to not understand the "entertainment value" of true crime

[Nimbostratus100]

I understand the enjoyment of murder mysteries, excitement, interesting characters, mystery aspect etc.

I dont understand the "enjoyment" of "true crime" where real people have suffered and died and been bereaved. The thread about Jonbenet for example, why are people enjoying "documentaries" and feeling they can speak authoritvly about the death a poor little girl, thousands of miles away about which they in reality know nothing, but feel like they can slag of members of her family anyway?

Ive just gone onto itv player to find something to while away a few hours, and find myself being offer a whole plethera of "true crime" stuff. No thanks, what on earth is fun or relaxing being a spectator to other people's grief, pain and misery?

I just dont understand what sort of person enjoys that. I hope you will enjoy it just as much if you are ever the subject of one of these dramas.

Fear and fascination is what psychologists suggest.

I really like certain types of true crime documentaries or podcasts. I'm mostly interested in finding out about the kinds of people who commit these crimes and the investigations that go on to find them. I don't want to hear gruesome details and I avoid anything sensationalist or that I feel trivialises terrible events.

I don't watch them often but when I do it's with a sense of horror and an attempt to 'understand' them

I find the forensics of solving it interesting (so scientific interest), I find forensic psychology interesting (also scientific interest) and, if unsolved, the mystery can be interesting. That doesn't take away from how awful or sad it is. I do sometimes think the pictures shown in such documentaries can be unnecessary. Right now I'm following one case in progress with interest as I've met the victim. It makes it more personal, even though my connection is very loose and nothing to do with me really.

I'm the same - I've always loved true crime. My dear old Dad was the same, we used to talk endlessly about serial killers which made Mum cringe. I love finding out about the investigations, and the justice system and how it can all come together to get some closure. I like other things too, but true crime is my go-to subject .

I enjoy them for the investigation aspect. I listened to a podcast recently called up and vanished and it was fascinating - in some of them it shows how inept the police can be in America.

I don't either. I think it's morbid, to be fascinated by people meeting their death in a horrible way. It's not as if it's fantasy, it's real people. Then all the speculations and discussion forums on true crime. Especially serial killers, who seem to be almost feted. Awful. I just think about families who've had their lives torn apart by loss, yet it's just gossip and entertainment to others. I do accept everyone is different though so I just leave it at not closely associating with someone fascinated by true crime as their mindset wouldn't be for me.

I’m fascinated by true crime - not the gory details whatsoever - but cold cases and the process around uncovering a needle in a haystack. I just find it really, really interesting.

The unearthing of information, the piecing together of it, the slow, gradual forming of a picture from tiny snippets, seemingly un connected. The persistance and the tenacity of the people involved. The care and love they have for the missing or deceased person.

The Lynn Dawson case where her family finally got justice after decades. He daughters lost her as pre-schoolers and her husband thought he’d got away with murder. It was good to see him get justice, especially after how appallingly he’d treated her before her death.

Marion Barter - who just vanished without a trace, and the NSW police just didn’t seem to care. Her daughter persisted and persisted and uncovered an absolute web of mystery and deceit.

And yes, JonBenét - who was killed in such odd circumstances. Someone knows something. Someone has literally gotten away with the murder of a 6YO.

I fully accept that if I disappeared without a trace, that others might be interested in that. In fact, I bloody well hope they are, so that whoever’s responsible is duly punished!!

Yes! I enjoy detective dramas & some true crime documentaries are interesting but many shows are deeply insensitive to the victims. Look at the Nicola Bulley situation, people treating it like a soap opera.

and conversely "that's why it's dangerous to go out, to be a "naughty/cheap/immoral" girl"

there is definitely an element of this.

I ‘watch’ it to try and learn what to do or not do to stay safe.

So what have you learned?

The series about the Stephen port case was well dramatised- it brought to life a community, culture and era I was unfamiliar with. Without that drama I wouldn't have really grasped the institutional homophobia that allowed him to operate so recently.

I agree & events can definitely be told in a sensitive way.

I think it’s as damaging as porn actually. It completely desensitises people - look at how many behaved over Nicola Bulley - they all treated it like some drama.

Two women a week in England and Wales are killed by a present or former partner.

It said this at the end of the Raol Moat programme - so murders are not some weird thing that happens in the past now and again but are happening here and now.

Not entertainment material really, I watched the beginning and end of this programme after all the advertising but not for me normally.

For me it's the puzzle to be solved. I also like aircraft investigations.

I watched a three part documentary about the Chicago marathon bombers. It looked at their background, one was aiming for the Olympics as a boxer and then the rules changed and he couldn't represent USA as he wasn't a citizen.

It interviewed some victims, obviously those who survived and the families of those who didn't.

It looked at the police response, and mistakes.

A while ago I watched yet another documentary about Jack the Ripper and actually learned something new!

Only one of his victims had a conviction for prostitution.

Where the term 'loose woman' comes from. It comes from not wearing a corset at a time when being all tightly bound was seen as moral. If a woman wasn't restrained by a corset then she was immoral. This ignored the impoverished circumstances of these women. Corsets were expensive and would likely have been sold or pawned if times were hard.

I find the psychology of it all fascinating. Especially where there is joint enterprise. I can't imagine how people get from 'He/She really annoys me' to 'Let's kill him/her' in conversation. Somebody has to say it first. Normal humans would be horrified at the thought of killing someone and if certainly wouldn't be a thought you'd share, so something must happen to send a signal that the other person would be amenable to the idea before the instigator risks sharing their thoughts.

How many times might a murder have been avoided because they shared their thoughts and were met with a horrified reaction, but then shrugged it off or turned it into a joke?

It is said that most of these joint enterprise crimes are just the unhappy connection of two people with the propensity for murder. If they hadn't met, neither would have murdered on their own. I find that fascinating, in a 'Sliding Doors' kind of way.

Most murderers aren't actually they clever (hence they get caught and there is a documentary about them) but many think they are.

This is what really interests me as well. In the Moors Murders it was Brady who initially was the one who suggested kidnapping and murdering a child, but how does someone like Hindley - who by all accounts had a fairly “normal” background, a shy young girl who worked in an office go from that to THAT? How does that even happen? And Rose West - people often think she was coerced by Fred West to murder and was forced into prostitution by him but actually she killed her step child when he was in prison, and survivors of events at Cromwell house have said if anything she was the most abusive and violent of the two during attacks they suffered… It’s like some dangerous melting pot of playing chicken when people like this come together.

There’s another really interesting case - I can’t remember the name now but it’s on Netflix in a Piers Morgan killer women one - where a 16 year old girl plotted to kill her whole family with her boyfriend because her Mum and Dad said they shouldn’t see each other. The boyfriend and his friends killed her Mum and her two young (child) brothers, shot her Dad and thought they’d killed him. He survived. He now forgives the daughter 😳😳 I find that curious as well. Don’t even know where to start with all that. Why did the boyfriend and his friends (1 boy and the other boy’s girlfriend) agree to become involved in killing a family they had very little to do with? It’s just all so odd. And for the Dad to forgive the daughter even though she masterminded the whole murder of his wife and her own brothers…..?!!

The world is a strange place.

Me and dh recently went to a Psychology of Serial Killers tour.Very interesting seminar type thing by a qualified speaker.
I just find it interesting.Each type of killer was profiled to give more insight into their crimes.

The cold case ones are very interesting, the way that evidence has been carefully preserved and its good that those who have got away with serious crimes for decades have been caught and punished. I bet there are many who are crapping their pants wondering if/when they will get a knock on the door!!
Last night I watched the 3 part doc about the Essex Boys and the people trying to prove that the 2 guys who were convicted of the murder, with no concrete evidence, are innocent. Quite a fascinating case and on watching it I'm also convinced they didn't do it

My DD did a project on this for her EPQ project, by far the biggest consumers of true crime are women. According to some studies, the main reasons for women are survival - what would you do to survive. Also an interest in the psychology of killers.
We went to a talk on the psychology of serial killers, and we did notice that most of the audience were women.

I watch and listen to True Crime. It's escapist for me (work and life stress). I have a job where I need to look at facts rationally without being too emotional, I enjoy investigations, I studied psychology at uni and I was in an abusive relationship previously and see some traits he had show up.

I think it can be a warning to people of what types to avoid.

Human nature innit. The idea that we are fundamentally nice is not borne out by history. We're a mix of all kinds of impulses, light and dark. Civilisation is a veneer. How we'd behave in more pressured situations is sometimes hard for us to understand but that doesn't mean it's beyond comprehension. There but for the Grace of god and all that.

Killing someone who is a stranger seems very different from killing someone you know - wife, family, parent. You must have shared so much.

Raoul Moat had a very cruel mother and difficult childhood. I think he hid how mentally damaged he was.

"According to some studies, the main reasons for women are survival"

For watching these programmes - I don't think that's a sensible reason. Any man I know could overpower me and I'm tall and pretty strong.
Unless it is wives watching to see what the signs are that they need to escape a marriage.