Cases which UM made it harder than it actually is - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

GDAWG · 12-03-2019, 04:19 PM

Which cases on UM did you find to have had simple explanations but the families don't believe it? If you didn't believe it, was it worth it airing time on UM?

unsolved88 · 12-03-2019, 05:14 PM

Arnold Archambeau and Ruby Bruguier. I think these were two underage kids who had too much to drink and got into an accident due to a combination of alcohol and icy roads. I think they may have exited the car to get help and succumbed to the bitter cold. The fact that they were found at different rates of decomposition is odd, but I definitely don’t believe that a killer was lurking in the subzero weather to abduct them, kill them, and place them back near the ditch to make it appear they died right there.

Todd Mueller · 12-03-2019, 05:35 PM

Honestly, I think MOST of the UM cases fall under this. That's part of what made the show cool and why they presented cases the way they did. They went out of the way to make the ordinary spooky.

Think of the Aeileen Conway case: "The pool had a hose filling it; the iron was out; the bathtub was full of water; and the phone was off the hook." At first, I was like "HOLY ****! What is going on here?!?" Then, as many others pointed out, that isn't that odd for someone multitasking. So a lot had to do with the presentation of it all.

Wanda Jean Mays was one of the earliest cases and there was no foul play involved with her. I think most of the cases they presented have fairly simple Occam's Razor conclusions. Most of the final appeal cases involve guilty people; most of the suicides were just that; many of the murdered did involve the main suspect. Many of these were brought but families or suspects who were looking for attention or resolution to their cases. There certainly are some cases where things did not go down as they seemed, but I think those are few and far between. When UM was first on, I thought 99% of the cases were conspiracy theories.

Now that I'm older and more objective, I think that number is probably 5% or less.

Realizing that now doesn't make me like the show any less. However I have learned to see that the UM spin and Robert Stack's excellent delivery could make anything seem suspicious as hell.

mercy1825 · 12-03-2019, 11:41 PM

I would tend to agree with a slight caveat. Sammy Wheeler was not killed by the suspecrs presented. Occams razor holds that the most likely scenario is an individual is FAR more likely to be murdered by someone they know than a "random act of violence." Wanda Jean Mays seems to deveate from this as well. Its seems impossible to even argue that the most likely scenario is she wandered off in the middle of the night and her death was accidental. In my humble opinion the new trend on this board is to bring up Occam's razor and oversimplify as well as over apply it in almost all circumstances. I do agree that Aileen Conway case is one where I believe it never was "unsolved" and the only mystery is why she was in that part of town traveling at an apparent high rate of speed. Yes we are all much older than we were when thewe cases were new to us and we are wiser, have been exposed to more cases, so I understand the tendency to look for the most likely probable scenario and it being the prevailing theory but it would be extremely hyperbolic to label "most" segments as all hype and only mysterious on account of Robert Stack's narration. Just my opinion.

TheCars1986 · 12-04-2019, 08:55 AM

Jeffrey MacDonald.

Pretty cut and dried when you don't rely on the fairy tale MacDonald invented.

MegtheEgg86 · 12-04-2019, 09:44 AM

Kenneth Engie.

I think 100% of the oddities in this case can be explained, to paraphrase Stack, by alcohol impairing his judgement.

Mike82 · 12-04-2019, 11:08 AM

Apologizes for sounding like a broken record but Katherine Korzillus and Amy Bradley are not mysteries and the former should never have aired. I have researched both cases to death and there is little doubt the simplest answer is correct. The only mystery is why so many people online can't seem to see the obvious.

Todd Mueller · 12-04-2019, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mercy1825

Yes we are all much older than we were when thewe cases were new to us and we are wiser, have been exposed to more cases, so I understand the tendency to look for the most likely probable scenario and it being the prevailing theory but it would be extremely hyperbolic to label "most" segments as all hype and only mysterious on account of Robert Stack's narration. Just my opinion.

I hear you... Don't get me wrong, I still LOVE this show and there are plenty of "WTH?" cases where things are messed up. I guess what I was saying is that as I got older, wiser, and learned more about many of these cases, I could see that UM liked to play up the mysterious parts of the show. In some instances, they absolutely omitted facts or theories that would have made cases far more obvious. There certainly are exceptions, with Sammy Wheeler being a good example. But there again, UM played up the triangle of blame angle and some of what was alleged was quite silly. It did make for good TV, though.

Stack did a tremendous job playing this up on many cases. He could make something very ordinary sound spooky: "Bob stopped at a hot dog vendor's cart on the street. Bob ordered a hot dog, but curiously, he got mustard AND ketchup. Bob's family has no explanation for why he ordered two condiments on the same hot dog. Perhaps he was just experimenting, or perhaps it implied something far more sinister going on..."

I also think that with a lot of tragedies (suicide, murder, missing) people want and need resolution. When it makes their loved one culpable for their own demise, often times people have a hard time accepting that so they reach out for help and more answers.

I wasn't trying to sound overly cynical, but I still do believe many of these cases are far more simpler than they appeared during broadcast. Cases like Charles Morgan made my eyes pop as a kid, but now looks like a paranoid guy who was laundering money and he was eliminated because of it. It's still a cool case, but it isn't as much cloak-and-daggar as it appeared back in the 80s.

Crystal Spencer's case is the poster child for me of the idea that what once looked sinister is probably just very ordinary and someone couldn't get over that fact.

rerungirl · 12-04-2019, 02:20 PM

Todd Mueller said:

Stack did a tremendous job playing this up on many cases. He could make something very ordinary sound spooky: "Bob stopped at a hot dog vendor's cart on the street. Bob ordered a hot dog, but curiously, he got mustard AND ketchup. Bob's family has no explanation for why he ordered two condiments on the same hot dog. Perhaps he was just experimenting, or perhaps it implied something far more sinister going on..."

There were other signs that week that Bob might have been worried about something...or someone. His wife's Eileen said Bob had been looking out the living room window quite a bit the morning of his disappearance. "He kept checking every few minutes, like he was expecting something to happen. I finally asked him what he was looking at and he said he wanted to see if it had started to rain. That seemed odd to me. We have several umbrellas at home. He could have used any one of them."

Co-workers too sensed something was a miss. Bob always went to lunch at noon like clockwork every day. But that week he inexplicably started going to lunch at 12:30. Was his late departure a sign that something was wrong? Something he was too afraid, or ashamed to talk about?

unsolved88 · 12-04-2019, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rerungirl

Todd Mueller said:

Stack did a tremendous job playing this up on many cases. He could make something very ordinary sound spooky: "Bob stopped at a hot dog vendor's cart on the street. Bob ordered a hot dog, but curiously, he got mustard AND ketchup. Bob's family has no explanation for why he ordered two condiments on the same hot dog. Perhaps he was just experimenting, or perhaps it implied something far more sinister going on..."

There were other signs that week that Bob might have been worried about something...or someone. His wife's Eileen said Bob had been looking out the living room window quite a bit the morning of his disappearance. "He kept checking every few minutes, like he was expecting something to happen. I finally asked him what he was looking at and he said he wanted to see if it had started to rain. That seemed odd to me. We have several umbrellas at home. He could have used any one of them."

Co-workers too sensed something was a miss. Bob always went to lunch at noon like clockwork every day. But that week he inexplicably started going to lunch at 12:30. Was his late departure a sign that something was wrong? Something he was too afraid, or ashamed to talk about?

LMAO I mentally read this whole thing is Stack’s voice. I’m even picturing the re-enactment.

sharonite · 12-04-2019, 11:25 PM

I agree that the Archambeau/Bruguier case, despite being strange in some respects, was probably a tragic accident.

I’ve always felt that Bryan Nisenfeld’s death was more likely a suicide or accident rather than a murder.

LooksLikeCRicci · 12-07-2019, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharonite

I agree that the Archambeau/Bruguier case, despite being strange in some respects, was probably a tragic accident.

I’ve always felt that Bryan Nisenfeld’s death was more likely a suicide or accident rather than a murder.

Agree on both. Arnold and Ruby were definitely accidental deaths that occurred at the same time. I can’t explain the differing rates of decomposition on the bodies, but no other explanation fits or makes sense.

Todd Mueller · 12-08-2019, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LooksLikeCRicci

I can’t explain the differing rates of decomposition on the bodies, but no other explanation fits or makes sense.

I agree this was most likely nothing nefarious. As far as the differing decomposition, I wonder if one of them was submerged more than the other. I would imagine that the amount of the body exposed to air/sun and how much water it was or wasn't in would affect the rate of decomposition. I imagine it's just that simple.

I don't doubt the sincerity of the police officer in that story, but when you break this case down, Occam's Razor just screams "Don't overthink this." They had an accident in the winter, near a watery ditch, and we are to believe that they were taken, killed, and then replaced at the scene of the crash? I'm sure they searched as throughly as they could but in that kind of weather I'm sure it would be easy for a body to be covered by the elements and missed.

justins5256 · 12-08-2019, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Todd Mueller

I agree this was most likely nothing nefarious. As far as the differing decomposition, I wonder if one of them was submerged more than the other. I would imagine that the amount of the body exposed to air/sun and how much water it was or wasn't in would affect the rate of decomposition. I imagine it's just that simple.

I don't doubt the sincerity of the police officer in that story, but when you break this case down, Occam's Razor just screams "Don't overthink this." They had an accident in the winter, near a watery ditch, and we are to believe that they were taken, killed, and then replaced at the scene of the crash? I'm sure they searched as throughly as they could but in that kind of weather I'm sure it would be easy for a body to be covered by the elements and missed.

On the main thread for this case, I believe that someone who lived in the area at the time posted and said that police and local Native American relations were at a low at the time of the homicides. It could be that the local sheriff was just trying to placate the family and smooth things over in terms of police and community relations.

UMlover · 01-03-2020, 10:56 AM

Also in this category of cases that were much simpler than UM portrayed: Kurt McFall. Just watched it again yesterday.

Stack: "It appears that Kurt fell from the treacherous cliffs, but it is not known if he fell accidentally, or if he was beaten and pushed."

??? Oh Robert *sigh*

In the other category of legit mysteries, however, would be Keith Warren.

12-03-2019, 04:19 PM	#1
GDAWG Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Dec 14, 2017 Location: Dallas, Texas Posts: 136	Cases which UM made it harder than it actually is Which cases on UM did you find to have had simple explanations but the families don't believe it? If you didn't believe it, was it worth it airing time on UM?

12-04-2019, 09:44 AM	#6
MegtheEgg86 Member Forum Veteran Join Date: Jun 19, 2008 Location: The Volunteer State Posts: 5,156	Kenneth Engie. I think 100% of the oddities in this case can be explained, to paraphrase Stack, by alcohol impairing his judgement.
	__________________ "Why is she lying?, it makes me wonder. What is she hiding?, it makes me wonder." Go Vols!

12-04-2019, 02:20 PM	#9
rerungirl Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Sep 23, 2002 Location: Midwest Posts: 295	There were other signs Todd Mueller said: Stack did a tremendous job playing this up on many cases. He could make something very ordinary sound spooky: "Bob stopped at a hot dog vendor's cart on the street. Bob ordered a hot dog, but curiously, he got mustard AND ketchup. Bob's family has no explanation for why he ordered two condiments on the same hot dog. Perhaps he was just experimenting, or perhaps it implied something far more sinister going on..." There were other signs that week that Bob might have been worried about something...or someone. His wife's Eileen said Bob had been looking out the living room window quite a bit the morning of his disappearance. "He kept checking every few minutes, like he was expecting something to happen. I finally asked him what he was looking at and he said he wanted to see if it had started to rain. That seemed odd to me. We have several umbrellas at home. He could have used any one of them." Co-workers too sensed something was a miss. Bob always went to lunch at noon like clockwork every day. But that week he inexplicably started going to lunch at 12:30. Was his late departure a sign that something was wrong? Something he was too afraid, or ashamed to talk about?

12-03-2019, 05:14 PM	#2
unsolved88 Member Forum Regular Join Date: Apr 16, 2006 Location: Daytona Beach, FL Posts: 514	Arnold Archambeau and Ruby Bruguier. I think these were two underage kids who had too much to drink and got into an accident due to a combination of alcohol and icy roads. I think they may have exited the car to get help and succumbed to the bitter cold. The fact that they were found at different rates of decomposition is odd, but I definitely don’t believe that a killer was lurking in the subzero weather to abduct them, kill them, and place them back near the ditch to make it appear they died right there.

12-03-2019, 05:35 PM	#3
Todd Mueller Member Senior Member Join Date: Feb 11, 2005 Posts: 1,626	Honestly, I think MOST of the UM cases fall under this. That's part of what made the show cool and why they presented cases the way they did. They went out of the way to make the ordinary spooky. Think of the Aeileen Conway case: "The pool had a hose filling it; the iron was out; the bathtub was full of water; and the phone was off the hook." At first, I was like "HOLY ****! What is going on here?!?" Then, as many others pointed out, that isn't that odd for someone multitasking. So a lot had to do with the presentation of it all. Wanda Jean Mays was one of the earliest cases and there was no foul play involved with her. I think most of the cases they presented have fairly simple Occam's Razor conclusions. Most of the final appeal cases involve guilty people; most of the suicides were just that; many of the murdered did involve the main suspect. Many of these were brought but families or suspects who were looking for attention or resolution to their cases. There certainly are some cases where things did not go down as they seemed, but I think those are few and far between. When UM was first on, I thought 99% of the cases were conspiracy theories. Now that I'm older and more objective, I think that number is probably 5% or less. Realizing that now doesn't make me like the show any less. However I have learned to see that the UM spin and Robert Stack's excellent delivery could make anything seem suspicious as hell.

12-03-2019, 11:41 PM	#4
mercy1825 Member Frequent Poster Join Date: May 04, 2004 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Posts: 176	I would tend to agree with a slight caveat. Sammy Wheeler was not killed by the suspecrs presented. Occams razor holds that the most likely scenario is an individual is FAR more likely to be murdered by someone they know than a "random act of violence." Wanda Jean Mays seems to deveate from this as well. Its seems impossible to even argue that the most likely scenario is she wandered off in the middle of the night and her death was accidental. In my humble opinion the new trend on this board is to bring up Occam's razor and oversimplify as well as over apply it in almost all circumstances. I do agree that Aileen Conway case is one where I believe it never was "unsolved" and the only mystery is why she was in that part of town traveling at an apparent high rate of speed. Yes we are all much older than we were when thewe cases were new to us and we are wiser, have been exposed to more cases, so I understand the tendency to look for the most likely probable scenario and it being the prevailing theory but it would be extremely hyperbolic to label "most" segments as all hype and only mysterious on account of Robert Stack's narration. Just my opinion.

12-04-2019, 08:55 AM	#5
TheCars1986 #VLSKMS Forum Fanatic Join Date: Nov 22, 2008 Location: Maryland Posts: 8,606	Jeffrey MacDonald. Pretty cut and dried when you don't rely on the fairy tale MacDonald invented.

12-04-2019, 11:08 AM	#7
Mike82 Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Oct 19, 2017 Posts: 294	Apologizes for sounding like a broken record but Katherine Korzillus and Amy Bradley are not mysteries and the former should never have aired. I have researched both cases to death and there is little doubt the simplest answer is correct. The only mystery is why so many people online can't seem to see the obvious.

12-04-2019, 11:25 PM	#11
sharonite Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Dec 27, 2009 Posts: 157	I agree that the Archambeau/Bruguier case, despite being strange in some respects, was probably a tragic accident. I’ve always felt that Bryan Nisenfeld’s death was more likely a suicide or accident rather than a murder.

01-03-2020, 10:56 AM	#15
UMlover Member Occasional Poster Join Date: Oct 20, 2013 Posts: 56	Also in this category of cases that were much simpler than UM portrayed: Kurt McFall. Just watched it again yesterday. Stack: "It appears that Kurt fell from the treacherous cliffs, but it is not known if he fell accidentally, or if he was beaten and pushed." ??? Oh Robert sigh In the other category of legit mysteries, however, would be Keith Warren.