Mannahatta
-
Posts
182 -
Joined
Content Type
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Discussion
Posts posted by Mannahatta
-
-
Well, I watched "The Family I Had" last night. Made by two independent filmmakers - it's definitely not your usual ID fare. I don't want to discuss the specifics for those who haven't seen it, but I will say that the story of inter-generational familial psychopaths, and the mother's denial (wrapped up in forgiveness), unfolded in a way that was absolutely chilling. So don't let those ads turn you off! It was fascinating.
-
12
-
-
17 hours ago, Miles said:
What? Outright acquittal is always availible to te jury. It's called jury nullification. I know that and I'm not ven american.
As I fell down the internet rabbit hole about this case, I came across this article: http://articles.latimes.com/1993-12-07/local/me-64883_1_lyle-menendez
Apparently the option of outright acquittal isn't always available: ".... the judge dealt a severe setback to the defense, turning down a request for a jury instruction offering the option of an acquittal. Weisberg said the facts of the case did not meet the legal standard: that a reasonable person would have feared imminent death on the night of Aug. 20, 1989, when the brothers shot and killed their parents."
This makes sense as the defendants weren't pleading that they were not guilty. The trial was to determine the severity of the charges, based on whether or not the defendants felt their lives were in danger at the time of the homicides.
-
2
-
-
7 hours ago, wallofsound said:
I read something about the "boys" having in their possession in jail a book (possibly written by a psychologist) about sexual abuse within the family and the book reportedly used the same vocabulary that Eric used on the stand - like when he mentioned he called certain encounters with his father 'the object sessions' or something like that. It was really specific language and specific scenarios in the book that the "boys" basically repeated verbatim on the stand. This is foggy to me - maybe someone else knows more and can explain it better?
https://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/1994/03/dunne199403
Quoting Dominick Dunne from the above link: "....I have heard straight from the mouth of a Menendez relative, with whom I met clandestinely during the trial, that the brothers’ account of the molestation was false, gleaned from books they read in jail, beginning with Paul Mones’s When a Child Kills: Abused Children Who Kill Their Parents, a study of true cases and how they were defended in court. Pamela Bozanich, the cool, no-nonsense prosecutor, made the point during the trial that much of the defense strategy was suggested by Mones’s book: “In one of the incidents related in the book, which dealt with sexual abuse as the basis of parricide, there was mention of Vaseline in the incident. There was mention of sex used to punish the child. There was talk about the defense attorneys’ need to collect all photos, diaries, letters, and everything in order to substantiate the abuse. There was indication that the defendant in this case was scared that he was homosexual. . . . There’s information on page 66 that the father’s sex was getting rougher, that the sex included being poked with pens and pencils … that the particular person was dressed up in sweaters in order to make him look younger for purpose of testifying.”...."
I for one would love to know what are the actual facts of the case. This series leaves out a lot of what Dunne covered, and Dunne left out or didn't believe a lot of what the series now presents as fact. I would really need to know more about those photos....
("Blood Brothers" was written in 1995 and got fairly good reviews. But apparently there's a lot of price gouging going on at Amazon due to this series. The current price for it ranges from $42.49 to $162.49. Last week the prices were even higher. Guess I'll have to wait a while for the prices to go back to normal.)
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, hoodooznoodooz said:
I don't remember Jeff cheating on Susie before either.
Jeff has cheated on Susie in the past. There was the Officer Krupke episode where Susie finds a pair of women's underpants in Jeff's possession. Jeff then asks Larry to lie for him and say that they belong to Larry which leads Larry to practice saying "I'm Larry David and I like wearing women's underpants". There was also another episode where Jeff had sex with the mentally unhinged sister of Funkhauser, and later there's a dinner scene where she's coming on to him while Susie is sitting at the table. In my recent marathon watching I think I saw a few other times where it's implied that he's cheating. Now that I think about it - Jeff is actually quite the creep.
-
1
-
11
-
-
I just watched "One Moment" (Derek Paul Smyer). Wow. What a psychopathic narcissist. I bet his lawyers wished he had never taken the witness stand. The smirking, the barely contained laughter, was truly appalling. So much for the veneer of superficial charm. That went out the window whenever he thought he could prove that he's smarter than everyone else.
I wished that Dateline had shown more of the trial testimony - especially from his daughter. It sounded like she had a lot more to say and probably more reality based than his sister's glowing accolades.
As to the issue of avoiding unwanted pregnancies: most birth control methods aren't 100% effective, not everyone is pro-choice, and sadly a guy like Smyer probably wouldn't get a vasectomy. He'll think that'll make him less of the manly man he imagines himself to be. But I do wonder just how conscientious they were about birth control and if the 2 women involved actually planned to get pregnant. Even if you have family to help you out (and Crystal Taylor's family seemed like very nice people) and even if you don't want him to live with you: you would think that deciding who is going to be the father of your child is a major life decision. If you can avoid it - why bring a kid into a world that isn't wanted by the father? Life is complicated enough.
I also wonder if he had threatened Crystal and that's why she was crying when she got off the phone, and also made those comments to her sister. It's so sad she couldn't bring herself to tell them more.
-
6
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Clearly Shawn's ability to sew let alone design was very limited. So it really pissed me off when she tried to turn her ineptitude into an act of nobility - "I concede." Concede, my ass. The judges would have sent her home anyway. And l for one would have liked to see how Claire's blue outfit turned out.
ETA: Awaken I see we were thinking along the same lines there.
-
43
-
Is anyone watching Street Justice: The Bronx? It's another one of these series based on the recollections of a retired detective. Since I had worked in the Bronx for 25 years I had some interest in seeing this show. So I watched 2 episodes but both times felt that there was something so off about this show. The detective, Ralph Friedman, relates the stories in a flat workmanlike fashion with a minimal show of emotion, wit, or insight. The reenactments are cliched with dialog straight out of a 1970s cop show. Plus the pacing is wierd. Interspersed between the cheesy re-enactments they'll throw in some random news footage of the Bronx burning or whatever, and have a random talking head (another detective usually) make some kind of social commentary. And, most important, unlike Shattered, this show is unable to convey any true emotion - any sense of what the victims went through, what made the criminals tick, or even how the people in law enforcement felt. It's like it's going through the motions but it doesn't have any heart. At least, that's my take on it. I'll be curious to know what others think.
-
2
-
-
On 9/18/2017 at 1:19 PM, Writing Wrongs said:
The Chandra Levy show was interesting.
I found it to be interesting too. For starters I hadn't realized (or had forgotten) just how sleazy and manipulative Gary Condit was: married with multiple girlfriends, very secretive, bad temper, attempted to obstruct justice by asking women to lie for him, etc, etc. I also didn't know that Chandra had told someone (I forget who) that she had wanted Condit to leave his wife for her. And then there's the question of why Chandra went to a isolated trail in Rock Creek Park that was so rocky it wasn't even suitable for running. Did she go there to meet someone? Also, unlike a lot of the well publicized cases that keep getting rehashed - there has been a major development in this case over the past year: Ingmar Guandique, who was originally convicted of her murder has been released from prison and the decision was made to not retry him. So unlike other cases that are being solely retried in the media this one could actually be retried in court - in the unlikely event that any new evidence pops up. What a sad mess of a case.
One more thing - I had to google this - Gary Condit is still married to his wife. WTF
-
5
-
-
I was struck by how all the women started to talk over Tinsley just as she was expressing her vulnerabilities. No matter what they said to or about her- the point is they weren't really listening to her. They all needed to be in control. I'm of the opinion that they perceive her as being weak and dependent and that's what struck a collective raw nerve. True or not; the one thing these women pride themselves on is projecting strength. And since they refuse to acknowledge their own vulnerabilities Tinsley probably represents all their inner fears. I actually think Tinsley is a great addition to the cast. She's stuck in the past on so many levels and it's fascinating to watch her try to grow. I'm rooting for her. And at least she's not bitchy.
-
16
-
-
17 hours ago, biakbiak said:
This film made me worried for Mel, they are so close and he was barely in it.
Not to worry. He was probably too busy with his new play. http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/theater/news/ct-mel-brooks-chicago-theatre-20170327-story.html
http://www.playbill.com/article/casting-announced-for-uk-premiere-of-mel-brooks-young-frankenstein
-
2
-
-
On 5/26/2017 at 10:59 AM, ryebread said:
The problem with high gloss paint is, unless your walls are perfectly smooth, every ripple shows. And Dorinda's are showin'. In addition, if she ever wants to re-paint (and she needs to) it costs a small fortune because the walls have to be sanded lightly in order for the new paint to adhere AND if it's glossy and a dark color, good luck covering it without primer, primer, primer and even more paint. I know because husband's first house had a glossy forest green dining room. Thank god it was about 10x10. But Dorinda's got the bucks to make the change if she desires. But I think the shabby chic/eclectic look is what she's going for so there's that.
Ah but Dorinda's walls are lacquered. It's a more expensive, labor intensive process than just using high gloss paint and it's probably even more difficult to paint over. I actually like the look of her walls and that she's not afraid of color. Not that crazy about some of her knickknacks, like those green guys above the fire place, but at least her place looks comfortable. https://www.houzz.com/ideabooks/4438234/list/lacquered-walls-rise-and-shine
-
2
-
-
This episode was a bit of a game changer for me. Tom wasn't presented as being just a womanizer. He was presented as being a sexually aggressive dick. To me that puts his behavior in a whole new light. Guys like that are scary. Years ago the boyfriend of a friend cornered me and out of the blue tried to aggressively kiss me. When I told my friend she chose not to believe me. I think Lu is suffering from the same level of denial. Even if she loves being married for the sake of being married, and is accepting of Tom having affairs - I find it hard to believe that she would find sexually aggressive behavior acceptable. I can see how the other women would want to warn her - not that I think that they'll be able to break through her denial.
-
15
-
-
2 hours ago, Sweet-tea said:
There were multiple theories including the suicide-murder and Ambien....
I don't think she took Ambien because it wasn't mentioned in the toxicology report....
Did the coroner test specifically for Ambien?
In 2011 Diane's husband, Daniel, sued New York State (blamed the crash on the road) and his brother-n-law (Diane had borrowed his supposedly defective car). http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/07/26/report-widower-sues-state-after-tragic-wrong-way-crash-on-taconic-parkway/ So I think it's fair to say that the husband has to be one sick and twisted individual to sue the very man whose 3 daughters died in the crash that occurred while his own wife was behind the wheel.
So sick in fact that I began to wonder if Diane's husband had slipped her an Ambien before she hit the road. With Ambien a person's mind can fall asleep while their body appears to be functioning as if they were awake. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/15/ambien-side-effect-sleepwalking-sleep-aid_n_4589743.html This side effect can be abrupt in its appearance. It would explain how Diane went from appearing sober to driving in a completely irrational manner. Plus the husband is the one who said he didn't want children. It's rare but not unheard of for a man to kill (or try to kill) both a spouse and a child both to avoid responsibility and to appear like the victim.
Going on Reddit and Web Sleuth requires a commitment to reading that I'm not ready for. I'm already getting Carpal Tunnel Syndrome from scrolling this site. LOL So my question is this: has anyone else theorized that the husband was directly involved? Or do I just watch too much true crime on TV?
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, FozzyBear said:
What on earth could she have told a dentist to convince one to pull healthy teeth? Which leaves the *shudder* option that DeeDee was purposely doing something to Gypsy's teeth *shudder*
http://gawker.com/everything-we-know-about-dee-dee-blanchardes-twisted-oz-1712087183
The Gawker article says that the mother forced Gypsy to take anti-seizure medication that caused her teeth to fall out. It really is mind boggling that the mother was able to get away with torturing Gypsy all those years with the complicity of the medical community. Very scary stuff. That doctor who said that the mother wasn't neglecting Gypsy - just being overly concerned - conveniently left out that the very nature of Munchausen by Proxy means abuse was taking place.
And that scene of Gypsy singing (dreadfully) on stage in that Shirley Temple outfit really skeeved me. It just seemed so patronizing. Didn't anyone in that audience think something was very wrong with the dynamic between mother and daughter?
-
6
-
-
42 minutes ago, Brattinella said:
On ID, just now, I turned on "Love Kills" episode title "It was all a big fantasy". I am 5 minutes in, and I had to change the channel. It was probably an interesting episode, but the woman who is talking has THE MOST OBNOXIOUS VOICE. I just couldn't stand it for a moment longer. Maybe someone can give a summary when it is over, please?
I recorded it so I'm now 6 minutes into it.... I do believe ID may be trying to attract Comedy Central's audience. So far the style challenged Josh, whose family owns a 180 acre dairy farm, has informed us that "Sex with Donna was unbelievable." and shortly afterwards "Just as soon as she started milking cows I fell in love with her." Meanwhile Donna has a vocal fry so pronounced that her voice sounds like a death rattle. I don't know who eventually gets harmed in this story but I feel the greatest sympathy for them - not only for their unfortunate end but for having their name forever linked to this show. Not sure if I'll be able to make it much further myself......
-
5
-
-
On 4/24/2017 at 7:06 PM, One Tough Cookie said:
Did anyone watch the Joyce Mitchell movie last night? IT was called The Seduction of Joyce Mitchell and was, for me, compelling. If were Joyce, I''d probably want to hide in prison for the rest of my life after being the subject of this movie. It did her no favors and, IMO should be played every time the bitch comes up for parole.
Just finished watching it and I thought it was worked well as a dark comedy. Naturally, if it hadn't ended the way it did there would have been nothing to laugh at. And although Joyce probably isn't as hapless as they made her out to be, the movie struck just the right sardonic tone. Those two cons were able to play her like a fiddle. But she was using them just as much because where in the real world would she have been able to play the femme fatale?
And then there was this bit of dialog:
QuoteDetective: Mrs. Mitchell? You know that one of these men shot and ran over a sheriff's deputy?
J.M.: (whimpers) Yes
Detective: And that the other man tortured a man to death, sawed him into pieces and threw the pieces into the river?
JM: (meekly) Yes
Detective: And you gave them the means to escape from prison into the population?
JM: Everybody says I'm too nice....
I don't know if she actually said it or if it came from the writers' imaginations but it pretty much summed up her defense. Oh and that she was afraid of them. Meanwhile last I heard her husband is still patiently waiting for her. He even wrote a letter of support for her recent (unsuccessful) parole hearing. Guess it's true - you can't fix stupid.
http://www.newyorkupstate.com/northern-ny/2017/02/joyce_mitchell_parole.html
What she did was unconscionable. She's lucky no one was killed by Matt and Sweat when they were on the run. She would have been looking at a lot more than 7 years.
-
5
-
-
On the subject of DNA - last summer, as I was waiting for the dentist - I came across a July 2016 issue of National Geographic. It's cover story was about advances in forensics as well as its widespread misuse:
QuoteIn 2009 the National Academy of Sciences released a blistering report calling into question the scientific validity of the analysis of fingerprints, bite marks, blood spatters, clothing fiber, handwriting, bullet markings, and many other mainstays of forensic investigation. It concluded that with one exception, no forensic method could be relied on with a high degree of certainty to “demonstrate a connection between evidence and a specific individual or source.”
http://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2016/07/forensic-science-justice-crime-evidence/
While the article then goes on to note that the NSA's one exception was DNA, it then points out that "...a DNA sequence in a lab is only as good as the training of the person conducting the analysis." It's a very well-researched and scary article. It makes one wonder how many innocent people have been found guilty due to evidence that- unbeknownst to the jury - was based more on subjective interpretation than objective science. And if you add corruption, bullying, and an agenda by the police and the DA's office - then the whole process gets even scarier.
As for ancestry.com and any other DNA genealogy website - I guess I won't be sending them any of my saliva. lol
-
7
-
-
On 4/15/2017 at 7:46 AM, Josette said:
Re: Scene of the Crime
I don't believe he's involved in the murder. But I can't help but wonder if he's hiding something else and that's why he perjured himself.
Late in the episode, when the reporter was interviewing Raymond McCann, he said he hadn't lied at all but plead guilty to perjury because he was being threatened with a long prison sentence if he didn't. Innocent people do plead guilty if they're intimidated by the police enough. Still, one wonders where his lawyer was while all this was happening. Currently, the Michigan Law School's Innocence Clinic is trying to have his perjury conviction overthrown based on hours of still existing interrogation videos. I really feel bad for the guy.
-
7
-
-
On 4/12/2017 at 1:58 PM, bubbls said:
I rewatched Dateline's "Bad Blood" about the twins Tasmiyah and Jasmiyah Whitehead killing their mother. Those were two creepy kids. I remember my first time seeing this episode, and the second I saw the interview room footage I knew they did it.
Those two are textbook psychopaths to the core, and they'll be free in their forties! Free to threaten, harm and perhaps kill again. A few months ago Crime Watch Daily had a segment about them. What really stood out to me was a tape they showed of the twins, in prison of course, attending their GED/high school graduation ceremony. And who was there to celebrate and praise them but their maternal grandmother. Yes, the mother of their own mother, whom they had almost decapitated during their killing frenzy, was there on tape proclaiming how proud she was of them. How sick and twisted is that? If you care to be horrified further it's in the third tape of this link:
-
8
-
-
A few random thoughts.....A few weeks ago (or was it months?) I had sworn off RHBH, due to the dumbness of pantygate, etc., but still continued to read this forum. Big mistake - I should have gone completely cold turkey. My curiosity got the better of me. I fell off the wagon and binge watched all the episodes that I missed. (Hangs head in shame.) But enough about me.....
Some observations about Erika: her anger at Dorit and Eileen in Hong Kong was both amazingly over the top and devoid of any insight. She would rather be on the attack and full of the thrill of self-righteousness than question the reasons behind her own contradictory acting-out behaviors and emotions. She's kind of exhausting.
Another thing - for all the efforts of her glam squad there's a weird 1960s/1970s Playmate-on-steroids/ mother-of-the bride look to her hair, make-up, and clothes. In fact, I was switching the channels today and came across an episode of Wonder Woman from 1976. Is it just me or is there an uncanny resemblance between Wonder Woman's mother and Erika? http://www.wonderland-site.com/html/photos/wonder/ww0256.htm
-
14
-
-
I know the story but I haven't watched any episodes of the documentary yet. I plan to yet I'm dreading it. It is a horrific indictment of our entire criminal justice system.
-
I had recorded the episode of Evil Lives Here titled "Trapped in Hell". It was so disturbing that I had to keep interrupting it. After 3 days. I finally finished it. It's insane to think that in this country, in this day and age, that an upper class woman with a law school degree, Susan Hamlin was her name, who had been close to her own family of origin - could become so completely trapped in a marriage with a psycho. Of course, intellectually I know that it's possible but wow. That show was insane - especially how the father ( Richard Hamlin, a successful lawyer - oddly enough) was able to convince, through fear and manipulation, all 4 children that the mother was the member of a cult who deserved to be beaten even killed by him. It was the kind of show that makes me question not only what's going on behind closed doors but just how thin is the line between sanity and insanity. What thought process kept the wife from leaving before it got so out of hand?..... Of course, there are people (probably not on this forum, lol) who may ask why I'm watching these type of programs at all if I find them so upsetting.... Well, at least the ending was happy.... sort of. The psycho husband was locked up for life. But of course the rest of the family still remains traumatized. In fact, I think I'm experiencing second-hand trauma from watching this show.
-
7
-
-
On 3/20/2017 at 10:40 AM, wings707 said:
I have googled but came up empty. I want to know if the restaurant set is a replica of a famous restaurant in that era. The peach banquets Look expensive so it seems they must be significant. Many restaurants back then were not that elaborate and easier to replicate.
I think the restaurant is supposed to be Perinos. It was known for it's chandeliers and pink and peach color theme. Here's a 1940 photo of Joan Crawford taken in Perinos: https://www.joancrawfordbest.com/40perinoscafebevhills.htm
Here's another link about the now closed Perinos: http://www.iamnotastalker.com/2012/08/14/perinos-restaurant/ A scene from "Mommie Dearest" had also been filmed there.
Yep. It was definitely Perino's. Here's a link about the set design that includes this quote: "Since many of the era’s hotspots sadly no longer exist, Becker and her team recreated locations such as Perino’s restaurant." http://www.architecturaldigest.com/gallery/ryan-murphy-feud-set-design/all
-
3
-
-
On 3/12/2017 at 9:57 PM, Brattinella said:
This new 3 part special about CA. Does everyone remember the juror who said she "couldn't judge anyone"? Everything stunk in that trial, especially Baez. This better not be an apology piece to that monster.
I remember one juror saying after the trial: "We shouldn't have had to connect all the dots." What a dumb ass. I guess critical thinking was too much work for her and apparently all the other jurors as well. That verdict was a travesty.
-
14
-
General True Crime Shows
in Genre Talk
· Edited by Mannahatta
Well, the grandmother, Kyla Bennett, did wind up inheriting the (trucking?) business of her daughter's father - the same guy who was murdered. The grandmother creeped me out from the start, but apparently her carefree, smiling manner has served her well in life. And what about her rationalization for those violent, misogynist graphic novels she was sending to Paris in prison? How evil can you get?
I wonder how the other daughter turned out.
Another weird thing - among many - the mother, Charity, seemed to like to style her young son's hair as if he were a girl. It wasn't just that Phoenix's hair was long. In one scene he had barrettes in his hair. It was as if - in her usual unaware, oblivious manner - she was turning him into a replacement for her murdered daughter.
That scene with Charity speaking with a group of women was also very strange. The women all looked like they wanted to run for the nearest exit. A motivational speaker she is not.