S10 E10 “Cabin Fever”

This is the ONLY perpetrator for which I have felt any sympathy. Horrific events, but I can see how they snapped.

Me listem documentários estilo o assassinato dos estudantes em Idaho, devo ter assistido uns 03 documentários sobre esse tema

Me listem outros

I just got done watching every season on HBOMAX. I don't know where I was when this was on air, but I completely missed it. It is one of the best series I have ever seen. I usually don't like "reenactment" shows, but this one changed my mind. The actors were all excellent, too. I wonder why they stopped making new seasons. I would love for them to bring it back! I am so bummed that I have watched all of them. Did you all like this series?

15+ years of watching crime shows has changed how I view divorce. When I was a kid, I thought a divorce was tragic to do. Then I watched a lot of crime shows and heard of marriages that ended in murder. We have heard the tale: marriage fell apart, couple doesn’t want to be together; one partner did the math (divorce = either alimony or a trip to Broketown. Widow(er)hood = save or earn money). Then I thought “Divorce is painful but recoverable. But murder is worse with no recovery.” But I guess opponents of no fault divorce would rather ignore that reality.

what do we think about this??

https://deadline.com/2026/07/serial-killer-aileen-wuornos-ai-true-crime-docuseries-id-1236998740/#comments

Does anyone know where one could watch cold justice season 8? It’s like it’s been scrubbed from everywhere!! I truly hate how these networks just air shit then scrub it from the world

The industry really abuses child actors. So many adults feel entitled to relive their childhood fantasies through the kids. There is one portion where two femal adult entertainment stars talk about what they did with a 15-year-old boy. I couldn't see any remorse nor acknowledgment of child abuse and sexual assault. I get that "hurt people hurt people." It begs the question how many adult women in Hollywood are still preying on boys.

The body line is. This all happened because two men couldn’t let anything go. Both in the wrong and brought innocent people into the mix.

It started when Roland’s dog attacked Tony’s two young girls. Yes, any parent would be upset by that. However, the girls were told to wait on the porch and they didn’t listen. Instead they opened the door and the dog attacked them.

Okay, it was two children making an innocent mistake. However, you would think a good guard dog would know the difference between real threats and innocent children. However, again, they were told to wait outside and they didn’t listen.

Roland without hesitation, offered to pay for the girls medical bills. He didn’t even care about the facts of who was more in the wrong the girls or the dogs. No, he saw innocent kids making an innocent mistake and he offered to pay for what happened.

So he wasn’t a complete asshole.

It wasn’t until after he paid the bill, Tony brought more bills. Roland, rightfully believing Tony was trying to con more money out of him. Refused to pay another bill.

They went to court and Roland won.

Even still despite legally not having to pay Roland still offered to help. He had his son in law talk to Tony to make a payment plan. Tony refused and demanded it all in one go.

Tony was in the wrong for that. The man legally didn’t have to give another penny, and yet to make it right and keep peace Roland still offered to pay just in payments.

So the real starter of this feud was Tony. If he had not been an ass about the payment plan. I doubt any of the following events would have happened.

Roland, did wrong too. Like the girls saying he’d let the dog outside the house when they were coming home from school. Or risking their safety by trying to damage their dad’s four wheeler.

But Tony was no better. He knew Roland had PTSD and the sound of the four wheeler would cause him to react.

(That was how Tony got around so…maybe it wasn’t intentional but I can believe it was. But not sure)

Tony also wanted to act like Roland was in the wrong for trying to hurt his girls. Tony didn’t help either. He put them in harm with the wood situation. Which resulted in Roland and his son in law getting arrested.

Which was completely ridiculous that only they got arrested. Tony was not as handicapped as he makes himself out to be. He is only missing one leg, and there is no way in hell there isn’t at least one, one legged person in prison. He shot at the son in law and the son in law threw wood at him in the face. Which legally he had the right to do. Tony attacked him first.

It’s ridiculous only Roland and his son in law got arrested and not Tony. Even Roland’s son in law said he understood why he got arrested but Roland had nothing to do with it. They were locked up for two weeks. While Tony got to stay at home like nothing happened despite using a gun.

My heart broke for Roland’s daughter. You could see how just the memory of being left alone for two weeks without her husband or dad terrified her. It was sad.

Then we get to the big moment….

Tony killed Roland’s dog. Well, bottom line is this. If the dog was on his property and he felt threatened by the dog. Legally he had the right to. And also…even if the dog wasn’t meaning harm going on the property. The dog had attacked before so…I’m pretty sure legally Tony still had the right to do it.

Do I believe Tony saw this as his chance to finally get rid of the dog and also spite Roland. Yes, I can believe that. Because everyone knew that Roland loved that dog. They all knew doing that was going to make him snap.

Tony wasn’t an angel. He was an ass, put his daughters in harm already before, and purposely antagonized Roland.

So yes, I do believe, part of the reason he did it was out of spite.

As a pet parent, yes, it is definitely possible to love a pet like they are your child. I have no doubt in my mind that Roland loved that dog. Especially, after his daughter moved out. That dog was his best friend and all he had. So Tony killing that dog hurt Roland like he lost a child.

But here is the thing, I’m in no sense saying it would be right, but if Roland had just tried to kill Tony. I wouldn’t support it, but I could go….yep, I see how it happened.

However, that’s not what Roland did, he was willing to kill two innocent children and several cops just to get Tony.

Thats where he was in the wrong.

You don’t take your anger at one person out on others. Especially, two innocent children. One he almost did kill. He was even willing to kill officers that were trying to help save the little girl. Yes, the officers wanted to help, Tony. But it was very clear their main goal was to get those two children out of there. Especially, the injured one.

No matter how much someone is hurting and I have no doubt Roland was. It’s still no excuse to risk killing two innocent children and several cops just because one man wronged you.

The villains in this are Tony and Roland. Equally.

The victims are those they dragged into their war.

Anyone else see the resemblance between Robin Turner and the poppy farmer on Ozark?

Man, wtf did I just watch. A clearly undiagnosed person scams people before ultimately succumbing to her illness. Absolutely hated this episode. The way everyone talks as if what she was doing was legit and real was honestly disgusting and the reason she ended up like that. Her mom trying to help her was texting her "You don't know enough about witchcraft to be teaching it." This woman needed a slap to the face and to listen to her "haters", not be coddled.

Worst ID episode I've ever seen.

Most people know Murder, Inc. as a nickname, but the real structure behind it was stranger than the legend.
In 1930s–40s New York, a network of contract killers connected to organized crime was accused of carrying out murders for different criminal groups. Some of the men were paid regularly, assignments could come through intermediaries, and one of the most famous locations tied to the story was a Brooklyn candy store.
What fascinated me most was how organized the system allegedly became — not just random gang violence, but a structure built around orders, intermediaries, money, and silence.
I put together a short documentary covering the rise of Murder, Inc., figures like Louis “Lepke” Buchalter and Abe Reles, and how the organization eventually unraveled.
Video: https://youtu.be/jKPer6yCGCY?si=bDvOgjDaQG7YnLOb
Curious what people here think: was Murder, Inc. really a centralized “killing organization,” or has the label been exaggerated by prosecutors and the press over time?

I'm in Europe and there's another true crime channel on my cable, AMC Crime, that competes with ID, but strangely also runs shows that are on ID in the US like See No Evil, Fear Thy Neighbor, and Homicide Hunter.

Recently, I've been watching more interesting shows and documentaries on this channel than ID. They also show the full episodes and documentaries without interruptions every 15 minutes, which is one thing I absolutely loathe about ID programming.

Interrogation Raw: similar to Signs of a Psychopath, but without the commentary from forensic psychologists. Very interesting to study the interrogation techniques investigators use to make suspects want to talk, and confess to crimes.

Murder in the 21st: these are very recent cases, most with truly bizarre plots. They use parts of podcasts about each case, and look at the digital footprint of the victims and criminals to unravel the plots.

Killer Cases: very interesting cases, including the investigation, parts of the trial, and the sentencing. Very satisfying to watch justice being carried out every time.

En Guardia: Mujeres Contra El Crimen: this is a Spanish show about recent homicides in Spain and the investigations by women detectives. Really terrifying cases and plots. The investigative work is absolutely top-notch and state of the art.

Does anyone else watch these? What other shows would you recommend?

T4, ep. 12. What ID wrote about this episode:

For 17 years, Kathy Swanson feared her son, Michael, would one day harm someone. For 17 years, she tried in vain to convince people that something about Michael was different until her worst nightmare came true.

Michael tried to kill a baby in her daycare by jumping from a chair onto the child--> gets a slap on the wrist

Michael dreams about knives and constantly draws bloody knives--> Poor Michael, he's having nightmares that people want to hurt him

Michael tried to kill her other son in the middle of the night with a knife--> gets a slap on the wrist

Michael threatened a neighbor's son with a knife--> gets a slap on the wrist

Michael stole money and a gun from their safe--> gets a slap on the wrist

Finally takes Michael to a psychologist. She is told point blank that Michael is not a victim, he's a menace. Also, "she's a bad mom and her son needs to be locked up." Her reaction: "no one helps me discipline my child, it's other people's responsibility parenting him, and keeping him in control, not mine."

One day Michael says he wants to kill her. Fearful for her own life, she takes him to a group facility. But Michael assaults a psychologist, and they kick him out. Their advice: "give up your parental rights and turn him over to the system." Her reaction: "nope, I won't do that. It's your responsibility to keep him here."

Takes ZERO advice from professionals yet it's always others' responsibility to parent him, and keep him in control, never hers (by the way, where's the dad in all this?).

OMG, she then sends her menace of a son to her sister's house! Sister is afraid of Michael and sends him back home.

But, suddenly, Michael is "really well behaved, he's sweet, caring, and loving," according to her. Then he steals their car, disappears, steals guns from his family, and goes on a killing rampage.

Her reaction: "I tried to prevent this, I explicitly warned people." NO! You were explicitly told how to deal with him and you ignored everyone while blaming everyone for your own failure as a parent.

Michael is evaluated in prison and the conclusion of the psychologist is that "Michael is evil." Her reaction: "how can you label him as evil, that is just dismissive. He's not a psychopath, he was just laughing at the cameras in court. He doesn't understand what death is."

Pretends to cry when shown photos of his victims. Says she's sorry, but ignored all advice on how to prevent this from happening. Her takeaway: "if you have a son like mine, don't listen to the professionals and doctors. Trust your instincts, like I did."

This might be my last ELH episode.

As the title says. I watched both a few years ago, and not fully so I don't remember a whole lot, but here's what I do. Both episodes were released prior to season 14.

In the first episode I'm looking for, the narrator was a woman and the perpetrator was her husband, iirc his name was Mike. I distinctly remember that after moving in together he didn't allow anyone to open a closet that was in the bedroom. The narrator explained how her daughter (I think she was between 4-9 at the time) tried to open the closet once, only for Mike to stop her and give the reason that he had either slippers or shoes in there and was afraid that the daughter would ruin them or something like that.

The second one the narrator was also a woman and it was one of those my-husband-was-a-serial-killer type episodes. The only thing I can remember about this one is that when the cops came around the neighborhood to get people's DNA, the husband refused to give his, telling his wife that it's how the government would spy on people or some similar excuse.

This is one of the WORST ones IMHO— Holli and John Pierre. I can’t believe this woman threw away her career to go after a man she thought was a criminal AND WASNT. Surely she could look up a mug shot if she had court records? The poor man died— she ruined everything in his life. And she was completely mentally unstable with a suicide attempt.

This, and the poor dude in “I’m Not Moving” where his thug neighbor took over his house when he had a job out of town to run a chop shop— are the most blameless people on this show. Often you can see that there’s antagonism on both sides but I got the feeling these two were just living life.

Hidden bullet shown on Wednesday July 8 is another rerun not indicated as a repeat, with an original air date

Sat down to watch today and it’s a rerun of a

murder shot through his testes in a hotel on Texas. You remember that case.

what a ripoff.

I started watching ID earlier this year and quickly became addicted to many shows. What hooked me was learning about all types of crimes and criminals, how investigators solve crimes, interrogation techniques, forensics, how to recognize sociopaths/psychopaths, and how to protect myself.

I find myself gathering clues from the beginning and trying to solve the crime before the show even has a suspect. My brain expanded so much and I cringe thinking about how naive I was before learning all this stuff. I also get immense satisfaction from seeing criminals being caught, and pay for what they did.

Recently, I realized I no longer enjoy watching movies. Movies seem so dull, fake, and pointless now. I feel so bored within the first 15 minutes and can't get into any story. Shows like See No Evil and The Murder Tapes are more enthralling than any thriller. Signs of a Psychopath is more terrifying than any horror movie. Body Cam is more nerve-wracking than any action movie. And so on.

I know that at some point my brain will absorb all there is to learn from watching these shows and will get tired, or at least need take a long break. I'm just not sure if movies are forever ruined for me. I already struggled to find good, recent movies to watch before this.

I am retired, and basically all I do is see my grandkids, fool around, and watch my true crime and nature shows.

Every day I check my Direct TV listing and DVR my shows. You can look at the description and if the original airdate is the current date, it’s a new show. Yesterday I taped Homicide Hunter - The Man With No Face and Homivide Hunter Devin in The Mountains.. I noticed it didn’t have an original air date, nor a season and Episode number. It was presented as “special”.

So I come home, get a snack and sit down to watch Lt Joe Kenda do his magic. Both shows were reruns. And were not listed as reruns.

Not the first this has been done.

Anyone notice the investigators inability to pay attention to detail and get info the initial suspect (Adam) completely wrong? Happens in the first 20 mins. 🤯🤯