legal representation during her trial. Steve Glazer was a useless lawyer and a complete sham.**

If you're bombarded by word biased when watching this , ignore. There is no absolute objectivity anyways. There are numerous aspects which can be called as absolute objective w.r.t. Nick's frame of reference.