I'm not sure where to begin (sorry if it's muddled. My frustration has grown by each episode). Here it goes;
This is supposed to be a documentary on the History channel?!
It isn't a documentary as it's rife with errors and suppositions as well as dramatisations.
The lousy dramatisations? Awful whining actresses act out scenes no one could possibly know of.
America's first serial killer? Nope. There were many before him. Both men, and women, as well as pairs. I have no idea how many times this nonsense was spouted, but a whole lot!
Found a Herman Holmes on a ship manifest? Those names were not uncommon. It proves nothing.
Also, someone signing a registry as Mr. Alexander does not prove it is Holmes simply because he twice used Alexander as a first name in his aliases. Grasping at straws is putting it mildly.
The bimbo who's a former CIA agent with tons of experience and brings her expertise to the table? Well, she doesn't seem to know the difference between a mass murderer and a serial killer. She is also very willing to call any and everything "evidence". It may make for "good" reality tv to be surprised at every turn. But if people are supposed to believe you were a serious and qualified agent, maybe don't act flabbergasted all the time.
She should have mentioned that killers who only kill prostitutes (like the ripper) may change victims and go for more wealthy women, but don't go back to killing prostitutes. He'd steal tall assets (property and money) from the rich women and according to their theory then he just goes to New York and kills prostitutes for no monetary gain? Holmes seems to have killed in Chicago sole for monetary gain. The ripper killings were for the blood and gore. Not the same guy. And limiting the search for gory murders to when Holmes was caught is not how you prove or disprove his guilt. You widen the search to see if the New York disembowellings you're accusing him of continues. Again, something she should have known.
And Holmes receiving money for writing an account of his killing? While amoral, making money on your crimes is not, as Amaryllis calls it, a bribe. As a former member of law enforcement she should know that.
A dog laying down equals a crime scene? No. It constitutes a possible crime scene. A former agent doesn't know the difference?
Handling "evidence"? Even if it is only potential and not certain evidence wouldn't you wear gloves? If the things have been handled by Holmes there may be touch DNA (very slight possibility obviously, even if it were actual evidence). Why mess it up by letting a descendant touch items directly?
Maybe she was fired for being useless?
Jeff Mudgett? He certainly doesn't exude the charm and charisma his late great great grandfather reportedly did. Oh, did I mention. H. H. Holmes was his great great grandfather. Did you get that? Just to be sure, H. H. Holmes was his great great grandfather. H. H. Holmes was his great great grandfather.
He leaps onto every single bloody (figuratively and literally) crime and says it's Holmes'a doing. Since some of the New York disembowelments and ripper killings took place the same months they cannot all be done by the same person.
This guys says he's spent the past 10 years studying Holmes. Later it's almost all of his adult life? So this guy is in his 30's? Yeah, right.
Supposedly you're missing evidence of Holmes's whereabouts during the years surrounding the ripper killings. And that's not where you focus?maybe look in and around Chicago.
And claiming the 1894 World's Columbia's Exposition was the reason Holmes built the murder castle? Wrong. Holmes bought the plot for the murder castle more than a year before it had been decided where the fair would be held. There was talk of Philadelphia and New York too.
And the alleged recording of the killers voice? Convenient. Moreover, it's beyond ridiculous. The wording is almost a quote from his memoirs which he wrote in prison. I call bull. Someone had a laugh.
It is well documented that Holmes didn't want grave robbers. So he left instructions to have cement poured into his coffin, be placed into the cement and be covered. And then to have cement poured over his very heavy coffin to prevent anyone disturbing him after death. Also he wanted to have no headstone. After his death two Pinkertons sat vigile by the dead Holmes until the concrete could be poured.
The claim that not only all of the prison employees and warden, but a stand in (for the hanging) as well as undertakers, and Pinkertons have all been paid off in some elaborate ploy is past absurd.
The program seems to omit anything that discounts the ridiculous theory of linking the two killers H. H. Holmes and Jack the Ripper.
The program could have finished by the first episode. Sailing across the Atlantic took 6 weeks. He bought and signed for the property on which the murder castle would be built in the summer of 1888. At the same time the ripper was mutilating prostitutes in London.
On the other hand, Jeff Mudgett's theories are so out there, that it would not surprise me if he had an "answer" for that. Maybe a time machine? An evil twin? A private aeroplane that could make it across the pond? Teleportation?
6 out of 7 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
