Netflix's documentary The Crash has renewed public discussion about one of the most controversial vehicular homicide cases in recent memory: the case of Mackenzie Shirilla. As a trial lawyer who has spent years investigating serious motor vehicle collisions, I watched the documentary with a particular interest in the evidence. What struck me most was the repeated assertion by Shirilla and her parents that there was no evidence she intended to kill anyone. Technically, they were correct in one respect: there was no confession, no written plan, and no direct evidence of intent. But intent is often proven through circumstantial evidence, and in this case, the circumstantial evidence was extraordinarily powerful. The prosecution presented evidence from the vehicle's Electronic Control Module (ECM), commonly referred to as the vehicle's "black box." According to trial testimony, the data showed the accelerator was pressed to 100% for approximately ten seconds before impact. During that time, the vehicle accelerated to nearly 100 miles per hour. Just as significant, investigators found no evidence of braking and no evidence of any attempt to steer away from the wall.
For many observers, those facts alone were compelling. The vehicle did not appear to be out of control, but instead navigated an S curved road before crashing. The electronic data suggested continuous acceleration directly into a fixed object. What I found particularly interesting was the reaction of the victims' family members as the trial unfolded. Early in the proceedings, Dom Tiberi's father and sister appeared sympathetic toward Shirilla and her family, even sitting with them in the courtroom. As the evidence was presented, however, that dynamic visibly changed. Their growing distance seemed to reflect the impact the evidence was having not only on the trial judge, but on those most personally affected by the tragedy.
The documentary also highlights a phenomenon that is becoming increasingly common in modern litigation: young people documenting nearly every aspect of their lives online. Social media posts, TikTok videos, text messages, photographs, and recordings often provide an unfiltered window into relationships and one’s state of mind. In this case, the toxic relationship between Shirilla and Dom was preserved in countless digital records. The documentary portrays a relationship marked by insecurity, volatility, jealousy, and emotional dependence. Arguments that might have been forgotten were recorded and stored indefinitely. For lawyers and investigators, these digital footprints can become powerful evidence because they often reveal patterns of behavior that would otherwise remain hidden.
Another observation I had while watching the documentary was the apparent absence of faith, religion, or any meaningful spiritual foundation in the lives of many of the individuals involved. Every viewer will draw his or her own conclusions, but I could not help noticing how disconnected many of the participants seemed from any larger moral framework during periods of intense personal conflict and emotional turmoil.
From a trial perspective, the prosecution's presentation was highly effective. The state assembled electronic evidence, witness testimony, social media records, and relationship history into a narrative that persuaded the trial judge beyond a reasonable doubt that this was not simply a tragic accident. I was also struck by the defense team's decision to waive a jury trial and proceed before a judge. Lawyers make that choice for many reasons, and only the defense team knows their true reasoning. But such decisions are always strategic. Given the emotional facts and the nature of the evidence, one cannot help but wonder whether there was concern that a jury might react even more strongly to the prosecution's case. At its core, The Crash is not merely a documentary about a fatal automobile collision. It is a case study in how intent can be proven through circumstantial evidence, how digital evidence increasingly shapes modern trials, and how a series of decisions can lead to irreversible consequences. The case remains controversial, and reasonable people may continue to debate it. But after reviewing the evidence presented in the documentary, it is easy to understand why the court concluded this was far more than an ordinary car accident.