- Joined
- Dec 26, 2013
- Messages
- 4,535
- Reaction score
- 25,712
My thoughts/notes about the ID documentary.
(Spoiler Alert)
EPISODE 1
SP’s cute and sassy responses feel super awkward, immature, and out of place (e.g., her magic wand, the hair tossing, nervous laughter).
The soundbite from her former youth group leader: he says she was the only student he was ever afraid of. I wonder what that means!
At different points throughout her life, SP has accused every guy she’s dated of being abusive.
I don’t think anyone can fault Keith for asking for the post nuptial because she cheated on him. I’m sure it was something he demanded before he’d agree to stay with her. I see it as a way for him to re-establish trust in her and an attempt to keep it from happening again.
It was interesting to hear what the FBI agent found immediately suspicious about SP’s story and her behavior. Like how she was conveniently RETURNED on Thanksgiving and her flirty and unaffected demeanor with the Sheriff’s office during their interviews, how she talked about asking Keith to come home for lunch so they could have sex.
James told the FBI he couldn’t remember what he branded on SP’s shoulder. This is credible to me. Because why would he talk about every other aspect of the branding but try to hide WHAT was branded (especially considering the FBI had already seen it)? This only proves to me that SP asked James to do it. He couldn’t remember because it held no significance for him. It meant something TO HER.
The FBI agent said it best in the last few lines of the episode.
“The stories can be never ending, and I just don’t think people need to be given every opportunity to buy into it.”
EPISODE 2
IRONY STATEMENT #1: “(He) needs to get all the attention with all of the attentioning.”
- SP’s thoughts about Keith’s press statement after her arrest
Her own attorney says he never got the full story from Sherri.
She says she described the two Hispanic women because James’s mother is Hispanic, and she wanted to give the police clues that would lead them to James without directly saying he was involved. The producer asks her what her rationale was there. Like why not just say it was James if you’re hoping the clues will ultimately lead them to him anyway? How is it any different? She doesn’t really have an answer to the question. Surprise, Surprise. She just mumbles something about how fear makes you do illogical things.
Her therapist, Dr. Diggs, says she has self-defeating personality disorder. This disorder is not currently included in the DSM, but it has been proposed as a future addition. The disorder is sometimes referred to as MASOCHISTIC personality disorder because key characteristics include the avoidance of pleasure and an attraction to suffering. “They may be drawn to situations or relationships where they are likely to experience pain and hardship.” Hmmmm…. interesting! I wanna know why the producers didn’t ask Dr. Diggs about these characteristics. They also omitted how histrionic disorder is characterized (by a pervasive pattern of excessive emotionality and attention-seeking behavior); Dr. Diggs only talks about how he believes SP’s histrionic symptoms are specific to male relationships and not the general public. I think the reason the producers omitted the FACTS is quite obvious.
Dr. Diggs’ language to describe SP is also quite telling.
“She is now, most of the time, quite honest.”
“She has stopped telling the big lies because the consequences are big.”
But the “he said/she said” scenario she’s providing now is impossible to prove or disprove, so what does SP have to lose with her current version of events?
The conversation she recorded of Keith isn’t the proof she apparently thinks it is – which is that he’s some horribly abusive monster who stole her kids. In fact, he’s actually much more calm and rational than I believe most men would be in his situation.
IRONY STATEMENT #2: “Your daughter has to live with that on the internet for the rest of her life and so do you!!”
- SP’s response to Keith’s allegations in the Hulu documentary
EPISODE 3
SP says Keith stole her children because the court didn’t order it. She then goes on to say the court granted Keith full custody because she was going to jail. Ummm… the court granting Keith full custody is the definition of a COURT ORDER.
SP says she planned to meet up with James in Redding the day of the kidnapping to tell him goodbye (end their relationship) and said she’d call him after going for a run, but he just showed up.
Side note: Wasn’t there a second dude she’d been talking to online that she was planning to meet up with that same weekend?
Anyway, she says her cell phone fell out of her hand when she saw James pull up, and that’s the last thing she remembers. The producer says but you told Keith you purposefully left the phone there so that he’d know you’d been abducted. So, which is true? She then gets all flustered and says James told her they’d found her phone while she was “in captivity” and something about it was her first attempt to say that she’s in trouble? I don’t really understand what she’s trying to say here.
The whole reenactment segment is a bit ridiculous. She’s not crying because she’s traumatized. She’s crying because she feels cornered into providing a believable narrative about how she ended up in the car with James, and she can’t come up with one.
SP claims Keith completely cut off all access to her money after the kidnapping, but his attorney provided the producers with financial documents that proved otherwise.
EPISODE 4
SP pulls out a wood burning tool in her house. She says she used to do woodworking as a hobby. OK. I’m not even sure why she felt that it was a good idea to point this out. Because WHAT ARE THE CHANCES that James just decided to take a trip to HOBBY LOBBY to buy a wood burning tool to use as a torture device. Commmme onnnnn.
Her own mother believes she went with James willingly. Keith’s sister Suzanne believes she planned to go on a daytime date with him. Her doctor believes she expected to go hook up at a hotel. In other words, all of her “supporters” still believe that SP planned to leave with him.
She fails the polygraph question about whether she’d been planning to leave with James. When confronted about the lie, she says she failed the question because she remembers telling James she would go with him to lead him on and keep him interested in her. But she never actually intended to do it.
IRONY STATEMENT #3: “He’s a sociopath.”
- SP’s response when asked to explain how she and James both passed the same polygraph question with different answers.
When the producer reveals that James’s mom is actually Irish (and not Hispanic like she claimed in an earlier interview) and confronts her about the sketch, SP just scoffs and says OK I’ve met her twice. She then gets very defensive and drops an F-bomb about how it wasn’t about his mother, it was about him. The contrived look of confusion on her face is such a satisfying “GOTCHA!” moment.
And I love how they end the series with SP asking:
“Do you think that this film is going to do more harm than good for me?”
With an implied … in response.
FINAL THOUGHTS: I worried this documentary would just cater to SP and give her another platform to tell more lies, but I actually think it does more harm than good for her. I believe SP thought this documentary would paint her as a sympathetic victim, but it really does the opposite. And I think she’s the only person to blame for that. She could have used the opportunity to garner some sympathy from the less cynical folks in the world, but she fails to achieve her goal because she simply CANNOT. STOP. LYING. And it’s obvious to anyone with even half a brain cell.
(Spoiler Alert)
EPISODE 1
SP’s cute and sassy responses feel super awkward, immature, and out of place (e.g., her magic wand, the hair tossing, nervous laughter).
The soundbite from her former youth group leader: he says she was the only student he was ever afraid of. I wonder what that means!
At different points throughout her life, SP has accused every guy she’s dated of being abusive.
I don’t think anyone can fault Keith for asking for the post nuptial because she cheated on him. I’m sure it was something he demanded before he’d agree to stay with her. I see it as a way for him to re-establish trust in her and an attempt to keep it from happening again.
It was interesting to hear what the FBI agent found immediately suspicious about SP’s story and her behavior. Like how she was conveniently RETURNED on Thanksgiving and her flirty and unaffected demeanor with the Sheriff’s office during their interviews, how she talked about asking Keith to come home for lunch so they could have sex.
James told the FBI he couldn’t remember what he branded on SP’s shoulder. This is credible to me. Because why would he talk about every other aspect of the branding but try to hide WHAT was branded (especially considering the FBI had already seen it)? This only proves to me that SP asked James to do it. He couldn’t remember because it held no significance for him. It meant something TO HER.
The FBI agent said it best in the last few lines of the episode.
“The stories can be never ending, and I just don’t think people need to be given every opportunity to buy into it.”
EPISODE 2
IRONY STATEMENT #1: “(He) needs to get all the attention with all of the attentioning.”
- SP’s thoughts about Keith’s press statement after her arrest
Her own attorney says he never got the full story from Sherri.
She says she described the two Hispanic women because James’s mother is Hispanic, and she wanted to give the police clues that would lead them to James without directly saying he was involved. The producer asks her what her rationale was there. Like why not just say it was James if you’re hoping the clues will ultimately lead them to him anyway? How is it any different? She doesn’t really have an answer to the question. Surprise, Surprise. She just mumbles something about how fear makes you do illogical things.
Her therapist, Dr. Diggs, says she has self-defeating personality disorder. This disorder is not currently included in the DSM, but it has been proposed as a future addition. The disorder is sometimes referred to as MASOCHISTIC personality disorder because key characteristics include the avoidance of pleasure and an attraction to suffering. “They may be drawn to situations or relationships where they are likely to experience pain and hardship.” Hmmmm…. interesting! I wanna know why the producers didn’t ask Dr. Diggs about these characteristics. They also omitted how histrionic disorder is characterized (by a pervasive pattern of excessive emotionality and attention-seeking behavior); Dr. Diggs only talks about how he believes SP’s histrionic symptoms are specific to male relationships and not the general public. I think the reason the producers omitted the FACTS is quite obvious.
Dr. Diggs’ language to describe SP is also quite telling.
“She is now, most of the time, quite honest.”
“She has stopped telling the big lies because the consequences are big.”
But the “he said/she said” scenario she’s providing now is impossible to prove or disprove, so what does SP have to lose with her current version of events?
The conversation she recorded of Keith isn’t the proof she apparently thinks it is – which is that he’s some horribly abusive monster who stole her kids. In fact, he’s actually much more calm and rational than I believe most men would be in his situation.
IRONY STATEMENT #2: “Your daughter has to live with that on the internet for the rest of her life and so do you!!”
- SP’s response to Keith’s allegations in the Hulu documentary
EPISODE 3
SP says Keith stole her children because the court didn’t order it. She then goes on to say the court granted Keith full custody because she was going to jail. Ummm… the court granting Keith full custody is the definition of a COURT ORDER.
SP says she planned to meet up with James in Redding the day of the kidnapping to tell him goodbye (end their relationship) and said she’d call him after going for a run, but he just showed up.
Side note: Wasn’t there a second dude she’d been talking to online that she was planning to meet up with that same weekend?
Anyway, she says her cell phone fell out of her hand when she saw James pull up, and that’s the last thing she remembers. The producer says but you told Keith you purposefully left the phone there so that he’d know you’d been abducted. So, which is true? She then gets all flustered and says James told her they’d found her phone while she was “in captivity” and something about it was her first attempt to say that she’s in trouble? I don’t really understand what she’s trying to say here.
The whole reenactment segment is a bit ridiculous. She’s not crying because she’s traumatized. She’s crying because she feels cornered into providing a believable narrative about how she ended up in the car with James, and she can’t come up with one.
SP claims Keith completely cut off all access to her money after the kidnapping, but his attorney provided the producers with financial documents that proved otherwise.
EPISODE 4
SP pulls out a wood burning tool in her house. She says she used to do woodworking as a hobby. OK. I’m not even sure why she felt that it was a good idea to point this out. Because WHAT ARE THE CHANCES that James just decided to take a trip to HOBBY LOBBY to buy a wood burning tool to use as a torture device. Commmme onnnnn.
Her own mother believes she went with James willingly. Keith’s sister Suzanne believes she planned to go on a daytime date with him. Her doctor believes she expected to go hook up at a hotel. In other words, all of her “supporters” still believe that SP planned to leave with him.
She fails the polygraph question about whether she’d been planning to leave with James. When confronted about the lie, she says she failed the question because she remembers telling James she would go with him to lead him on and keep him interested in her. But she never actually intended to do it.
IRONY STATEMENT #3: “He’s a sociopath.”
- SP’s response when asked to explain how she and James both passed the same polygraph question with different answers.
When the producer reveals that James’s mom is actually Irish (and not Hispanic like she claimed in an earlier interview) and confronts her about the sketch, SP just scoffs and says OK I’ve met her twice. She then gets very defensive and drops an F-bomb about how it wasn’t about his mother, it was about him. The contrived look of confusion on her face is such a satisfying “GOTCHA!” moment.
And I love how they end the series with SP asking:
“Do you think that this film is going to do more harm than good for me?”
With an implied … in response.
FINAL THOUGHTS: I worried this documentary would just cater to SP and give her another platform to tell more lies, but I actually think it does more harm than good for her. I believe SP thought this documentary would paint her as a sympathetic victim, but it really does the opposite. And I think she’s the only person to blame for that. She could have used the opportunity to garner some sympathy from the less cynical folks in the world, but she fails to achieve her goal because she simply CANNOT. STOP. LYING. And it’s obvious to anyone with even half a brain cell.
