It's on of the most remembered cases and hasn't been solved. I can't see why it would be excluded

Someone will need to write on the UM Facebook account to ask this question tomorrow...when they make the post "Season 4 now available." There should be no reason it's excluded...as the CBI seems to push this to a lot of news outlets and different avenues still, and obviously there is no statute of limitations. I really hope they include it in season 5 maybe.

This is a really interesting case for sure

Another missing segment is Tommy Gibson

Someone will need to write on the UM Facebook account to ask this question tomorrow...when they make the post "Season 4 now available." There should be no reason it's excluded...as the CBI seems to push this to a lot of news outlets and different avenues still, and obviously there is no statute of limitations. I really hope they include it in season 5 maybe.

Do the more recent reports bring up the husband at all? That's the only reason I could think of why it isn't here. I recall the Lifetime syndication version mentioned once or twice that he had been cleared by the police. Maybe he got it pulled because he didn't like how he came off in it?

Someone will need to write on the UM Facebook account to ask this question tomorrow...when they make the post "Season 4 now available." There should be no reason it's excluded...as the CBI seems to push this to a lot of news outlets and different avenues still, and obviously there is no statute of limitations. I really hope they include it in season 5 maybe.

It's been featured in countless news outlets, written about in multiple books, the UM episode in 1991, the Sensing Murder episode in 2006 and it has an entire website with tons of pictures of evidence at the public's disposal.

It's been 35 years since the double murder but investigators desperately want it solved and the case has had never ending publicity for the better part of three decades.

There is absolutely no reason for this segment to be excluded from Prime.

There's a few other segments missing too. Off the top of my head:
David Harry Fisher
Baskins
Super glue bank robbery
Joe and Gladys Owens
Mark Groezinger
Bunk beds

There's a few other segments missing too. Off the top of my head:
David Harry Fisher
Baskins
Super glue bank robbery
Joe and Gladys Owens
Mark Groezinger
Bunk beds




Surprised there hasn't been a thread with the full list yet. I think I'll make one

Ad Steven Hadley and Jim Fontes to the list too

Do the more recent reports bring up the husband at all? That's the only reason I could think of why it isn't here. I recall the Lifetime syndication version mentioned once or twice that he had been cleared by the police. Maybe he got it pulled because he didn't like how he came off in it?



Yes I'm starting to think that since the episode focused on Jeff Oberholtzer as a suspect, maybe he didn't want it out there now. Also, I wonder if Larry Gibson was able to ask the Tommy Gibson segment
Not be shown

Yes I'm starting to think that since the episode focused on Jeff Oberholtzer as a suspect, maybe he didn't want it out there now. Also, I wonder if Larry Gibson was able to ask the Tommy Gibson segment
Not be shown

Jeff Oberholtzer obviously signed a release when this segment was produced and first aired. He cant just say he doesn't like how he was portrayed in the segment and expect that it not be aired because of that. This case is still unsolved and thus the segment is still relevant. Its disgrace that it still hasn't be rereleased. This has turned into an unsolved mystery of its own.

Another missing segment is Tommy Gibson

Not too surprised about this one, considering that Larry Gibson has served his time for causing his son's death, started over in Montana, and attempted to launch a country music career. There are even YouTube videos of his country performances in which he has conveniently disabled commenting in case someone tries to bring up his shady past. I guess Filmrise was worried how Larry might react if his case was put into the spotlight again. But the segment still deserves to be shown since Tommy's body has never been found and Larry never fessed up to what he did.

Jeff Oberholzer, on the other hand, agreed to appear on the Sensing Murder episode in 2006, talked openly about being considered a suspect, and I'm sure still wants his wife's murder to be solved.

Jeff Oberholzer, on the other hand, agreed to appear on the Sensing Murder episode in 2006, talked openly about being considered a suspect, and I'm sure still wants his wife's murder to be solved.

I wasn't aware of that. Kinda puts a damper on my theory, eh?

Have we ruled out technical difficulties? I haven't seen CMP mention them, but I also haven't read every single response on Facebook or the AMA. Until 1993/94 or so, it's probable the master tapes CMP retained would be 1" reel to reel, which isn't fun to work with. Maybe there was an issue, and the restoration budget wasn't enough to go back to the source tapes and re-do the online for messed up segments?

Yes I'm starting to think that since the episode focused on Jeff Oberholtzer as a suspect, maybe he didn't want it out there now.

I highly doubt he was even contacted by AP.

And as far as the segment went, it was far less incriminating of Jeff than other episodes that suspected husbands of pulling off a murder. They mentioned that he passed a polygraph, pointed out his alibi and featured a stranger in the reenactment of the murders.

The UM segment, as I later found out reading, 'Murderers Among Us,' didn't even scratch the surface of how badly the police treated Jeff in the years following the murders.

Have we ruled out technical difficulties? I haven't seen CMP mention them, but I also haven't read every single response on Facebook or the AMA. Until 1993/94 or so, it's probable the master tapes CMP retained would be 1" reel to reel, which isn't fun to work with. Maybe there was an issue, and the restoration budget wasn't enough to go back to the source tapes and re-do the online for messed up segments?

That might make more sense if this was one of those segments which hadn't been aired in many years, but I'm sure the Orange Socks Murders was reran numerous times in syndication without issue.

Ok this case was In the Farina reboot so maybe we'll still get the Stack one. Maybe there is some edits they have to make though


Though Mike Reiner was in the Farina version and we still haven't gotten that one

Didn't they say that some cases are going to be featured in later "seasons" because they had to leave some other segments out for obvious reasons?

There's some segments like the wild horses and the Lancaster extortion letters which are missing, but I could see where they don't age well.

Mike Reimer/Diana Robertson should be shown - this case has had action in the past few years. Doesn't make sense.

Mike Reimer/Diana Robertson should be shown - this case has had action in the past few years. Doesn't make sense.

On the UM website it says this segment (with Stack) will be available soon.

FYI...I just asked this on UM's Facebook page about the Orange Socks. (username is Kendra Jeffrey...under my wife's name) They said "Hi Kendra - unfortunately that segment will not be in the streaming version with Robert Stack" Anyone ready to start a petition? hahaha!

FYI...I just asked this on UM's Facebook page about the Orange Socks. (username is Kendra Jeffrey...under my wife's name) They said "Hi Kendra - unfortunately that segment will not be in the streaming version with Robert Stack" Anyone ready to start a petition? hahaha!

Booo! That sucks. That is a classic UM story. I'm sure they have their reasons but that really bites.

Also, I replied and asked what the reason may be..legal, technical, etc..? Here is their reply:

That segment was originally shown in a re-run episode, and we are unfortunately not able to find a place for every segment.

So, it looks like we may need to start a petition...maybe they can take out one of the 5 "tyler updates" or the 10 "orphan train" update segments :) haha

Also, I replied and asked what the reason may be..legal, technical, etc..? Here is their reply:

That segment was originally shown in a re-run episode, and we are unfortunately not able to find a place for every segment.

So, it looks like we may need to start a petition...maybe they can take out one of the 5 "tyler updates" or the 10 "orphan train" update segments :) haha

That is such a b.s. answer... This is streaming, so it's not like everything has to fit in a neat little 60-minute package. They could easily insert it into almost any episode they want.

Don't get me wrong -- I'm thrilled UM is on Amazon. But I wish C/M would just be honest. All they have to say is "Due to legal issues, we are unable to re-air that story." Why make up crap like "We can't fit in every segment?" That just annoys the true fans of the show. So dumb.

Also, I replied and asked what the reason may be..legal, technical, etc..? Here is their reply:

That segment was originally shown in a re-run episode, and we are unfortunately not able to find a place for every segment.

That is incorrect because I remember when that segment originally aired. It aired alongside the Sacramento thrill killer, the Countess con artist from Cleveland and the Jackie Dragon lost love case. All were new segments at the time.

This person either lied to you or doesn't know what he/she is talking about. UM was only in it's third season at the time. They would never re-run 3 segments and then throw in one new segment to fill the hour.

Segments didn't start getting juggled until the show went into syndication several years later and started airing re-runs on Lifetime.

I think I found out how UM is finding the answers to the questions about "Will this segment air?":

http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj166/rev920/thread%20bombs/8Ball.gif

Isn't the segment available on the Farina version on Amazon and Youtube? It's mind boggling that they would upload certain segments for the Farina reboot, but not the original Stack ones.

With all these missing segments from each season, it's clear that this was a rushed project that wasn't thought out very well. I know I've mentioned it before, but I have a strong feeling they won't be releasing the "L'Enfant'" episode which should be in season 5 I believe. I've never seen that episode on TV - only in low-res online video.

With all these missing segments from each season, it's clear that this was a rushed project that wasn't thought out very well. I know I've mentioned it before, but I have a strong feeling they won't be releasing the "L'Enfant'" episode which should be in season 5 I believe. I've never seen that episode on TV - only in low-res online video.



The obvious reason they are missing is because someone involved in the segments don't want them available

With all these missing segments from each season, it's clear that this was a rushed project that wasn't thought out very well. I know I've mentioned it before, but I have a strong feeling they won't be releasing the "L'Enfant'" episode which should be in season 5 I believe. I've never seen that episode on TV - only in low-res online video.

I remember seeing the "L'Enfant" segment many times on Lifetime back in the day. Don't get your hopes down, until Filmrise releases all 13 Seasons and calls it a day anything is possible.

This person either lied to you or doesn't know what he/she is talking about. UM was only in it's third season at the time. They would never re-run 3 segments and then throw in one new segment to fill the hour.

Segments didn't start getting juggled until the show went into syndication several years later and started airing re-runs on Lifetime.

I don't expect to be told all the legal/technical minutia about how and why segments get dropped or moved, but this is a bit ridiculous. It's a total nothing answer.

The only way I can parse it and get any potential meaning out of it is going back to the discussion of the original full show masters. Like Robin said, this case was aired over and over in syndication. Which means some source for it survived until the mid/late 90s. But we don't know how the syndication programs were handled at that time, nor what sources they're currently working off.

I don't want to get too nerdy, but depending on how the audio tracks were handled on the original 1" master tapes, they could've done most if not all of the syndication edits from those, without having to go back to the film telecine and work tapes. If that's the case, they almost certainly would've dumped them onto a digital tape format in the process, so having missing segments for technical reasons is a bit bizarre; properly stored professional digital video tape should last 30+ years before starting to degrade. If they didn't retain those for some reason, or if all that became the property of the distributor, then it's entirely possible that CMP/FilmRise are having to use the old original 1" tapes they would've run copies off to send to NBC. They're prone to all kinds of problems. If you're bored, search for "One Inch C Format Videotape", and you can see what a process it is to prepare a tape for digitizing, and a selection of the glitches those things throw up regularly. A lot of the glitches can be fixed by hand, but it takes time and money.

I don't want to seem ungrateful. Not three months ago, I had no way of watching any episodes of my favourite television show ever. I'm deliriously overjoyed that it's back. A little more detail would be nice, though.

Someone asked why the Orange Sock episode wasn't included on the UM Facebook page, and they responded:

That segment was originally shown in a re-run episode, and we are unfortunately not able to find a place for every segment.

Kind of sucks and I don't really know quite what they mean (it seems like it would be fairly simple to integrate the episode considering that was what was done for a re-run), but c'est la vie.

Someone asked why the Orange Sock episode wasn't included on the UM Facebook page, and they responded:



Kind of sucks and I don't really know quite what they mean (it seems like it would be fairly simple to integrate the episode considering that was what was done for a re-run), but c'est la vie.

That was actually asked by a member here and is discussed earlier in this thread.

It's a bummer to say the least. To me, segments like this are straight-up and CLASSIC Unsolved Mysteries. I'd also be curious to know the REAL reason this was left out of the bunch.

This may be a dumb question...but if it's included in the Farina versions, as some had said, what is the title of the segment? I just was looking all through those and cannot find it...am I just skipping by it or does the title have little to do w/ the case?

This may be a dumb question...but if it's included in the Farina versions, as some had said, what is the title of the segment? I just was looking all through those and cannot find it...am I just skipping by it or does the title have little to do w/ the case?

It's very possible it was updated for the Farina reboot but was not released in the Farina versions on Amazon (presumably for the same reasons it's not on the Stack versions). It's very possible the references to it being part of the Farina update are users who saw it air on Lifetime and/or Spike with Farina.

This would actually be very consistent with my suspicions of how the rights of release works. Cosgrove-Meurer was able to edit and air the Orange Sock Murders as part of the Farina reboot because syndication broadcast was covered under the original contracts, but digital media release is not covered.

This may be a dumb question...but if it's included in the Farina versions, as some had said, what is the title of the segment? I just was looking all through those and cannot find it...am I just skipping by it or does the title have little to do w/ the case?

Season 6, Episode 15. "Two for the road".

Saying "The Orange Sock Murders" was shown in a re-run and therefore can't be released to Amazon Video is pretty darn pathetic if you ask me.

So if that is the case then why were the segments featuring "Sal Guardado" and "Delia Fezzani Goldie" released to Amazon Video, those two cases were first shown in a re-run and I am sure there were a few others in that same category that were released to Amazon.

It says on the unsolved.com page about the case (http://unsolved.com/archives/bobbie-jo-oberholzer-annette-kay-schnee) that it's on Amazon season 6 and available on YT right now. Makes absolutely no sense that they would include it in the Farina version but not Stack.

All I know is more people from here need to post under my comment on Facebook page asking about it...maybe it will at least gain some momentum/attention, as it's the only case for that season people are asking about...please :) I can't watch only the Farina version of the Orange socks in it's entirety...I would love to see the original broadcast version on the Stack episodes.

Perhaps, just perhaps, the details offered in the original airing were later contradicted, or found to be false, and they are just protecting their arses from the embarrassment?

Perhaps, just perhaps, the details offered in the original airing were later contradicted, or found to be false, and they are just protecting their arses from the embarrassment?

They've got the Farina version on Amazon and the forbidden site, though.

Perhaps, just perhaps, the details offered in the original airing were later contradicted, or found to be false, and they are just protecting their arses from the embarrassment?

Nope. Other than Jeff possibly being considered a suspect for a while, you'll find every single fact and theory presented in the segment is still presented in any publication you read about the case 25 years later....right down to the possibility that Annette might not have been murdered where she was found and she was simply dumped there.

http://www.rockymountaincoldcase.com

Bummer. One of the most memorable segments that remains unsolved.

The odd thing is this episode is NOT a rerun. The original airdate was 5/1/91. All the stories that night were new. I wonder if they are confused. I know I'm not because I have the broadcast on tape!

I have a feeling the young person(s) in charge of responding to comments on the UM social media accounts was told "When the nerds who really know this show well ask why a certain segment isn't there, tell them it is for legal reasons or that we couldn't find space for it. Doesn't matter which response, just keep rotating both answers."

I realize there is stuff going on to bring these to Amazon (and I am THRILLED we get to watch original Stack episodes) but the half-ass non-answer responses are really lame. At least have your facts right before trying to pull the wool over fans' eyes.

This is one of my "favorite" cases. It boggles my mind that so many "solved" cases are still being shown, but this case that is "unsolved" is not being shown, especially a case with no statute of limitations. I think, with the expanded viewership of streaming, who knows, it could end up getting in front of the right people at the right time. It definitely deserves to be there and I don't see any legal reasons why not (and Jeff O. seemed like a chill enough guy that he wouldn't have any objections to this segment these days.)

http://www.rockymountaincoldcase.com

In this day and age, is there no computer software, program, website etc where the picture of the unknown male could be scanned and potential matches be found?

hopefully if we complain enough they will release the segment on a later season.

Also, I wrote the rocky mountain cold case about this, if they weren't aware. Like I said, streaming opens up a whole new audience, so as much exposure as this can get, anything could help.

I had a reply from the detective (won't mention names) over at rocky mountain cold case and they informed me, to their knowledge, there should be no legal reason for this case not being shown. I also had mentioned this message board and how we still thoroughly discuss this case and want to see a resolution.

I had a reply from the detective (won't mention names) over at rocky mountain cold case and they informed me, to their knowledge, there should be no legal reason for this case not being shown. I also had mentioned this message board and how we still thoroughly discuss this case and want to see a resolution.

Thanks for the update. I still hope it will show up in a different season. I don't trust any of the answers given by UM's social media people.

It's a strange choice to not include this one.

They have to know this is one of the more popular cases, just odd.

I am at least glad to hear that Mike Reimer and Diana Robertson will come at some point, hope that along with The Orange Sock Murders that Mark Groezinger comes at some point as well.

In this day and age, is there no computer software, program, website etc where the picture of the unknown male could be scanned and potential matches be found?

I have no idea. I'm guessing not.

I'm also puzzled as to why the dark haired woman seen with Annette at the drugstore an hour before she hitchhiked home has never been identified. Or the fact that she has never come forward in 35 years. The woman knew Annette well enough to know which brand of cigarettes she smoked and they were talking and laughing together the entire time they were in the store.

http://www.rockymountaincoldcase.com/images/mysterywoman50.jpg

I have no idea. I'm guessing not.

I'm also puzzled as to why the dark haired woman seen with Annette at the drugstore an hour before she hitchhiked home has never been identified. Or the fact that she has never come forward in 35 years. The woman knew Annette well enough to know which brand of cigarettes she smoked and they were talking and laughing together the entire time they were in the store.

http://www.rockymountaincoldcase.com/images/mysterywoman50.jpg

Off the wall theory, but...

Maybe she was killed, too? And we've just never found her body?

Off the wall theory, but...

Maybe she was killed, too? And we've just never found her body?

Interesting thought. I'd be interested in matching the sketch against missing women reported around that time.

Off the wall theory, but...

Maybe she was killed, too? And we've just never found her body?

I don't know. When Bobbie and Annette disappeared, it caused the community to go into a panic. When Bobbie's body was found the following day, the media was constant and people went out to buy guns to protect themselves. If a third woman from the area had disappeared at that time, it would have been all over the news, I feel. But no missing person report matching that woman's description was ever reported.

It really bothers me that she has never been identified. Annette had a live in boyfriend, tons of friends and many coworkers from her two jobs. Somebody should have been able to identify her.

The absence of Orange Sock Murders on Amazon Prime has inspired me to finally release a podcast episode next month, so I've started delving into this case.

I too am pretty baffled by the fact that this woman Annette was conversing with before her disappearance has never been identified. But it's even more baffling to me that Annette had a photo of this guy in her backpack, but he also has never been identified...

http://www.rockymountaincoldcase.com/images/schneeunknownphoto.jpg

The guy looks like he could be in the military or posing for a mug shot, but I just don't know how he would be connected to Annette.

The absence of Orange Sock Murders on Amazon Prime has inspired me to finally release a podcast episode next month, so I've started delving into this case.

Awesome! If you need any passages from the two books where the case is mentioned ('Monster' and 'Murderers Among Us') I would be happy to type them out and email them to you. They give many details to the tidbits featured in the UM segment and the Sensing Murder episodes.

I too am pretty baffled by the fact that this woman Annette was conversing with before her disappearance has never been identified. But it's even more baffling to me that Annette had a photo of this guy in her backpack, but he also has never been identified...

http://www.rockymountaincoldcase.com/images/schneeunknownphoto.jpg

The guy looks like he could be in the military or posing for a mug shot, but I just don't know how he would be connected to Annette.

He might not be as important to the case as the dark haired woman because she was actually SEEN with Annette an hour before she hitchhiked home. But I'd still like to know who this man is. If his picture was kept in Annette's wallet, he must have held some importance to her. He should have been identified by a family member or friend long ago.

Awesome! If you need any passages from the two books where the case is mentioned ('Monster' and 'Murderers Among Us') I would be happy to type them out and email them to you. They give many details to the tidbits featured in the UM segment and the Sensing Murder episodes.

Cool, thanks! I actually found "Monster" on Google Books and have been reading it. I also recently found this old post of yours where you shared some of the most interesting details from "Murderers Among Us":
http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showpost.php?p=4875851&postcount=46

If I need any clarifications on the material in that book, I'll let you know.