Cases where the most "outlandish" explanation actually seems TRUE?

[SheRaaa]

I couldn't think of a better way to phrase the title, so I'll try to explain: obviously, UM deliberately tries to play up the "mystery" aspect of all of its cases (duh, lol). However, there are sometimes cases where it seems like the most mundane explanation is probably the most likely.

For example -- and many will likely disagree with me, but that's ok, lol -- in the "dakotas double deaths" episode, I think the law enforcement agency simply missed locating the bodies the first time around but won't admit it, thus removing some of the case's mysteriousness (if that explanation is indeed correct, which it may or may not be).

Anyway, what are some cases where you think the more "outlandish" or wild 'n crazy scenarios actually ARE the most plausible?

I know I have one: Amy Bradley. The first time I saw her story on UM, I thought, "oh, she was probably drunk but her family doesn't want to admit it, and she fell overboard in a tragic accident." However, I caught the case on Vanished with Beth Holloway, and now I really do believe she was kidnapped and forced into prostitution. It sounds crazy, but the multiple eyewitness accounts, the suspicious behavior of the band member, the disappearance of Amy's photos from the ship, and the fact that apparently no one saw or heard anyone falling overboard...I actually believe the more outlandish explanation on this one.

Not to mention, *if* Amy did fall overboard, she was out on the balcony by herself. Did she lean too far over the railing? That's actually kind of hard to do; unless you're dancing around partying or whatever, I would think the only way to drunkenly stumble over would be to do so on purpose, and Amy did not appear to be suicidal at all. Even though I do think many cruise passengers' disappearances are the result of literally "going overboard," I don't think Amy Bradley was one of them.

[McBevis]

Originally Posted by SheRaaa

I couldn't think of a better way to phrase the title, so I'll try to explain: obviously, UM deliberately tries to play up the "mystery" aspect of all of its cases (duh, lol). However, there are sometimes cases where it seems like the most mundane explanation is probably the most likely.

For example -- and many will likely disagree with me, but that's ok, lol -- in the "dakotas double deaths" episode, I think the law enforcement agency simply missed locating the bodies the first time around but won't admit it, thus removing some of the case's mysteriousness (if that explanation is indeed correct, which it may or may not be).

Anyway, what are some cases where you think the more "outlandish" or wild 'n crazy scenarios actually ARE the most plausible?

I know I have one: Amy Bradley. The first time I saw her story on UM, I thought, "oh, she was probably drunk but her family doesn't want to admit it, and she fell overboard in a tragic accident." However, I caught the case on Vanished with Beth Holloway, and now I really do believe she was kidnapped and forced into prostitution. It sounds crazy, but the multiple eyewitness accounts, the suspicious behavior of the band member, the disappearance of Amy's photos from the ship, and the fact that apparently no one saw or heard anyone falling overboard...I actually believe the more outlandish explanation on this one.

Not to mention, *if* Amy did fall overboard, she was out on the balcony by herself. Did she lean too far over the railing? That's actually kind of hard to do; unless you're dancing around partying or whatever, I would think the only way to drunkenly stumble over would be to do so on purpose, and Amy did not appear to be suicidal at all. Even though I do think many cruise passengers' disappearances are the result of literally "going overboard," I don't think Amy Bradley was one of them.

Two cases where I think the most outlandish explanations probably carry a lot of weight are the Robert Dirscherl and David Chase murders. In each case, it had gotten to the point where it seemed like there was little or no hope of ever having any real closure until each case was given new life when a psychic somehow got involved, and in these two cases, despite how far-fetched some of their claims might seem, I find these psychics to be very believable. In the Dirscherl case, it was a lady who started talking to a Dirscherl family member during a train ride and seemed to know quite a bit not only about the circumstances of the murder, but also general information about the Dirscherl family. By all family accounts, the woman was a complete stranger, and during segment interviews with family members, all of them paint a picture of the woman as an honest, well-meaning person who just doesn't seem like somebody that would actually be a suspect in the murder despite knowing everything that she apparently did.

In the Chase case, psychic Phil Harris, considered by pretty much everybody to be an honest, friendly and humbly down-to-earth guy that wouldn't deliberately go making such outlandish claims for the hell of it, claims that he communicated with the spirit of the victim, and many of the things that this supposed encounter led to and uncovered (including the less-than-ingratiating behavior of the prime suspect when he was confronted) just don't seem like random tidbits that Harris could be right about just from taking a wild guess, and like the mysterious lady in the Dirscherl case, it seems rather improbable that Harris could legitimately be considered a suspect.

[nohwheregirl]

Great topic! I'm honestly not sure what I think about the Amy Bradley case, but here's my list...

Charles Holden who was accused of murdering his mother, and he claimed that it was a drugged-up hitchhiker who did it. He was telling the truth.

Frank Olsen, who supposedly jumped out of a hotel window to his death. In all likelihood, he was poisoned with LSD by the CIA a few weeks earlier, and then they tried to cover up the incident by pushing Frank out the window and making it look like a suicide. The gov't has all but admitted guilt in the case and even paid his family restitution.

[RobinW]

Yeah, I agree, I used to be pretty skeptical about the sex slave theory, but after I saw the "Vanished" episode on the case, I thought there was pretty compelling that it might be true. Even if there is no sex slave ring, I've never believed Amy simply jumped or fell off the ship since cruise ship railings are specifically built to prevent that. There was certainly some pretty suspicious behaviour by the cruise line after Amy's disappearance, so I've always thought something was hinky.

I definitely also agree that there is some weight to the psychic intervention in the Chase and Dirscherl cases. I'd put the Terasita Basa case into this category as well since I have no other rational explanation for what happened besides supernatural intervention.

While I'm not convinced the girl in the Polaroid is Tara Calico, I don't think it's a prank and that those kids are genuinely being held against their will.

I'm also inclined to believe that the terrified 911 call in the Antonette Cayedito case is genuine.

I'm convinced that the man Roy Harrell encountered in the restroom in Italy really was William Bradford Bishop.

I think Cindy Anderson's disappearance was most likely caused by her law firm's ties to the drug trade.

Oh, and after watching the "Nightmare in Las Cruces" documentary, I'm convinced that those murders weren't just random and that the owner of that bowling alley was mixed up in something shady.

I also do believe that Judith Hyams is alive and living in Omaha... okay, maybe not !

[McBevis]

Also, another one that really took me by surprise was the Bill Rundle and Traci Kenley case. They were close friends who went missing for no apparent reason after being out on a country drive together. Despite strong insistence to the contrary from Bill's family members and Traci's longtime boyfriend, the most plausible explanation at the time was that the two of them had been having an affair and ran away to start a new life together, too ashamed to break it to their loved ones. However, what ended up actually being the truth was much more shocking. Tragically, they (and the Jeep they were in) were literally swallowed alive by a huge mud hole.

[WishfulDreamer]

I also believe Phil Harris and that the Anthonette Cayedioto phone call was her her.

I'm halfway through reading the book about Amy Billig; with all these false leads and everything, I DO think that the biker theory was right. Certain people knew things that NO report ever mentioned. Tragically, most of the leads were false and many people just wanted money; she may also have been murdered because of the searching. However, I haven't gotten to the part of the book about Blair yet...

[TheCars1986]

I think there's a strong possibility that Norman Ladner's death was simply an accident. I never thought the "murder theory" held much water.

[spaceace]

Originally Posted by TheCars1986

I think there's a strong possibility that Norman Ladner's death was simply an accident. I never thought the "murder theory" held much water.

I agree, I never bought the murder theory in this case either.

[dks64]

Originally Posted by SheRaaa

For example -- and many will likely disagree with me, but that's ok, lol -- in the "dakotas double deaths" episode, I think the law enforcement agency simply missed locating the bodies the first time around but won't admit it, thus removing some of the case's mysteriousness (if that explanation is indeed correct, which it may or may not be).

Yes, Yes, and Yes! I've always thought this.

[TheCars1986]

Originally Posted by spaceace

I agree, I never bought the murder theory in this case either.

Nice avatar!

[Steve W.]

Originally Posted by TheCars1986

I think there's a strong possibility that Norman Ladner's death was simply an accident. I never thought the "murder theory" held much water.

With the evidence that was presented, how could he have accidentally shot himself?

[McBevis]

Originally Posted by Steve W.

With the evidence that was presented, how could he have accidentally shot himself?

I've always had a bit of a hard time figuring out what to make of this one. I suppose it could have been an accident, but one strange thing about that case that troubles me (and leads me to believe that it could have been a murder) was the strange encounter that Charlette Ladner had when she was examining her son's body. A stranger comes up and starts talking to her, and though I don't remember what he said word for word, it was something to the effect of "You have other children. Just let it go and don't stick your nose where it doesn't belong."

[TheCars1986]

Originally Posted by Steve W.

With the evidence that was presented, how could he have accidentally shot himself?

Investigators initially thought Ladner's death was an accident, and it was accepted by everyone. The theory was that he was up in the tree hunting and fell out and his gun discharged, killing him. I have no idea why they changed their theory to suicide however. The evidence for murder, IMO, was thin.

Originally Posted by McBevis

I've always had a bit of a hard time figuring out what to make of this one. I suppose it could have been an accident, but one strange thing about that case that troubles me (and leads me to believe that it could have been a murder) was the strange encounter that Charlette Ladner had when she was examining her son's body. A stranger comes up and starts talking to her, and though I don't remember what he said word for word, it was something to the effect of "You have other children. Just let it go and don't stick your nose where it doesn't belong."

I've always been a bit leery about the mother in this segment. Especially when she relates the story abuot what happened at the funeral home. If your child was just found dead with a gunshot wound, and you suspected murder, and some stranger comes up to you and says, "let it go, you have other children", you simply let the man walk away without questioning him even more? I would demand answers in that situation. However, I think Norman's mother is a bit misleading in the context of the quote. I don't think it was a threat of sorts to say, "Keep your nose out for your other children's safety", but more of a "you should let the investigators handle this and worry about your other kids" type of a response. At least that's what I've always thought.

[Melanie85]

I believe Katherine Korzilius fell off her mom's vehicle, instead of being a victim of hit/run or a botched kidnapping. Even though the investigator believes she couldn't have held on to the back of the vehicle, I think she most likely held onto the door latch and was in a crouching position, thus why her mother didn't notice her in the rear window.

[spaceace]

Originally Posted by TheCars1986

Nice avatar!

Thanks!