Investigating the Investigation
I don't know what it is about the ID shows, but they always seem to pick and choose what parts of a story they want to tell. They don't seem to realize how easy it is to Google information about these cases. The information left out seems inversely proportional to how long the show runs. Seasons one and two have moments of "Huh, I wonder why they didn't mention this part?" But the longer it goes on the more ridiculous the oversights are. It really starts to carry a stink of "But only the people we are interviewing matter." Sometimes it seems like the equivalent of interviewing a Dahmer survivor and failing to mention that he killed fifteen other people.For example: There was one case that they made a huge fuss over how religious the family was and how it must of been God that protected and saved them. The mother and daughter were kidnapped and held hostage by a former student of hers. But the show completely fails to mention that while kidnapping the two of them, he also kidnapped and murdered a young boy for witnessing what was happening. It just reeked of sillyness. "God was with us." Well, he didn't seem to be with that little boy who only died for seeing what was happening!
In another case a woman's ex-boyfriend goes on a killing spree. He winds up killing the family that was sheltering her and then kidnapping her. The re-enactment then becomes very generous with its timeline. According to the show's version they went to a hotel and almost immediately he wigs out and wants to leave and she spots a cop and heroically runs for help. What they fail to mention was that they most certainly weren't there for mere minutes. In real life there were a lot of questions about her involvement and how much was happening against her will. According to the hotel manager she was away from the guy on multiple occasions to buy snacks and drinks. To him, she seemed "Chipper and happy" and at no time did she seem tortured or under any duress, nor did she relate that she was being held against her will, which she could have done at any time. The show also fails to mention that after she escaped he killed another person in a carjacking. Then, when they relate the part about him kidnapping the woman's mother, they completely leave out two other human beings! "OH NO! He has my mother!" What they fail to mention is that mom's boyfriend and a twelve year old boy were in the house and held hostage as well. Why? Why fail to mention this? Did you overlook two people? Or is it just more heroic if only female victims are involved? The show also fails to mention that our heroine and her mother both heroically sued the police department and lost. Their claim was that the cops failed to adequately protect them, only problem was, the cops had offered both of them protection on numerous occasions, including having an officer in their homes.
It just seems like the entire show is conveniently one-sided. Every victim's story starts with: "They were sweet, innocent, well-liked, beloved, had many friends, and in their spare time they fed the starving leper orphans of Calcutta." Whether the producers are poorly researching these stories or just ignoring the inconvenient stuff....the decision is questionable at the least. We want to hear the whole story, not just some "version" of it.
score 3/10
df4205 21 July 2020
Reprint: https://www.imdb.com/review/rw5923059/15068
Pages:
[1]