smart

These true crime documentaries are much better than Netflix’s latest

Documentaries can offer substantial insight into the lives, crimes and untold stories behind some of the biggest headlines worldwide, whether they’re examining the past or exploring current affairs. The market has become saturated with stories, particularly when it comes to true crime.

Netflix’s Kidnapped: Elizabeth Smart is no exception to this rule. The streaming platform continues to captivate viewers with almost unbelievable stories and a stereotypical, predictable twist that leaves people craving more.

That’s how they draw you in each time they promote a new, never before told story. Elizabeth’s story concerns a teenage girl snatched from her bedroom at knifepoint in Salt Lake City, Utah, back in 2002.

The case is described by Netflix as “one of the most intense and widely covered missing-persons cases America has ever seen”, and whilst that may hold true across the Atlantic, it doesn’t quite resonate in the same way over here.

It’s a story told in her own words; the ending being spoiled across the numerous adverts plastered on the streets of London. The first half of the documentary would have you believe the worst had happened, but the revelation of a middle-aged Elizabeth recounting her experience living off-grid in captivity makes the entire story even more unbelievable, though not in a mind-blowing way.

In truth, once the twist was unveiled, the documentary never really gained momentum or suspense. Instead, it followed the same pattern as many other Netflix documentaries. The case of Elizabeth Smart will, regrettably, be consigned to the pile of documentaries that caused a ripple, not a wave.

This isn’t the case for all documentaries, as some continue to leave a lasting impression on me years later. Documentaries need to stir you, to provoke you, to make you question the very fabric of society.

They don’t need to be packed with twists and turns purely for the sake of shock value.

Unknown Number: The High School Catfish (2025)

One recent Netflix documentary that hits the mark is Unknown Number: The High School Catfish, which focuses on a teenage couple terrorised by a troll at the end of a phone line. It all started with a text message.

The relentless torment of Michigan high school students Lauryn Licari and her ex-boyfriend, Owen, led to an investigation that pointed to a multitude of potential suspects. Classmates, friends, even family members are drawn into the spotlight.

For this small town, it was a real-life whodunnit. The abuse hurled at the teenagers goes beyond simple bullying, with death threats, sexually explicit messages and horrific rumours lurking around every corner. The youngsters’ lives were deeply affected, as they recount the events as 18 year olds.

The most shocking part? The identity of the person behind those messages. I won’t ruin the surprise, but be prepared for your eyes to bulge and your jaw to drop.

You’ll never view an anonymous text message in the same light again.

The Keepers (2017)

In a similar vein to Netflix’s Making a Murderer, The Keepers delves into the unsolved murder of nun Catherine Cesnik in 1969.

Her former pupils suggest there was a cover-up by authorities after Sister Cathy suspected a priest had sexually abused students at Baltimore’s all-girls Archbishop Keough High School.

Now adults, the former students share their experiences at the Catholic school with those in positions of power there and within the local church, including sexual abuse, intimidation, and one student even witnessing the body of a deceased nun.

The Keepers transitions from the disappearance and murder of the nun to the concealment of abuse perpetrated by prominent members of the Catholic church, and the survivors’ ongoing battle for justice decades after the crimes. For true crime enthusiasts, sadly, there is no definitive answer as to what happened to Sister Cathy, but perhaps one day there will be.

Blackfish (2013)

There’s an old adage about not interfering with nature, and that extends to the animal kingdom. Blackfish examines the captivity of Tilikum, an orca implicated in three fatalities, including that of SeaWorld trainer Dawn Brancheau, and explores the ramifications of confining orcas in such environments.

The film reveals the circumstances surrounding Tilikum’s capture back in 1983, the treatment marine creatures endured at various marine parks, and the orca’s interactions with trainers and other orcas. It’s essential viewing, though not suitable for those easily disturbed.

This documentary will make you reconsider ever visiting or financially supporting SeaWorld again.

When Louis Met… (2000) & Louis Theroux, Savile (2016)

Having established himself as a familiar face over the decades, Louis Theroux launched his documentary career with his Weird Weekends, immersing himself in the lives of others. He explored an array of unconventional and controversial subcultures, crime and the justice system, and celebrities.

Louis’ awkwardness is also his charm, something audiences have grown accustomed to witnessing over the years. Brits will appreciate his idiosyncrasies and intellect.

His most notorious work involves his encounters with former “childhood hero” Jimmy Savile, a story he revisits 16 years after his initial documentary with him.

The first documentary examined Savile’s ascent to stardom as a TV and radio presenter, alongside his domestic life. Whilst Theroux briefly touches upon the allegations of paedophilia and sexual abuse, Savile dismisses them with laughter.

It wasn’t until 2012 that the world was made aware of the true scale of Savile’s offences, exposing a host of predatory individuals in the aftermath of Operation Yewtree. In his 2016 film, Louis revisits his past association with Savile and converses with some of Savile’s victims and those who worked closely alongside him.

Given our current knowledge, it’s challenging to look back and not see the rumours as glaringly evident. How? Who? Why? For how long?

One is almost at a loss for words contemplating how a public figure, swamped with these types of allegations, was permitted to continue, and who was shielding him. The 2016 documentary prompts not only Louis but an entire generation to question what they believed they knew.

If you want ideas and inspiration to plan your next UK adventure plus selected offers and competitions, sign up for our 2Chill weekly newsletter here

United States plans for Gaza amount to a “theme park of dispossession” for Palestinians, argues Drop Site News Middle East Editor Sharif Abdel Kouddous.

Abdel Kouddous tells host Steve Clemons the draconian measures planned for the two million shell-shocked Palestinians in Gaza are an Orwellian labyrinth of biometrics, bureaucracy and “a lab for government surveillance” – all meant to drive them out.

Noting that Israel hasn’t “gone past phase one” of any ceasefire agreement with an Arab country, Abdel Kouddous warns that Israel is establishing facts on the ground in Gaza – including 50 military bases – “which eventually become permanent”.

In the roiling debate over California’s proposed billionaire tax, supporters and critics agree that such policies haven’t always worked in the past. But the lessons they’ve drawn from that history are wildly different.

The Billionaire Tax Act, which backers are pushing to get on the November ballot, would charge California’s 200-plus billionaires a one-time, 5% tax on their net worth in order to backfill billions of dollars in Republican-led cuts to federal healthcare funding for middle-class and low-income residents.

Critics of the proposal have argued that past failures of similar wealth taxes in Europe prove they don’t work and can cause more harm than good, including by driving the ultra-rich out. Among those critics is San José Mayor Matt Mahan, a tech-friendly Democrat who is contemplating a run for governor.

“Over the last 30 years, we’ve seen a dozen European countries pursue national-level wealth taxes,” Mahan said. “Nine of them have rolled them back. A majority have seen a decline in overall revenue. It’s actually shrunk the tax base, not increased it, and it’s because it creates a perverse incentive and drives capital flight.”

Backers of the measure acknowledge such failures but say that they learned from them and that California’s proposal is stronger as a result.

Brian Galle, a UC Berkeley tax law professor and one of four academic experts who drafted the measure, said if it gets on the ballot, every voter in the state will receive a copy of the full text, a one-page explainer on what it does, and nearly two dozen additional pages of “rules for preventing wealthy people and their army of lawyers from dodging” it.

Many of those rules, he said, are based on historical lessons from places where such taxes have failed, but also where they’ve succeeded.

“If you understand the actual lessons of history, you understand that this bill is more like the successful Swiss and Spanish wealth taxes,” Galle said. “Part of that is learning from history.”

Warnings from Europe

Since the 1990s, several European countries have repealed net wealth taxes, including Austria, Denmark, Finland, France and Germany.

A major example cited by critics of the California proposal is France, which implemented a much larger wealth tax on far more people, including many millionaires. The measure raised modest revenues, which fell as rich people moved out of the country to avoid paying, and the measure was repealed by the government of President Emmanuel Macron in 2017.

In a 2018 report on net wealth taxes, the Paris-based Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development found that European repeals were often driven by “efficiency and administrative concerns and by the observation that net wealth taxes have frequently failed to meet their redistributive goals.”

“The revenues collected from net wealth taxes have also, with a few exceptions, been very low,” it found.

Critics and skeptics of the California proposal say they expect California to run into all the same problems.

Mahan and others have pointed to a handful of prominent billionaires who already appear to be distancing themselves from the state, and said they expect more to follow — which Mahan said will reduce California’s “recurring revenue” beyond the amount raised by the one-time tax.

Kent Smetters, faculty director of the Penn Wharton Budget Model, which analyzes the fiscal effects of public policies, said net worth taxes in other countries have “always raised quite a bit less revenue than what was initially projected,” in large part because “wealth is easy, as it turns out, to try to reclassify or move around” and “there’s all these tricks that you can do to try to make the wealth look smaller for tax purposes.”

A bus in London promotes a campaign by British millionaires advocating for an end to extreme wealth and inequality.

(Carl Court / Getty Images)

Smetters said he expects that the California measure will raise less than the $100 billion estimated by its backers because billionaire wealth in California — much of it derived from the tech sector — is relatively “mobile,” as many tech barons can move without it affecting business.

“Policymakers have to understand that they’re not going to get nearly as much money as they often project from a purely static projection, where they’re not accounting for the different ways that people can move their wealth, reclassify their wealth, or even just move out of the state,” Smetters said. “So far, we only know of a few people — with a lot of money — who have moved out of the state, [but] that number could go up.”

Kevin Ghassomian, a private wealth lawyer at Venable who advises rich clients, said he expects the administrative costs of enforcing the tax to be massive for the state — and much greater than the drafters have anticipated.

On the front end, the state will face a wave of legal challenges to the tax’s constitutionality and its retroactive application to all billionaires living in the state as of the end of 2025.

Moving ahead, he said, there will be litigation from wealthy individuals whose departure from California is questioned or who dispute the state’s valuation of their net worth or individual assets — including private holdings, which the state doesn’t have extensive experience assessing.

Valuating such assets will be “a nightmare, just practically speaking, and it’s going to require a lot of administrators at the state level,” Ghassomian said, especially considering many California billionaires’ wealth is in the form of illiquid holdings in startups and other ventures with fluctuating market valuations.

“You could be a billionaire today, and then the market plummets, and now all of a sudden, you’re a pauper,” he said. “It could really lead to some unfair results.”

Lessons from Europe

Backers of California’s proposal said they have accounted for many of the historical pitfalls with wealth taxes and taken steps to avoid them — including by making it harder for wealthy Californians to simply shuffle money around to avoid the tax.

“There are a lot of provisions that are designed based on what has worked well in other countries with wealth taxes in the modern era, especially Switzerland, and there are also provisions meant to shut down some of the holes in some of the earlier wealth tax efforts, especially the France one, that were viewed as not successful,” said David Gamage, a University of Missouri tax law professor and another of the proposal’s drafters.

Galle said the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development study found that many of Europe’s historical wealth taxes “hadn’t figured out how to solve the problem of what small businesses were worth,” so were more narrowly focused on publicly traded stock and real estate. “Over time, there was a lot of abuse where people shifted their assets to make them look privately held.”

The California proposal “tries to solve that problem” by including small businesses and other privately held wealth in their calculations of net worth, he said — and benefits from the fact that such wealth has gotten a lot easier to track and appraise in recent years.

Doing so would be a familiar exercise for many California billionaires already, he said, as it is hard to raise venture capital, for example, without audited financial statements.

Backers of the measure said it is harder for U.S. citizens to avoid taxes by moving abroad than it has been for Europeans, and that evidence from Switzerland and Spain suggests differing tax rates between a nation’s individual states do not cause massive interstate flight.

San José Mayor Matt Mahan, who might run for governor, opposes the proposed tax on California billionaires.

(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

For example, each state in Spain sets its own wealth tax rate, and Madrid’s is 0% — but that has not caused an exodus from other parts of Spain to Madrid, Galle said.

The risk of California billionaires avoiding the tax by simply moving to another U.S. state was further mitigated by the measure’s Jan. 1 deadline for avoiding the tax. Galle said the deadline “was intended to make it more difficult for individuals to concoct the kind of misleading, apparent moves that wealthy people have used in other places to try to avoid a wealth tax.”

Gamage said that “history shows if a tax on the wealthy can be avoided by moving paper around, claiming that you live in another location without actually moving your life there, moving assets to accounts or trusts nominally in foreign countries or other jurisdictions, you see large mobility responses.”

But when “those paper moves are shut down,” there’s much less moving — and “that’s the basis for the California model,” he added.

The outlook

Ghassomian, who said he has been “fielding a lot of inbound inquiries from clients who are just kind of worried,” said it is clear that the proposal’s authors “have done their homework” and tried to design the tax in a smart way.

Still, he said, he has concerns about the cost of administering the tax outpacing revenues, especially amid litigation. Residency battles alone with billionaires whose claims of departing the state are questioned could take “years and years and years” to resolve, he said.

“The revenue has to line up with expenditures, and if you can’t count on the revenue because it’s going to be tied up in courts, or it’s going to be delayed, then I think that creates some real logistical hurdles,” he said.

Smetters said predicting revenues from a tax on so many different types of assets is “really hard,” but one thing that has generally held true through history is that “most countries, even with less-mobile wealth, typically do not get the type of revenue that they were hoping for.”

David Sacks, a venture capitalist and President Trump’s AI czar who decamped from California to Texas, said on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, last week that the measure was an “asset seizure” more than a tax, and that the state would be headed in a “scary direction” if voters approved it.

Darien Shanske, a tax law professor at UC Davis and another drafter of the proposal, said he and his colleagues did their best to “look at the lessons of the past, and apply them in a way that makes sense and is generally fair and administrable” — in a state where wealth inequality is rapidly growing and a wealth tax presents unique opportunities.

“Having a tax on billionaires does make particular sense in California because of the large number that live here and the large number who have made their fortune here,” he said.

Shanske said the proposed tax is designed to provide California a way to “triage” soaring healthcare premiums resulting from legislation enacted by the Trump administration and congressional Republicans. The proposal asks for contributions from people who will quickly recoup what they are taxed given the exponential growth of their assets, he said.

Emmanuel Saez, director of the Stone Center on Wealth and Income Inequality at UC Berkeley and another drafter of the measure, said many of the repealed European taxes targeted millionaires while providing loopholes for billionaires to avoid paying, whereas California’s measure is “exactly the reverse.”

He said the measure will raise substantial revenue in part because California billionaire wealth more than doubled from 2023 to 2025 alone, and is “the innovative and first-of-its-kind tax on the ultra-wealthy that the moment requires.”

Thomas Piketty, a French economist and author of “Capital in the Twenty-First Century,” called California’s proposed tax “very innovative” and “relatively modest” compared with massive wealth taxes after World War II — including in Germany and Japan — and said it would not only improve healthcare in the state but “have an enormous impact on the U.S. and international political scene.”

“In the current context, with a deeply entrenched billionaire class, wealth taxes meet even more political resistance than in the postwar context, and this is where California could make a huge difference,” he said. “The fact of targeting the revenue to health spending is also very innovative and can help convince the voters to support the initiative.”

Times staff writer Seema Mehta contributed to this report.