Rather than a documentary of a trial this film is a trial in itself. An afghan named Saif is put on trial for what seems like the nth time. When Louis delves into his personal life he comes into contact with a former 'friend' who mid film presents a questionable portrayal of events. Rape is a horrific crime but noone in the film seems to take it seriously. The victim is both naïve and insensitive, and at times comes across as a feminist. BUT Saif is disingenuous, witness testimony and his own mannerisms attest to that. He also seems two faced when he forces himself to cry mid interview then stops when convenient.
5 Reviews
Difficult to watch
thomasjay-22015 March 2019
Utterly horrible is the best way to sum up this documentary and in all honesty I could stop there. His fascination with America and its many horrific stories once again proves great subject matter. It's fairly objective which you might not want but does give out a rounded story of the offenders. At times Louis shows his best, catching out Saif who seems genuinely cold and evil. That aside it's a fantastic film that is important to see
How do you twist a tale to fit the acceptable narrative.
yavoyavo10 March 2019
Warning: Spoilers
If you thought that a piece validating the complaints of men's rights campaigners would appear on uk tv unsullied you'd be mistaken. However if you understand the only narrative allowed, then it all makes sense. Those expecting Louis to be objective will be disappointed. Either through luck or cherry picking they chose the case of a student who might have been guilty, and even so, not guilty of rape but of having a masochistic sexual kink, which can ride the line of simply being bad sex. The idea that universities should be judging what goes on behind closed doors is an absurdity, but when they add the presumption of guilt to it, it becomes injustice.
The slant of the documentary is revealed when Louis gives an uncritical interview with Emma Sulkowitz aka Mattress girl, never mentioning that her allegations were completely dismissed by the evidence of her being a woman spurned, pursing the man long after the so called incident, never mind her bizarre behavior afterwards, her pornography "art".
Documentary ends with the chilling line that Louis thinks the flawed system is necessary, demonstrating that he either doesn't know what due process is, or simply doesn't care. In his system the rights of the accused don't exist, evidence is unnecessary, and suspicion is the only standard of guilt. If people like him were truly serious about preventing harm, based on their own standards they should support full gender segregation because if a fundamental tenant of the justice system of british common law is to be sacrificed, that of a presumption of innocence, you have no argument against preventing harm of the accuser class at any cost. Full prohibition, or at minimum prohibition for women, and full gender segregation, bring the Saudi guardianship to western shores, no risk, no harm in Orwell's England.
The slant of the documentary is revealed when Louis gives an uncritical interview with Emma Sulkowitz aka Mattress girl, never mentioning that her allegations were completely dismissed by the evidence of her being a woman spurned, pursing the man long after the so called incident, never mind her bizarre behavior afterwards, her pornography "art".
Documentary ends with the chilling line that Louis thinks the flawed system is necessary, demonstrating that he either doesn't know what due process is, or simply doesn't care. In his system the rights of the accused don't exist, evidence is unnecessary, and suspicion is the only standard of guilt. If people like him were truly serious about preventing harm, based on their own standards they should support full gender segregation because if a fundamental tenant of the justice system of british common law is to be sacrificed, that of a presumption of innocence, you have no argument against preventing harm of the accuser class at any cost. Full prohibition, or at minimum prohibition for women, and full gender segregation, bring the Saudi guardianship to western shores, no risk, no harm in Orwell's England.
Think Brit Theroux would note the UK has the same level of this problem? Nope.
random-7077810 December 2020
Anonymous surveys of undergrad and grad women in in the UK indicate that the UK has even more of this problem than the US. In fact rape and sexual assaults' reporting numbers show that these assaults are easier t report in the US, and the victims is given more, not less, credulity, than the EU average.
Theroux botches this so badly that another reviewer here, "thomasjay" who is from the UK says this is one of the "many horrific stories" from "America" -- when the peer reviewed work shows this is a bigger problem in the UK than in the US.
In fact NOTHING in Europe comes close to victim reporting rights in US colleges and universities. The probative Burdon in the US schools ii so low that the US we now have a growing problem with false claims, as there s no penalty at all for false assault reporting.
Theroux botches this so badly that another reviewer here, "thomasjay" who is from the UK says this is one of the "many horrific stories" from "America" -- when the peer reviewed work shows this is a bigger problem in the UK than in the US.
In fact NOTHING in Europe comes close to victim reporting rights in US colleges and universities. The probative Burdon in the US schools ii so low that the US we now have a growing problem with false claims, as there s no penalty at all for false assault reporting.
His most biased work so far
JurijFedorov8 January 2022
The first Louis Theroux episode where he is clearly biased and takes a side. He's usually very fair and seeks deep info, here he takes a side. Which is understandable as this is a very criminal and immoral topic and he does maybe feel like he is making this for people who believe most of the victim stories and feel like such attacks are not tackled seriously enough. While it makes sense he finally fell into the trap of partiality it's still a shame for the finished product that doesn't even come close to his usual standard. But I also feel like he could do it better and with a less accusatory tone if he took his time. I trust him to improve and maybe create an update to this story that will fix the errors.
Louis Theroux also has his usual want to interview total weirdos. Not that they are lying about an attack, but they are just people you can't believe. Louis Theroux interviews a Yale student. An immigrant from Afghanistan who adapted to USA and is seemingly very interested in sleeping around. Khan uses his nationality to get with women. College girls usually like such victim group stories and fall for it. Overall Khan just looks creepy on camera. Louis Theroux clearly dislikes him from the first scene and you can see how repulsed he is by everything this Afghan immigrant says. Which does make me think that the editing has not been totally unbiased and that Khan is maybe not this creepy normally. But we just can't know. Here he comes off as a total sex deviant who you can't trust. He doesn't seem mean or evil, just creepy. And this sort of creepy personality may have caused people to have negative experiences with him if they initially think he is charming because of his background story. Whether it's consensual or not the experience may have felt non-consensual either way.
The Mattress Girl is the first example used of a victim. Louis Theroux claims that initially women were not heard and interviews her. Of course he never really explains her case. Today her case is largely used by people when showing examples of fake accusations. So this interview is not great for actual victims. There is another victim interview where the accused was expelled for 14 months. That accusation sounds more realistic. And it's a shame for everyone that 50% of the potential victims here are bad cases. The Mattress Girl and her story is so weak and weird that it's hard to believe all her claims. But I suggest everyone go read about it in all the pro and anti sources out there and figure out for themselves if her story holds water.
Then Louis Theroux interviews the guy who put him in contact with the Afghan immigrant. It's a young overweight guy who was kicked out of the falsely accused group. This guy was basically a huge fan of Khan and did everything for him. He claims he was sorta in love with Khan, and then also had a treesome with him and a woman where Khan made her take this guy from behind. It's all very weird. Either Khan is a sexual deviant and a total creepy who should be kicked out of the country or this former friend is a liar. Louis Theroux kinda hints at the friend having made up many other false stories so we can't believe him. But his story finally reached media anyhow and Khan is kicked out of Yale.
I don't have the evidence on any of this except for the unbelievable Mattress Girl story. Unfortunately Louis Theroux doesn't question the accusation stories even a single time so he remains uncritical on this and it's impossible to know what is true or not here. While he constantly haunts Khan for even minor details on the case, but gets nothing in return as Khan knows that revealing info is a stupid thing either way when you are in a trial.
This feels like a missed opportunity. I don't know if Khan is guilty or innocent. But it's a lazy investigation. At least his former friend is either clearly lying or telling the truth and Louis Theroux admitted to having way more stories and evidence on that. But he refuses to reveal any of it.
There are 2 stories I personally feel are real enough. A real victim and a falsely accused. Louis Theroux is a bit creepy and harsh towards the accused while he fully believes the victim. At any rate this still feels like a proper documentary. The other stories are too weird. It's just that the doc overall is creepy and weird and Louis Theroux rather creep us out than tell us about how this weird system works or show us conclusive cases.
For example, there are hundreds of actually innocent people in these cases because the barrier for evidence is extremely low. So even just a weak story with no extra evidence is enough to expel students. But I'm also sure there are some guilty people who maybe slipped through the system. Not many as it's very easy to expel them so it's hard to imagine many being lucky enough to hide from this system, but some. Like some random immigrant who doesn't understand how to act in USA and what is proper or not, but is then largely forgiven because "he doesn't understand our culture". Louis Theroux could have focused on more clear cases, but he didn't. He should have stayed more neutral too. The interviews and evidence should speak for itself. It wasn't allowed to.
Louis Theroux also has his usual want to interview total weirdos. Not that they are lying about an attack, but they are just people you can't believe. Louis Theroux interviews a Yale student. An immigrant from Afghanistan who adapted to USA and is seemingly very interested in sleeping around. Khan uses his nationality to get with women. College girls usually like such victim group stories and fall for it. Overall Khan just looks creepy on camera. Louis Theroux clearly dislikes him from the first scene and you can see how repulsed he is by everything this Afghan immigrant says. Which does make me think that the editing has not been totally unbiased and that Khan is maybe not this creepy normally. But we just can't know. Here he comes off as a total sex deviant who you can't trust. He doesn't seem mean or evil, just creepy. And this sort of creepy personality may have caused people to have negative experiences with him if they initially think he is charming because of his background story. Whether it's consensual or not the experience may have felt non-consensual either way.
The Mattress Girl is the first example used of a victim. Louis Theroux claims that initially women were not heard and interviews her. Of course he never really explains her case. Today her case is largely used by people when showing examples of fake accusations. So this interview is not great for actual victims. There is another victim interview where the accused was expelled for 14 months. That accusation sounds more realistic. And it's a shame for everyone that 50% of the potential victims here are bad cases. The Mattress Girl and her story is so weak and weird that it's hard to believe all her claims. But I suggest everyone go read about it in all the pro and anti sources out there and figure out for themselves if her story holds water.
Then Louis Theroux interviews the guy who put him in contact with the Afghan immigrant. It's a young overweight guy who was kicked out of the falsely accused group. This guy was basically a huge fan of Khan and did everything for him. He claims he was sorta in love with Khan, and then also had a treesome with him and a woman where Khan made her take this guy from behind. It's all very weird. Either Khan is a sexual deviant and a total creepy who should be kicked out of the country or this former friend is a liar. Louis Theroux kinda hints at the friend having made up many other false stories so we can't believe him. But his story finally reached media anyhow and Khan is kicked out of Yale.
I don't have the evidence on any of this except for the unbelievable Mattress Girl story. Unfortunately Louis Theroux doesn't question the accusation stories even a single time so he remains uncritical on this and it's impossible to know what is true or not here. While he constantly haunts Khan for even minor details on the case, but gets nothing in return as Khan knows that revealing info is a stupid thing either way when you are in a trial.
This feels like a missed opportunity. I don't know if Khan is guilty or innocent. But it's a lazy investigation. At least his former friend is either clearly lying or telling the truth and Louis Theroux admitted to having way more stories and evidence on that. But he refuses to reveal any of it.
There are 2 stories I personally feel are real enough. A real victim and a falsely accused. Louis Theroux is a bit creepy and harsh towards the accused while he fully believes the victim. At any rate this still feels like a proper documentary. The other stories are too weird. It's just that the doc overall is creepy and weird and Louis Theroux rather creep us out than tell us about how this weird system works or show us conclusive cases.
For example, there are hundreds of actually innocent people in these cases because the barrier for evidence is extremely low. So even just a weak story with no extra evidence is enough to expel students. But I'm also sure there are some guilty people who maybe slipped through the system. Not many as it's very easy to expel them so it's hard to imagine many being lucky enough to hide from this system, but some. Like some random immigrant who doesn't understand how to act in USA and what is proper or not, but is then largely forgiven because "he doesn't understand our culture". Louis Theroux could have focused on more clear cases, but he didn't. He should have stayed more neutral too. The interviews and evidence should speak for itself. It wasn't allowed to.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
