I wanted to read other reviews of this series before posting mine, and I was quite surprised by the number of viewers who gave the series a bad review while 100% agreeing with the point of view of the filmmakers. So in effect, they were mad that they agreed with what they watched. As a true-crime series, it has an interesting point of view which judging by the reviews is not a popular way of doing things, and that is to say they believe there was no crime. Instead, it focuses on a mother's increasingly delusion attempts to get justice for her son and the media sharks that fed this delusion. I think the problem stems from the fact that when a person dies, especially a young person, there is a lot of confusion as to what happened. This is coupled with the fact that in every country there is not enough money to sufficiently examine the death of every person. In this particular case, the initial investigators rushed to a conclusion that the death was accidental and suicidal without actually doing a thorough job. Then because the surviving spouse was a media figure, her actions were under more scrutiny than they would have been had she been a normal person, so that led to this gap where the family felt that the death had not been sufficiently investigated, and the ex was acting in a very callous way. Then the media jumped on the story and any chance of objectivity was lost. This is a very one-sided peace, but as I said before, I think it is now impossible to find the objective truth as to what happened.