This episode 4 from "FOX's" "Accused" anthology series called "Kendall's Story" which first aired on 2-14-23 is one that's a raw and tough gritty drama filled story which twists with trust issues. It involves Kendall( "The Cosby Show's Malcolm Jamal Warner) as a happily married man with a talented young daughter, things seem A okay however after one night Kendall and his wife receive horrible news that their daughter has been attacked and hurt in a nearby park, the entire world comes crashing down. Malcolm's friends suggest that he take matters into his own hands and practice justice the old fashion way his way however, things twist with his friends and Malcolm is thrown out to take the blame after the attacker of his daughter is done away with. Overall tough well done episode that challenges love, faith, and trust all while wanting some form of justice.
3 Reviews
Good Episode
Mehki_Girl10 December 2023
Warning: Spoilers
As far as showing how a good person can go down the wrong path when they allow someone to incite them and get into their head.
However, everyone knows in this day and age, and especially black people should know, never talk to the cops and they can't help you or do anything for you. Their job is to get a confession and collect evidence sufficient for the DA to bring a case against you.
That's it...
If he wanted to confess, consult with a lawyer and bring him/her with you.
That cop was lying because he knew he couldn't do anything, but bring a case to the DA. The ending was zero hope because unless they find (and we'd hope they already did forenics and so that question is already moot) something that would implicate the other two and therefore make their versions suspect.
Not to mention he'll have other cases and can't work a case unless assigned and would have little power with the DA to reopen a case that was already convicted.
Only chance... Maybe... Is a public outcry in favor of a man who killed a pedophile. Anyway, he was guilty because the guy was still very much alive until he got angry about the phone and stomped him.
The court scene was pathetic with worthless counsel (maybe he'd get a retrial on inadequate counsel), no objection when the DA was basically testifying.
Moral: Never talk to the cops, they can't and won't help you. It's up to the DA.
Stay far away from your no good friends of the past. They'll revert true to form when it's you versus them.
Trust no one.
No good deed...
However, everyone knows in this day and age, and especially black people should know, never talk to the cops and they can't help you or do anything for you. Their job is to get a confession and collect evidence sufficient for the DA to bring a case against you.
That's it...
If he wanted to confess, consult with a lawyer and bring him/her with you.
That cop was lying because he knew he couldn't do anything, but bring a case to the DA. The ending was zero hope because unless they find (and we'd hope they already did forenics and so that question is already moot) something that would implicate the other two and therefore make their versions suspect.
Not to mention he'll have other cases and can't work a case unless assigned and would have little power with the DA to reopen a case that was already convicted.
Only chance... Maybe... Is a public outcry in favor of a man who killed a pedophile. Anyway, he was guilty because the guy was still very much alive until he got angry about the phone and stomped him.
The court scene was pathetic with worthless counsel (maybe he'd get a retrial on inadequate counsel), no objection when the DA was basically testifying.
Moral: Never talk to the cops, they can't and won't help you. It's up to the DA.
Stay far away from your no good friends of the past. They'll revert true to form when it's you versus them.
Trust no one.
No good deed...
Why...
kayladonohueu17 February 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Spoilers
After the first two episodes of this show I was pretty excited to continue watching what else they come up with. Then the third episode came out and left me feeling confused and leaving too many questions unanswered, but I hoped and assumed they would be addressed in the next episode. Nope. Instead, this episode doubled down on leaving viewers with a long list of unanswered questions. Seemingly in an attempt to give the impression the story was unfinished intentionally to challenge real issues of systemic inequality, injustices, and morality. However, I really think they missed the mark. Instead it felt like the writers simply ran out of time and needed to wrap the episode up as quickly as possible.
The dialogue was rushed, unrealistic, and embarrassing. A detective in a murder case decides to give the suspect an opportunity to get his story straight with supposed alibis? Doesn't bring him in for questioning? Still doesn't question him after allegations are made by the two "alibis"-with criminal records and a previous stated impression of being "the wrong people" (that same detective) referred to when saying Kendall "is a good man caught up with the wrong people"??
Why was it made clear that a woman saw the three men approaching the park immediately before the murder? Was that just for added suspense, or did they initially write that to be a twist in the story that they forgot to remove when they ran out of time?
Why did the detective give the "I will make this right, I won't let an innocent man go down" speech at the end? To give viewers a sense of hope when left to make their own inferences? Because if so, it almost defeats the whole idea of this episode being meant to challenge issues within the justice system.
Why did Kendall's defense sit in trial silently glaring at the two men falsely accusing him of murder-lying under oath?? A defense in that case wouldn't object, cross examine, or say a single word? AND that defense would choose not to de-escalate, but to observe as their client seals his own fate by losing control and yelling "I will kill you" to the man falsely testifying in the middle of HIS MURDER TRIAL??
Unless there is a part two, this episode was a complete, infuriating waste of my time. I highly doubt a part two will happen (especially after episode 3 was the start of this trend), but if there is, I will update this accordingly.
After the first two episodes of this show I was pretty excited to continue watching what else they come up with. Then the third episode came out and left me feeling confused and leaving too many questions unanswered, but I hoped and assumed they would be addressed in the next episode. Nope. Instead, this episode doubled down on leaving viewers with a long list of unanswered questions. Seemingly in an attempt to give the impression the story was unfinished intentionally to challenge real issues of systemic inequality, injustices, and morality. However, I really think they missed the mark. Instead it felt like the writers simply ran out of time and needed to wrap the episode up as quickly as possible.
The dialogue was rushed, unrealistic, and embarrassing. A detective in a murder case decides to give the suspect an opportunity to get his story straight with supposed alibis? Doesn't bring him in for questioning? Still doesn't question him after allegations are made by the two "alibis"-with criminal records and a previous stated impression of being "the wrong people" (that same detective) referred to when saying Kendall "is a good man caught up with the wrong people"??
Why was it made clear that a woman saw the three men approaching the park immediately before the murder? Was that just for added suspense, or did they initially write that to be a twist in the story that they forgot to remove when they ran out of time?
Why did the detective give the "I will make this right, I won't let an innocent man go down" speech at the end? To give viewers a sense of hope when left to make their own inferences? Because if so, it almost defeats the whole idea of this episode being meant to challenge issues within the justice system.
Why did Kendall's defense sit in trial silently glaring at the two men falsely accusing him of murder-lying under oath?? A defense in that case wouldn't object, cross examine, or say a single word? AND that defense would choose not to de-escalate, but to observe as their client seals his own fate by losing control and yelling "I will kill you" to the man falsely testifying in the middle of HIS MURDER TRIAL??
Unless there is a part two, this episode was a complete, infuriating waste of my time. I highly doubt a part two will happen (especially after episode 3 was the start of this trend), but if there is, I will update this accordingly.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
