Ok, so I was searching through videos of Unsolved Mysteries that someone had up online and this person has alot of episodes mashed into many videos. I looked through one of them and someone was talking about a certain point in the video, so I went to that spot. Come to find out, it was the episode about the old man they found dead inside a steamer trunk (Jasper Watkins) and it showed his face and my heart almost jumped out of my chest. Yikes, talk about freaky. I normally keep the volume up and I scroll the page down to cover the video when that case is on, but I wasn't expecting it to show up on this person's uploads. That episode scares me more than any other episode, due to the fact they show the corpse and an eerie composite drawing of what he looked like before death. It's going to take awhile to get that visual out of my head.

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

Yes, that is a horribly disturbing image. Unless you're totally prepared for it, it can really %&$# you up!

That poor man.....crimes against children, animals, and the elderly REALLY break my heart, and I remember being so sad when I first watched this case. :(

I remember seeing it as a child and kind of looking away, but I don't remember how gruesome it was. I was kind of bothered by the mummified body in the John Wilkes Booth segment so I have no desire to see the steamer trunk one again. And yes, it is very sad. They did catch the woman (if you can even call her human) responsible, didn't they?

They did catch the woman (if you can even call her human) responsible, didn't they?

Yep! It was Nancy Jean Siegel who killed Jack Watkins.

ht tp://articles.baltimoresun.com/2009-03-17/news/0903160089_1_siegel-watkins-bank-fraud (correct "http")

Yes, that is a horribly disturbing image. Unless you're totally prepared for it, it can really %&$# you up!

That poor man.....crimes against children, animals, and the elderly REALLY break my heart, and I remember being so sad when I first watched this case. :(

I feel the same way too. I noticed that after the shock of seeing it set in, that I was taken by a feeling of sadness and tears were beginning to well up afterwards.

I remember seeing it as a child and kind of looking away, but I don't remember how gruesome it was. I was kind of bothered by the mummified body in the John Wilkes Booth segment so I have no desire to see the steamer trunk one again. And yes, it is very sad. They did catch the woman (if you can even call her human) responsible, didn't they?

Yeah, the mummified body in that segment scared me too. They charged Nancy Jean Siegel, a caretaker, with the man's murder and was sentenced to life in prison I believe.

.....crimes against children, animals, and the elderly REALLY break my heart......(

Those are the ones I have a really hard time with, too.


People who prey on the weak, helpless, or vulnerable infuriate me.
Those cowards usually never pick on someone strong enough to put them in their place. :angryfire

Those are the ones I have a really hard time with, too.


People who prey on the weak, helpless, or vulnerable infuriate me.
Those cowards usually never pick on someone strong enough to put them in their place. :angryfire
Usually when male murderers go to prison I hope that other inmates will dole out some punishment that the justice system won't. Same for this woman here. I forget, how did she kill him?

It's been heavily debated around here whether UM should have shown that photo, but if it actually played a role in getting him identified, then I would say "yes". However, Jasper Wadkins was not identified until two years later, so I'm not sure if the UM segment or the photo played much part in getting the case get solved. I guess they could have used another photo of him lying peacefully in his casket, rather than one of him with a horrific death grimace on his face.

BTW, love the avatar, BritishJustice! Truly one of the biggest WTF moments in UM history.

Usually when male murderers go to prison I hope that other inmates will dole out some punishment that the justice system won't. Same for this woman here. I forget, how did she kill him?

She drugged him with sleeping pills I think and bludgeoned him in the head with a blunt object, possibly a baseball bat or hammer but not sure that was ever disclosed.

It's been heavily debated around here whether UM should have shown that photo, but if it actually played a role in getting him identified, then I would say "yes". However, Jasper Wadkins was not identified until two years later, so I'm not sure if the UM segment or the photo played much part in getting the case get solved. I guess they could have used another photo of him lying peacefully in his casket, rather than one of him with a horrific death grimace on his face.



I always thought since they entered his fingerprints into a database in 2003 and identified him that way (assuming they finally got CODIS or something in West Virginia then), that they didn't even need to show the morgue photo. I guess they were hoping someone would identify him beforehand, or maybe just to scare the bejesus out of us fans lol.

She drugged him with sleeping pills I think and bludgeoned him in the head with a blunt object, possibly a baseball bat or hammer but not sure that was ever disclosed.
What a @@$$#! It's such a shame. She and Andelina Gonzalez should be forced to share a 9x9 cell

Richard's Rampage. Ugh. Every time I think about that case or see the segment I just get really uncomfortably creeped out and all stomach achy.

Richard's Rampage. Ugh. Every time I think about that case or see the segment I just get really uncomfortably creeped out and all stomach achy.

I think you might have the wrong thread. Try this one: http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=137905

I just realized that there were TWO completely steamer trunk cases featured on UM. I'd seen the "Gabby" steamer trunk episode several times, but until today, I'd never known about poor Mr. Wadkins.

I had always been under the impression that people were creeped out by the 3D rendering of the remains in Gabby's trunk, but now that I've seen what you've been talking about, it makes much more sense.

I was a little surprised that UM would show it, but unless I'm mistaken, they showed the autopsy photos of the Sumter County "couple" as well. Obviously, they were not as disturbing as Mr. Wadkins' photo, but I don't fault the producers of UM for showing any of these.

In UM's defense, in both cases, there were no other photos available of the unidentified deceased parties. Also, RS gives a fairly lengthy introduction before showing the photo in the Wadkins segment.

It's not pleasant, but I've watched many of the Unidentified Jane Doe clips (the ones I could possibly have known based on time/location) on the forbidden website. If I could give closure to one family missing a loved one, it would be worth all the discomfort involved.

At least Stack warned us about the Jasper Wadkins photo. IIRC, there was no warning (although nothing was really shown) when they showed Jeffrey Digman's dead body in his room.

That's true, I remember thinking it was strange that they used that crimescene photo in Digman's segment. At least it wasn't a real close-up photo, and I don't remember it even showing his head, just legs and torso.

I've seen a lot of really gross stuff over the years (not much of it crime related, mostly just living off the land, killing our own dinner, dressing out and butchering the animals which is gory, critters in various stages of decomp, plus cleaning up some road kill etc), so most unpleasant images flashed on tv or the web aren't too offensive to me personally.

However, there are lots and lots and lots of folks who are never exposed to such things. I'm glad they forewarned us in the Watkins segment, but I was only half paying attention and was completely unprepared for the scene in the Digman segment. I wasn't exactly sure if it was a reenactment or not, but it was real. In the Watkins case, an argument can be made that showing the image was necessary to ID the victim. In Digman's, it just seems gratuitous, considering that we already had a the thorough mock up and recreation.

I feel bad when people aren't suspecting to see something like this and it's just sprung on them like in that video mashup thing. Subject matter warnings are just the thoughtful thing to do. Not everyone is hardened to the sight of unpleasant images and those of us who are seem to forget that when sharing info.

I have only watched this segment once. When I saw the infamous picture, as disturbing as it was, all I could feel was sadness. I guess UM, in showing the picture, was really desperate to find family members of Mr. Watkins. But even with Stack's warning, it's definitely a wow moment in the history of Unsolved Mysteries.

You may recall in the Cindy James segment that UM showed her corpse within the first 30 seconds of the program. That photo was not permitted to be released in either of the books written about her and instead had police drawings instead. Yet for some reason, the actual photo was allowed to be shown on UM. Even in the Lifetime versions that cut out 3 minutes of the original segment.

I have only watched this segment once. When I saw the infamous picture, as disturbing as it was, all I could feel was sadness. I guess UM, in showing the picture, was really desperate to find family members of Mr. Watkins. But even with Stack's warning, it's definitely a wow moment in the history of Unsolved Mysteries.

You may recall in the Cindy James segment that UM showed her corpse within the first 30 seconds of the program. That photo was not permitted to be released in either of the books written about her and instead had police drawings instead. Yet for some reason, the actual photo was allowed to be shown on UM. Even in the Lifetime versions that cut out 3 minutes of the original segment.

I remember seeing her body in the original segment :eek:

For those who remain unidentified, like the guy who committed suicide in a Idaho church 30 years ago, I wonder if showing their face, or even a plaster mold of what they looked like, would help solve cases faster?

The trunk with Jasper Watkins body in it was actually found about 20 minutes or so from where I live. That part of the county is pretty remote, especially at night which creeped me out even more. If I had been that cop I would not have bothered to open the trunk up until help arrived.

Yikes, and I came across it on accident again while looking for a case on the Unsolved Mysteries Wiki page for someone here. It's dark out and being by myself in my own house didn't help matters much. :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

All of those crime scene photos aren't that bad, even the Jasper's one is still normal to me (the doctor had done a very good job). A lot of traffic accident pictures I saw they didn't try to fix the victim face, just cleaned the blood saw it up and show it on the tv .We used to have an identification show like that, it really messed up my childhood.

My first post after nearly a year, hope it makes sense.
:crazy:

[QUOTE=RobinW]It's been heavily debated around here whether UM should have shown that photo, but if it actually played a role in getting him identified, then I would say "yes". However, Jasper Wadkins was not identified until two years later, so I'm not sure if the UM segment or the photo played much part in getting the case get solved. I guess they could have used another photo of him lying peacefully in his casket, rather than one of him with a horrific death grimace on his face./QUOTE]

Yes, he wasn't identified through the show, it was through his fingerprints, which were run through a federal database, as he was in the military, and there was a hit on them (albeit 7 years after he was found).

And the reason they couldn't show a picture of him in his casket instead of him on the autopsy table, pre-autopsy, was because he wouldn't be put in a casket until he was identified. Until a body is identified, it stays in the morgue/coroners. Generally (not always), but generally, they aren't embalmed and laid to rest until they are identified, and next of kin, if any, has been contacted.
So, they really had no choice, if they wanted to identify him via viewers of the show.

Now, I worked in a morgue for years. And I've been elbow deep in entrails. So for me, creepy as the photo was, it didn't bother me. I've seen, much, much, MUCH worse. The unholy things done to a corpse for an autopsy (which is necessary), THAT stick in your head forever. That and the smell. It's a copper-y/rot mix smell, and it sticks in your nose hairs. Then ya have to go to lunch. so eventually, that stuff just doesn't bother you anymore. Babies, children, teens, adults, the elderly...I've seen it all. Most people think the babies would bother you the most. But they always bothered me the least. It was the elderly that bothered me the most. They've lived life, a baby hasn't. They have 3/4 of a century or more of loving life, a baby, doesn't know what it's "missing out on", so to speak.
So this segment bothered me in the sense that I thought it was particularly rotten and cruel, what she did to him. Bitch.

But-all-in-all, I didn't find the photo disturbing, though I do understand why it would be for most people.

It's always been one of my favorite segments.