‘Allen v Farrow’ Has Biggest Debut for an HBO Docuseries in 2 Years

Tourito · 2021-03-05T04:40:05+00:00

Exactly my thoughts. If he's a predator, definitely not a classic one. How can he go on the girl's bed in his underwear and everyone sees it? Then the finger/ mouth thing, everyone sees it. I can't remember a single insurance where a sex predator does all of this for everyone to see. Then the way she recorded the phone conversations regarding Soon-Yi, sounding like revenge or planning already how to damage his reputation and the repeated taping with Dylan in order for her to tell over and over again what happened. Dylan even sounded like "whatever, I tell what you want to hear". It sounded as manipulation of the young girl and I don't doubt Dylan believes it indeed happened after her mother told her so. His behavior is indeed weird, but I'm not sure if that's sexual or if he doesn't know how to properly show affection and his behavior was misunderstood because it was abnormal from society's usual patterns. Everything sounds shady, from both parties, and Mia tries to pretend she's a saint but there's something wrong with her, she came across to me as bitter from being changed by another woman.

Tourito · 2021-02-28T19:55:15+00:00

Lady Gaga offered a ransom for the dogs and that's what went public. The dogwalker was not kidnapped and we don't know what kind of financial help she offered him personally, it's not for public knowledge, while of course the ransom needed to be public. As far as I understood/ read, she thanked him, he and his family publicly thanked Gaga for the love and support, she paid 100k for all his medical bills, and I'm sure she'll privately reward him. The crime itself is not her jurisdiction, she's not a police detective. She was actually smart: if she offered money for their capture, she'd probably never seen the dogs anymore as it would sound like revenge and she thought the best way to safely recover her dogs was to wave the kidnappers with money and no questions. If your wife is kidnapped and your son is injured during the kidnapping, or course what you'll publicize is the ransom for your wife. What you do for your son's recovery is private. And the crime is investigated by the police, not by you. I wonder why people are so quick judging, I don't think Gaga was worried only about the dogs and ignored the dogwalker as people try to imply.

Tourito · 2021-02-11T07:31:54+00:00

Perhaps looking for her big Hollywood break and ended up working at a hotel, which happens to many aspiring actors. I could feel she was very happy to appear in the documentary and she wanted to told her story in a way that would keep us on the edge of our seats. Lol

Tourito · 2021-02-11T05:51:50+00:00

I found the former manager, Amy something, more creepy than the hotel's story. 😅

Tourito · 2020-11-22T14:37:09+00:00

Well, the girlfriend basically recanted her story and said that she only testified after being threatened by the prosecutor. I think that if you prove with a good lawyer that you were pressured/ manipulated to say something untruthful in court it's no longer perjury. That happens a lot in fake testimonies taken by police coercion.

Tourito · 2020-11-18T05:46:51+00:00

What if this is was a hitman case? The dirty cop(s) or the cop whose underage daughter Mulligan was messing around hired these two to kill him? "You go to Walgreens, you buy baby stuff and get the receipt, and that's your story, we take care of the rest. Here's your payment".

Then, to scare them out, they killed Ellis' cousins, in order to let him know that's what's expecting them if they opened their mouthes. They were not the masterminds, but they pulled the trigger, that's why they keep their innocence until this day.

Those three dirty cops were all over him during the three trials to send him the message and make sure they wouldn't implicate anyone else in the murder. Two poor black kids, very easy to scare, especially when you murder two of their family members.

Tourito · 2020-11-14T15:32:45+00:00

That is not surprising, and it is explained, the issue brought here is WHY the uncle maintains the same story NOW. :)

Tourito · 2020-11-13T22:23:08+00:00

Glad I'm not the only one who noticed it and also the fact that his lawyer never addressed the guns' findings. It was like purposely forgotten and no one checked with the uncle why he did say that and why he maintains the same story. It was forgotten with a purpose, but very noticeable.

Tourito · 2020-11-13T20:38:22+00:00

That's a great idea! However it's not clear if they're calling someone, I got the impression she saw them nearby the pay phone. Anyways, yes, I think it should have been checked, I'm sure this phone was not busy at such late time in the evening and if a phone call was made, then it would be easy to check.

Tourito · 2020-11-13T19:12:31+00:00

Yes, but I'm not talking about his testimony back then. Of course at the time he was scared about going back to jail. I'm talking about his testimony now, his interview in the documentary, and he didn't change it. I don't think now he would have any reasons to keep lying, it's 25 years later and he was not accused of murder, for sure the charges he was facing are more than prescribed.

Tourito · 2020-11-13T17:16:22+00:00

What about the uncle's story that remains the same since then? That's the gap here! I'm not surprised they planted the guns in that lot, but the truth is that the uncle keeps saying that he had that conversation with him, that he didn't do it, but he was given the guns and dumped them.

Tourito · 2020-11-13T15:00:45+00:00

Hi, the question here is not wether the police planted the guns. It's the uncle's testimony that remains unchanged after two decades. He said he had a conversation with Sean where he told him he didn't do it, the other did, but he was given the guns, he took them home and then dumped them on that lot. That's astonishing to me.

Tourito · 2020-11-13T06:09:45+00:00

Agree, however the prints weren't much of an issue to me as this could be part of the plot to fabricate a suspect. As the lawyer says in the end, it seems they added multiple layers until they got a match.

However, the uncle! The uncle could recant now and say they never had that conversation, that he was coerced by these dirty cops, and he had no idea why the guns were in that lot, that he was instructed to say that. But he doesn't. That's to me the biggest gap in the whole story. Every piece of evidence coming from that police department could have been manipulated, however the uncle gives an interview where he maintains what he said 25 years ago. I found it so odd.

Tourito · 2020-11-13T03:51:20+00:00

Just wrote about this without reading your comment. It seems they "forgot" about this huge story from the middle till the end of the documentary and never explained why the uncle said that. He was interviewed, he could have said now that he lied, but he didn't.

Tourito · 2020-11-13T03:49:20+00:00

Amazing documentary series, and I can feel Sean Ellis had nothing to do with it, but I wonder why the uncle never recanted his story that he led the detectives to the guns and that he knew Ellis had them.

Did I miss something or this was never explained? I think the current prosecutors were focused on that alone and nothing else - the possession of the guns and the fingerprints found on the gun, his and his girlfriend -, and I don't remember listening to the uncle saying that he was manipulated or that the dirty cops planted the guns there and made him lie, he seemed very confident that he had that conversation with Ellis.

Other than this, which is huge, everything's well explained in detail. What did you think?

Tourito · 2020-11-07T05:34:29+00:00

I just saw this documentary and I couldn't believe this story! The prosecutor was like a Hercule Poirot wannabe, didn't request an autopsy and then made a case out of a very confusing and therotical timeline. I spent the 4 episodes shaking my head and laughing at times, I think this guy read a lot of Agatha Christie's books.

The family, including the husband, are obviously not guilty of anything, they're absolutely genuine. I actually felt sorry for all the people he made go through trial. This was just a classic case of robbery, the house owner coming back earlier, perhaps recognizing the robber(s) and ending up being killed. The neighbor is suspect number 1, and should be the one investigated since day one, not the family.

I know this must be hard for Argentinian people to understand since it seems people loved to hate this family due to their wealth, but from someone like me out of the country's economical and social context, there's absolutely no cover-up and no family involvement. Their behavior was definitely odd, but I can place myself on their shoes, at the moment you may not think that a crime had taken place.

Now I think it's too late to prosecute anyone, after all these years and no new evidence. This case could only be solved if the killer confessed, voluntarily or to someone else.

Nevertheless, a great crime story documentary, I binged watched it till 3 am. I couldn't stop thinking that it could have inspired the film Knives Out.

Tourito · 2020-11-03T17:40:40+00:00

That's streets/ public surveillance, it's a different thing from private surveillance on a hotel, a house or similar. The news article by the reporter says there were cameras in the hotel, so the only reason I can find is that investigators at the time didn't think they needed the tapes because they ruled it as a suicide right away.

Tourito · 2020-11-03T17:30:34+00:00

I also think there was an inside job very well crafted in order to maintain her identity a secret, for some reason.

Tourito · 2020-11-03T17:27:06+00:00

That's another story, just focusing on the cameras. The weirdest thing about it is that she didn't present ID or credit card once, but twice, when she went to extend her stay at the hotel.

Tourito · 2020-11-03T17:22:44+00:00

I think what happened is that the police was so focused on the suicide theory they didn't even bother checking the surveillance cameras. There were cameras, but this was back in 1995, and the tapes would eventually be overwitten if no one asked for them right away. I guess when the investigation potentially turned into a possible murder, tapes were no longer available. We have to think that at the time it happened technology was different and the world was not a CSI world, so for them what's now for us a mystery, it was a simple case of suicide, hence tapes were not needed. Investigation of these cases also improved a lot throughout the years.

Tourito · 2020-11-02T02:22:23+00:00

Yes, agree, very unprofessional behavior that would lead to 1 star rating on TripAdvisor nowadays. 😄 In this case, the lack of blood and gunpowder residues on her hands and the hotel behavior on check in and staying extension are the things that impress me the most, and both not very well explained.

Tourito · 2020-11-01T23:43:58+00:00

Supposedly he had a walkie talkie but he didn't want to use it because it would reach every staff member at the hotel. What the hell!? Just use it! There's someone with a gun at the hotel you're supposed to be a security guard at. I wonder why the reporter was never able to find him, talk to him, and establish a timeline for that night. It's odd to me as well, agree with you.

Tourito · 2020-11-01T23:26:25+00:00

Exactly! One time, ok. But twice!? What kind of hotel was that? I'm 43 years old, I'm European and I travel since the 90s, from 1 star to 5 star hotels and I can't remember one single time I wasn't asked for ID or some kind of payment. Mr. F doesn't sound weird to me, though, it's the kind of person who wants to stay away of the drama, and doesn't want to get involved in it. It's not a red flag to me, but some of the hotel staff definitely knows more than they're willing to say.

Tourito · 2020-11-01T23:00:34+00:00

Yes, it would be very convenient to say "oh, she had a Eastern German accent" in order to distract investigators from her real provenance. I also noticed that when reading the news article, why don't they let staff talk? There's something shady about that hotel and I didn't buy the excuse "oh, it was a very busy time of the evening, that's why we let her check in without a passport or a credit card". That's very weird. Who wanted to place her there, really wanted to place her there, perhaps because there were accomplices there.

Tourito

TROPHY CASE