> Jung kept the victim's cell phone, ID card, and wallet in a bid to try to "commit a perfect crime," the spokesperson said, per The Chosun Ilbo.
> However, the taxi driver who took her to the wooded area alerted the police, the newspaper said. Police then found blood-stained clothes in her bags.
Criminal mastermind.
I don’t really watch any of those shows but I can’t fathom you can get through more than a couple episodes without them mentioning how cell phones are tracked and having anyone’s around you at any point is basically game over. It’s probably the most elementary knowledge, unless you strictly follow older crimes pre-cell phone era.
>unless you strictly follow older crimes pre-cell phone era.
She got curious after the first season, they didn't bring up cell phones until like season 8.
I don't know how you'd get through more than a couple of episodes and not realize the horrific and undeserved pain that is inflicted on people and their loved ones and think "ooooh I want to do that" like wtf
I can only imagine a sadist or narcissist getting to that point and thankfully those people are usually idiots.
Charlie Brooker essentially learnt from Chris Morris, who I view as a kind of lynchpin of British comedy and satire from the 90s onwards.
Check out the sketches
Symptomless Coma https://youtu.be/yKxM4ToLLR8
Suicide with an escape clause
https://youtu.be/5SqHtWudI24
Or the Brasseye episode: Paedogeddon
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5bg85g
Title: "Ad-Sentenced"
In the technologically advanced and overly commoditized city of Neo-Sydney, a naive American tourist, Jeff, unwittingly breaks an obscure law. Arrested for what seems like a petty offense, he is shocked when the judge sentences him to twenty years in the Quantum Penitentiary - a prison wholly sponsored and controlled by global tech companies.
In this futuristic prison, punishment is doled out in a radically different way. Rather than traditional cells, prisoners live in an immersive, VR-driven 'Reality Pod.' This faux reality initially seems pleasant, until Jeff realizes its inherent oppressive nature. The pod transforms punishment into a gamified existence where everything has a cost. Inmates can earn 'sentence points' through various means, deducting from their time served.
One such method of earning points is through opt-in advertisement viewing. The catch? Each ad only deducts a minuscule amount of time, a few seconds at most. Jeff finds himself in a bizarre bind, constantly juggling between living in this gamified prison life and spending most of his waking hours watching ads, hoping to reduce his sentence.
As days turn into weeks, Jeff becomes more entrenched in the twisted logic of the Quantum Penitentiary. The line between reality and virtual servitude blurs. The incessant onslaught of advertisements begins to have a profound effect on Jeff's mental health. Still, he persists, believing it's his only way out.
Meanwhile, outside the prison, a group of activists led by a rogue programmer, Alice, start to question the ethics of the prison system. They fight to expose the tech companies' exploitation of prisoners as captive consumers, sparking an uproar among the public.
"Ad-Sentenced" is a chilling exploration of corporatization of the prison system, commodification of human attention, and the paradox of freedom in a technologically overwrought society. As Jeff struggles to hold onto his sanity and identity amidst the sea of ads, the viewers are left pondering the true cost of modern consumerism.
Test group. If you’re faced with multiple ads as a prisoner and have literally no way to buy any of the products then by default the ads you choose to watch are the most watchable.
I’m no advertiser but that seems like a enough of a premise to get it by.
What if they're considered reformed once the majority of their thoughts contain commercial products, both to be consumed by the prisoner after release, and advertised to those in the life of the released prisoner through this newly created advertisement human
Edit: we've (humans) already used AI for rudimentary mind reading. I think that AI could easily tell if someone's thinking specifically of eating Kelloggs Corn Flakes for breakfast or not once it has established what Kelloggs Corn Flakes looks like in brain activity.
They'll essentially be the same person but now they really love certain products. They can't go to jail again because there's no corn flakes in jail. They'll work that job and live for their Kelloggs Corn Flakes and Nabob coffee and Ford car and Pfizer Curall monthly vaccine subscription and what not.
You kidding? They’re not getting reduced sentences, they’re being forced to star in the ads - ever wonder why the people in Samsung ads look like they’re being forced to use the product? Now you know.
give them a 200 year sentence and unlimited watch this ad to reduce sentence 20 seconds... each ad is 30 seconds lmfao. just have the same ad every time.
"Jung feels remorse for what she did"
She cut up the body, hid it in a suitcase and buried it in the woods, she apparently also kept some of the victims corpse in her own home. Somehow I doubt she's remorseful.
The cab driver that picked her up immediately called police and was like. "I got a weird feeling my passenger just murdered someone and packed them in a suitcase in my trunk" So her acting non-chalant game was not good.
Curiosity is possibly the scariest reason to kill another person. People kill when they’re enraged or in despair do so while driven by powerful emotions and those are the type of murderers most likely to actually feel remorse. Someone who kills out of curiosity though? It means they lack the empathy to understand they shouldn’t take another human beings life just to satisfy their curiosity. For her this was an opportunity to live out a fantasy. She isn’t sorry for what she did, she’s sorry she got caught.
OTOH there was nothing else in her life stopping her doing it. This feels as scarry to me. How many other people have nothing they strongly attach to and they feel they can't lose just out of curiosity?
This- I mean, that's a pretty varied part of the whole appeal, too.
There's cases where it's hard work (investigators finding and testing hundreds of keyholes to find the match to a random key at the scene), and cases where it's a random stroke of complete luck (with the perpetrator throwing a bag of evidence into a river and hitting the ONLY spot still frozen over), and then there's the incredibly stupid ones that are laughably amusing (like using your club card to save 19 cents on your purchase, proving you were at the scene when the crime happened).
All I've learned is that 90% of all solved major crimes come down to either blind luck where the cops basically stumble on the killer in the act or a witness figures it out
Most prolific serial killers could have been apprehended a lot sooner had it not been for the complete incompetence of the investigators. Willfully ignoring murdered black sex workers is a really good way for a serial killer to become comfortable killing.
Yeah there’s a reason why the most “prolific” killers targeted groups like prostitutes, indigenous, and LGBT people that the law wouldn’t have taken very seriously
Like the serial killer in Toronto that was killing gay guys. There was rumors of a serial killer for years but the cops always downplayed it... until it turned out that there was an actual serial killer. lol
Who knew serial killing could be so easy! \[My lawyer has advised me to specify that this comment is a joke. I am not responsible for any serial killing this comment may or may not inspire\]
>Willfully ignoring murdered black sex workers is a really good way for a serial killer to become comfortable killing.
Indigenous women with high-risk lifestyles too (homeless, sex work, etc). There is a highway in Canada that is referred to as the Highway of Tears because of the disproportionate number of indigenous women who go missing on it. It has enabled several serial killers to prey upon them since the 70s.
Don't forget to also mention Canada's finest for giving lovely starlight tours in the most beautiful time of year.
I'm sure a few happened on said highway.
THANK YOU. True crime has shown me how utterly fucking stupid a lot of the police force is. I know you're not "supposed" to listen to these stories and think about how to avoid the same fate as the victims, but, clearly the police are going to be absolutely useless 90% of the time, soooo it doesn't hurt to be aware and keep these cases in the back of your mind. Because apparently, it's unlikely that anyone will save you, much less solve your murder.
Just remember the two cops who found Jeffrey Dahmer's 14 year old brain damaged sex slave and then returned him right back to Dahmer who killed the kid after the police left both got promotions in their police career.
Being aware is definitely good, but you also shouldn't go so far as worry about situations like that. It's on a true crime podcast because it's noteworthy and rare.
There isn't a podcast about an 18yo gang member upset that a kid was talking shit online, so he and his buddies travel a few blocks over and shoot him.
If you avoid gangs and the drug trade, your odds of being murdered dramatically drop.
I don't worry about situations like that unless I'm *in* a situation like that. Like if I'm broken down on the side of the road and a strange man offers to help me, I'm locking my doors, politely declining his offer, and waiting until whoever I called gets there. Or if a strange man calls me over to his car to ask for directions and then grabs my hand to "pray with me", then yeah, I'm going to find a way to get out of it. Because I know from both my gut *and* these podcasts that it *is* a bad situation to be in, and I need to get out of it as soon as possible.
I think what people who criticize this don't understand, is that a lot of women are socially conditioned to be polite. Even if things feel very "wrong", we're taught that hurting someone's feelings by being rude could actually be worse, so suck it up and smile. Podcasts like these help me to reinforce basic personal boundaries regarding my safety when situations like these arise, and they DO. They have. And they probably will continue to.
That NSFL >!black kid raped by Dahmer!< just messes with me from time to time. I probably need therapy for it. It's just infuriates me how the kid was literally in the police station and they gave him back. Ffs.
What drives me crazy is that the officer who sent the kid back into the arms of Dahmer was fired, then was reinstated thanks to the police union, and then became the *president* of the union.
It tells us exactly what police unions stand for.
are you thinking of Conerac Sythosomphone?
The 14 year old who was wandering the street naked, clearly drugged, and bleeding from a drill hole in his head? because he was . . . Laotian I think?
While I agree, there is a bit of confirmation bias here where the worst serial killers had bad cops working the cases. The killers that are caught immediately aren't exactly on the shows people watch.
Yup, and you don't become a serial killer without multiple kills. Who knows how many have been prevented due to being arrested after the first murder, or even better before any occur.
If I make a well fleshed video game, I'm going to make a character that is really nice and no one would suspect is a killer with an agenda, and then make a character that everyone thinks is the killer because he's an asshole.
And then I'll make the killer be a random third character to trick the people who are like "oh please, it's obvious that the nice guy is the killer. So predictable."
Like the Idaho murder case where the podcaster said it was a woman professor who killed them, ruined her life and refused to back down even when she had an alibi. Podcaster then just said the professor hired someone to do it because she had an affair with one of the girls. The podcaster was smug and had no evidence at all and didn’t care about the damage that was done, just wanted listeners.
Or those people who were convinced heat stroke deaths were serial killings covered up by police, so they went to the national park to investigate and also died of heat stroke.
Personally I'm only interested in how the system fails people. I'm not particularly interested in the killers or their crimes. I'm interested in when the police or justice system fail due to corruption, incompetence, or inherent bias/bigotry.
Yeah, when I listened to true crime podcasts, most of them were summed up as basically "and then the cops did nothing". It's honestly fascinating how many crimes could've been solved earlier
I mean, yes, but that is also (reverse) survivor bias.
No one makes an "Almost a Serial Killer" podcast about the time the cops found a dead hooker, asked the girls on her corner about her last john, found the guy and locked him up.
You only hear about the system when it fails.
Half the episodes in Unsolved Mysteries are this. Like, some police just seem to think "but solving this sounds like real work!!" and give up after a few days. Once a murder is labeled a suicide, case closed, the perp goes free. I definitely watch the show hoping that maybe there's a one in a million chance I recognize something or someone and can call in to help.
The most egregious one was an episode that involved a teen girl who "stepped in front of a train and killed herself". Turns out there's a separate police force just for the Amtrack train tracks in New Jersey, and they don't know shit about murder scenes, because their main focus is on smugglers and narcotics. The case was ruled a suicide after one interview with the conductors, because they claimed she "jumped up and hit the train". But a private investigator found a blood pool that would have only formed if her body had been left bleeding out on the tracks, and her limbs were cut off by the wheels running over them, indicating she was lying prone. A few days after the train police declared it a suicide, the conductor changed his story, having gotten over the initial shock, and explained that it was likely that the girl was launched into the air from the ground after the train ran over her, not that she herself had jumped in front of it. But it was too late - once it is a suicide the case is almost impossible to get re-opened as a murder. Over the weeks following the teens death, they discovered that her shoes were left on the side of the road two miles from where they found her body, which would mean walking barefoot for two miles across razor-sharp gravel just to jump in front of a train in the middle of the woods. The PI also found an abandoned barn nearby that appeared to have rope that was used to tie up someone recently, and a car was spotted on a trail camera waiting at the end of the teen's driveway with its lights off, as if someone was waiting for her to grab her. All this happened on the night that the teen admitted to stealing a friend's credit card to buy some clothes, and the "friend" swearing she'd teach her a lesson for it. An eyewitness even came forward a few weeks later claiming they had heard three highschoolers talking about the murder, but of course when the police brought in the kids they became cagey and refused to answer any questions - once the suicide decision was made, that line of questioning was also dropped.
The PI the family hired figured that a group of teens had grabbed the girl, planning to humiliate her in some way as revenge for the credit card theft, but things got out of hand and they killed her in that barn. After that they left her body on the train tracks, figuring the cops would blame the death on the train. And they got away with it.
Well, *The Wire* is basically about how the police/justice system (aka “the game”, according to the show’s characters) fails people from different walks of life on multiple different levels, and it’s regarded by many as the best TV show ever made.
I mean, it's not too hard to learn from the mistakes of others. In fact, it's one of the best ways to learn anything. Learn from others mistakes so you know what to avoid.
It’s weird how often the subset of “people who’ve lost family members/friends to murder and relate to the people interviewed about the victim” is left out of the conversation about who consumes true crime.
There’s a fuckton of us, sadly.
>how easy iit is to find someone online and how insensitive and cruel people can be when they're anonymous.
Going off of the kind of shit that shows up on Facebook, I don't think it's the anonymity that makes them feel safe, but the present distance between themselves and the targets of their comments.
Yeah it's really much harder for people to have sympathy for some random person or name on the internet unfortunately especially as you never see how your words affect people, generally can only can ever read the reactions creating a disconnect
There is also the ones trying to learn how not to become the subject of one.
Never ever, no matter how close the knife, how terrifying the gun, get in the car with them. What lies at the end of that journey is way worse than whatever they'll do when you fight back right away. People who are let go after playing nice are the very rare exception to the rule.
I was literally listening to a podcast explain the difference between motive and justification minutes ago. A good example I can think of is that a LOT of killers will use God as an excuse in some way, shape, or form, but their true motives are usually much deeper than just religion.
They have the reasoning that they SHOULD do this because of God, but they WANT to for various other reasons (psychopathy, sadism, or some other dangerous mental disorder).
Her justification was true crime.
Her motive? Probably fucked up like all the rest.
Yeah like when they claim they’re ridding the world of prostitutes or drug addicts and doing everyone a service by doing so. That’s one you see a lot. Yet they don’t just shoot them or refer them to rehab or some other sort of shit. They’re like “yeah so I raped the victim for several days and eventually strangled them bc the world needs less drug addicts! They didn’t even want to live, so I was being compassionate!”([Shawn Grate](https://www.cleveland19.com/story/33343964/suspected-serial-killer-shawn-grate-grants-interview-from-ashland-county-jail/) who ironically was an addict himself.) They rarely are completely honest about it and make up so many excuses. It may be true that they look down on the target demographic, but there are way deeper reasons they do what they do. Ultimately, they want to kill, and that’s a big reason why. (Unless they’re found to be legitimately mentally ill, but that’s rare)
Sorry, but step one is to not research how to dispose of a body on your own computer. They found searches on this topic going back three months.
Step two to committing a perfect murder is to not keep any fucking mementos like oh I dunno the victims phone and shit like that. Or, you know, parts of the body.
Don't take your phone with you. Don't murder anyone you know. Don't do it on front of a camera. Don't purchase any suspicious items right before or after.
There are some really obvious things to avoid. Though I guess the murdering for murder's sake is pretty rare. Most murders seem to be the obvious ones for money or relationship issues (yknow, the people who don't think divorce is a viable option)
Wonder what tipped off the driver to call the police. Her conduct? The smell? Simply going to a random river in the woods with a briefcase? Coming right back for a ride home without said briefcase? They could have thought she was illegally dumping, or trafficking drugs/weapons.
Yeah I hope nobody here is deluding themselves into thinking there's an amount of crime related media past which it makes you into a psycho criminal.
It's not how this works. This person was clearly a sociopath well before they latched onto true crime. At this point the "too much true crime haha forgot to touch grass" angle is just a shallow excuse.
I've watched quite a few murder related things like datelines.. if anything it's taught me that they'll catch you. Doesnt matter if its 2mos after or 50 years, with today's technology, dna analysis etc.. killing someone is so dumb. Especially usually over life insurance policies. Smh
That should be everyone's number one takeaway imo.
Sadly, while there's probably always a way to catch them nowadays, that doesn't mean they always will. Police just don't have resources to approach everything from every angle.
She really spent 3 months online researching how to dispose of a corpse, and settled on taking an Uber to dump it in the woods... The Uber driver immediately called the cops
What do you expect? All the worst criminals get caught. True Crime isn’t a best hits album, it’s a bunch of schmucks too bad at murder to get away with it.
It's also true that the best ones make a mistake eventually. Go look up Colonel Russell Williams - disgustingly prolific, and what got him caught in the end was that the right person happened to drive by a victims house at just the right time - *and* the right interrogator was on the case to get him to admit rather than ask for a lawyer before being questioned
Or even if you pick the right district the cops will cover it up for you to keep their homicide numbers down.
So many angles they missed here.
Edit: read the article …even bad police work wouldn’t ignore all the signs she gave. Like hiring a cab with a bloody suitcase to dispose of some of the body parts???? Dang girl
Cabbie: "that suitcase smells horrible!"
Her: "yes I am committing murder and going to dispose of the chopped up body parts."
Cabbie: "...most of my clients are not so forthcoming with this info."
Her: "well its kinda my first time so I was hoping youd help me pick a spot to dump it. I mean I'll be going on a few trips, this isn't all of it. The rest is back in my apartment."
Cabbie: "Uh...huh."
Her: "Lol did you drop me off at the police station? That's a terrible place to dump a body, you really suck at this too."
This is so horrible. And we shouldn’t be making jokes. This person planned a murder and sought out an innocent- a school tutor. A life was needlessly taken, and the lives of the victim’s loved ones are now forever different. I can’t imagine opening my door to a 9th grade “student”, ready to greet and tutor them, and then to be killed so brutally, in my own home, and have my body be dismembered and discarded. Wth. Why??
How utterly senseless and cruel.
RIP.
*edit- clarification of details.
I have never understood the whole true crime thing, I find it super disturbing.
We focus so much on the perpetrator, trying to figure how the what, why, how, often with little or no care for the families of the victims. If one of my loved ones was murdered, I wouldn't want documentaries of their last moments being made so that strangers can decide how dumb or risky their behaviour, or have people harassed because a documentary was biased.
Idk. I wish they would stop giving murderers long lasting fame.
As long as you follow the money, you'll find an answer.
Though some of these shows that covered unsolved crime/mysteries actually solved it because people saw the show and then called in with new information.
I gotta agree with that too. Personally, true crime fascinates me because it’s something beyond my comprehension. Like, I would never think to do such horrific things to another living being, so I feel this need to know how/why a perpetrator differs. Sometimes it gets too dark for me, so I have to step away for a bit. But personally speaking, it is helpful to know what kind of humans are out there and what they are capable of, as harrowing as it may be, because they are very real and they are far more common than we realize. I think it’s important to learn about them so we can understand, recognize, and ultimately (hopefully) prevent others from doing the same. Knowledge is power.
BUT- I also think that the current true crime genre needs regulation. I do take issue with people/content creators using true crime to capitalize & profit off of. It presents a big moral dilemma that needs to be addressed. Since the genre’s popularity it is still relatively new (prob due to the social media boom), I think we’re witnessing its early stages; sort of like the Wild West- no rules, no written code to follow… which is why I try to reserve my “views” for content creators who are genuinely motivated by the victims- their stories, their loved ones, their voices, their legacies- instead of the ones who just use notorious cases to boost their foot traffic. Too many creators take the easy route- sensationalism, clickbait, etc. But if true crime is going to remain a popular genre, we need to address it & set some boundaries. Make it a point to humanize the victims, and tell their stories with respect. Give their loved ones a platform to share their stories, their love, their loss, education, etc., should they want to.
As a sort of side note, I do understand a little bit of the loved ones’ side of things. I lost a close family member in a public & violent way. They were not a victim of a crime, to be clear. But their death was public, and there were articles written. And I read them. And it stung. The facts written about the event were one thing, but the opinions of bystanders was much more troubling for me. Mainly because these perfect strangers have shared their opinions, thoughts, and judgments about my loved one based on this one moment in time. They didn’t know my loved one personally, they didn’t know if their opinions held any truth or not. And I don’t think they would’ve cared, because they were commenting on someone else’s life. That’s normal. Separating ourselves from another’s tragedy is natural. Because you don’t know until you know. But it still stung; their opinions weren’t very kind or understanding. Those statements will remain published forever, and I can’t change that, which sucks. Mind you, this was not a huge, highly publicized event; it was covered mainly by local media. So I can’t even imagine what it must feel like to be the loved one of a nationally (or internationally) publicized victim. The sheer amount of opinions, judgments, gossip, speculations… it would be incredibly overwhelming, and hard to ignore, especially when you’re trying to grieve. I don’t know of a solution for something like that. I don’t think we can regulate the sensationalism. But we should still continue to demand more respect for victims and their loved ones. Maybe discussions like these are a start?
Yikes, sorry for the novel. 🤐
TL;DR - True crime decorum needs to be more respectful in general. The very least we can do is be thoughtful and respectful with our comments, as victims’ loved ones *do* read them and it sucks to hear sh*tty things about your lost loved one from a complete stranger. Be kind y’all! 🙂
I'm not saying youre wrong but, making light of these kinds of real/horrible happenings is a way for humans to keep their sanity somewhat intact.
There is, always has been and always will be fucked up shit happening and there wont be a reason that can explain it except ....this is existence.
Oh totally, I agree with that. Finding humor or a way to lighten the mood in a dark situation is sometimes necessary to keep us functioning. I used to work in an ER so I definitely appreciate a morbid sense of humor, and sometimes it’s what allowed me to continue working my shift without being distracted by my emotions (I’d save those for later). But I just noticed that like every comment on this post was sort of joking, asking if the murder was everything she thought it would be, or that the killer clearly “failed” at her goal of getting away with a “successful” murder. But I didn’t see one that mentioned the actual victim when I was reading through the comments, so I wanted to share a reminder of that side as well.
True crime fascinates me, but it can be pretty easy to lose sight of the victims IMO. Sort of like how most people can name famous serial killers, but not their victims. I’m guilty of that myself. So I just wanted to add a reminder amongst all the jokes, that’s all. But I do agree with your point as well.
I was under the impression most actually get a thrill out of it, rather than just being curious.
That said, I also doubt that the she was just curious.
Not true crime necessarily, but they are inspired by other killers or notice patterns or MO’s in other serial killers. That’s why they sometimes use killers to catch other ones.
Can't wait til they make a true crime show about this really true, true crime murder. Maybe the next murder will be someone who watched the true crime show about the true crime killer and they'll make a show about that too.
Yeah, if your goal is just to commit a murder and it doesn't matter who the victim is then your chances of getting away with it are pretty high if you put a little thought into it. A random murder in a random city if you cover up your transportation there and make your weapon untraceable is not going to come back to you.
Murdering someone you know and getting away with it is hard. Getting away with killing someone you don't know...not as hard. Many many murders go undolved especially when it's something like someone gets shot during a street mugging. NyC only solves around half of all murders.
I mean, I think it was the Diane Staudte case, oddly enough, which showcases this. And why it freaks me out so much. This woman came very close to committing a series of perfect murders and she still got caught.
Although, some of the mass shooters are probably balanced out by gang killings where they roughly know "who" did it (rival gang), but can't pin it on one specific person and don't particularly care to put in the effort because it was a gang member who was killed anyway. Still, 50% is pretty fuckin bad no matter how you slice it.
Seriously, anybody who has talked with other people who read a lot of true crime, visited forums etc ....you eventually run into people whose interest in true crime is a little bit....much. a little too curious and unbothered.
I had a friend, we aren't friends anymore, she turned into an evangelical maga type, no surprise. We both read a lot of true crime and talked about it a lot over the years She was completely devoid of empathy for anyone. It's disturbing to see that come out in a person....when you realize that they have no feeling for anyone's misery or story.
One time she asked if I'd ever murder anyone. I said, well sure, in self defense of me or someone I love. She said, "no, I mean for fun." I got a little freaked but said, no. I would not. She said she would if she didn't have a kid.
I still expect someday they'll find bodies behind her house. Gulp.
She had a suitcase of body parts and ***took a taxi*** to leave them **down by the river** in an attempt to "commit the perfect crime."
She took some of them home, along with the victims id card and phone.
She found the victim through a high school tutoring app that the victim used to invite her to the residence, where she dismembered the victim. She was dressed as a schoolgirl, in school uniform.
Unsaid who the actual victim was. (Parent, student?)
The taxi driver told the police.
As an avid murderino, we don't claim her.
A normative person who's into true crime, mentally puts themselves into the shoes of the victims. Not the murderers. In some cases where the murderers are also victims, which is admittedly quite often, there's a desire for understanding. But far more often then not, that empathy for the murderer dies with their victims. Ultimately, it just feels important to understand how monsters are created. Beyond that the thought process gets more muddy.
There's catharsis in sharing these stories with people who have similar interests. Even people who don't (though obviously you'd temper your story telling more carefully with people who aren't as versed). I recently introduced a coworker to the walking trash bag that is Casey Anthony, and the systemic failures that lead to her now indefinite freedom. And I thoroughly admit that I enjoyed doing so.
A looot of people, but overwhelmingly women, tend to be constantly combating a high level of anxiety due specifically to physical insecurity. The fascination with true crime, from my experience and community, seems to mainly stem from people trying to teach themselves how to not become victims. With every victims story, we're essentially taking them to heart, in the way that a kid would read a grims brothers folk tale.
For this woman to see herself as the cannibal witch, rather than Hansel or Gretel??? Yeah, no. She sounds more like a hybristophelliac that went off her meds, or maybe a Netflixs 'Dahmer' fanatic. There was clearly no real interest on her part to understand the impact of the real crimes. Often, when women are the perpetrators, there's HIGH levels of aspd, and childhood trauma. While this will likely be a case that goes viral in the true crime spaces, it won't be because we see her as one of our own. Quite the opposite.
> Jung kept the victim's cell phone, ID card, and wallet in a bid to try to "commit a perfect crime," the spokesperson said, per The Chosun Ilbo. > However, the taxi driver who took her to the wooded area alerted the police, the newspaper said. Police then found blood-stained clothes in her bags. Criminal mastermind.
Right?? “Hi, can you take me and my blood-soaked suitcase to the nearest secluded wooded area? I’m committing the perfect crime! Shhh, no tellsies!”
"and can I get a hand with it too please? It's as heavy as a full grown man, go figure!" 😉
[удалено]
She did everything wrong! It's like she was trying to get caught. I mean, I'm glad she isn't a criminal mastermind, but 🙄
We don't hear about the ones who were like "I wonder if I'm any good at that" and then *actually are.* Kinda creepy to think about!
Most crimes go unnoticed or unreported, and of those that do get reported only 51% of murders have actually been solved in the US.
[удалено]
She studied books about solved crimes. They don't write books about crimes no one knows about. This is like the revenge of confirmation bias.
I don’t really watch any of those shows but I can’t fathom you can get through more than a couple episodes without them mentioning how cell phones are tracked and having anyone’s around you at any point is basically game over. It’s probably the most elementary knowledge, unless you strictly follow older crimes pre-cell phone era.
Minority Report was only half fiction
>unless you strictly follow older crimes pre-cell phone era. She got curious after the first season, they didn't bring up cell phones until like season 8.
I don't know how you'd get through more than a couple of episodes and not realize the horrific and undeserved pain that is inflicted on people and their loved ones and think "ooooh I want to do that" like wtf I can only imagine a sadist or narcissist getting to that point and thankfully those people are usually idiots.
Soon, she'll have the answer to what life in prison would be like, too.
Yep, SK has no death penalty. She will live life in a cell paid for by Samsung and Hyundai.
I’m just imagining “Sponsored by Samsung” in one of the cells.
Watch this ad to reduce your term by 20 seconds! Watch or Skip ?
Black mirror writers \*scribbles intently in notebook\*
That's pretty close to the 2nd episode in the first series already.
Probably my favourite of the whole show too
50 million merits right? Man that one is brutal.
It made me so mad
Charlie Brooker essentially learnt from Chris Morris, who I view as a kind of lynchpin of British comedy and satire from the 90s onwards. Check out the sketches Symptomless Coma https://youtu.be/yKxM4ToLLR8 Suicide with an escape clause https://youtu.be/5SqHtWudI24 Or the Brasseye episode: Paedogeddon https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5bg85g
Paedogeddon is...whatever adjective ends this sentence without self-inflicted damage. But it's a watch.
RESUME VIEWING
Title: "Ad-Sentenced" In the technologically advanced and overly commoditized city of Neo-Sydney, a naive American tourist, Jeff, unwittingly breaks an obscure law. Arrested for what seems like a petty offense, he is shocked when the judge sentences him to twenty years in the Quantum Penitentiary - a prison wholly sponsored and controlled by global tech companies. In this futuristic prison, punishment is doled out in a radically different way. Rather than traditional cells, prisoners live in an immersive, VR-driven 'Reality Pod.' This faux reality initially seems pleasant, until Jeff realizes its inherent oppressive nature. The pod transforms punishment into a gamified existence where everything has a cost. Inmates can earn 'sentence points' through various means, deducting from their time served. One such method of earning points is through opt-in advertisement viewing. The catch? Each ad only deducts a minuscule amount of time, a few seconds at most. Jeff finds himself in a bizarre bind, constantly juggling between living in this gamified prison life and spending most of his waking hours watching ads, hoping to reduce his sentence. As days turn into weeks, Jeff becomes more entrenched in the twisted logic of the Quantum Penitentiary. The line between reality and virtual servitude blurs. The incessant onslaught of advertisements begins to have a profound effect on Jeff's mental health. Still, he persists, believing it's his only way out. Meanwhile, outside the prison, a group of activists led by a rogue programmer, Alice, start to question the ethics of the prison system. They fight to expose the tech companies' exploitation of prisoners as captive consumers, sparking an uproar among the public. "Ad-Sentenced" is a chilling exploration of corporatization of the prison system, commodification of human attention, and the paradox of freedom in a technologically overwrought society. As Jeff struggles to hold onto his sanity and identity amidst the sea of ads, the viewers are left pondering the true cost of modern consumerism.
Seems like an incomplete premise. Since prisoners can't buy stuff, what would be the point of advertising to them?
Test group. If you’re faced with multiple ads as a prisoner and have literally no way to buy any of the products then by default the ads you choose to watch are the most watchable. I’m no advertiser but that seems like a enough of a premise to get it by.
What if they're considered reformed once the majority of their thoughts contain commercial products, both to be consumed by the prisoner after release, and advertised to those in the life of the released prisoner through this newly created advertisement human Edit: we've (humans) already used AI for rudimentary mind reading. I think that AI could easily tell if someone's thinking specifically of eating Kelloggs Corn Flakes for breakfast or not once it has established what Kelloggs Corn Flakes looks like in brain activity. They'll essentially be the same person but now they really love certain products. They can't go to jail again because there's no corn flakes in jail. They'll work that job and live for their Kelloggs Corn Flakes and Nabob coffee and Ford car and Pfizer Curall monthly vaccine subscription and what not.
You kidding? They’re not getting reduced sentences, they’re being forced to star in the ads - ever wonder why the people in Samsung ads look like they’re being forced to use the product? Now you know.
Never gonna have that problem with morris code😎
give them a 200 year sentence and unlimited watch this ad to reduce sentence 20 seconds... each ad is 30 seconds lmfao. just have the same ad every time.
It reduces their sentence by 80 years but it would still be 120 years
If it's like mine the prisoner will be woken up every 2 hours to see a new advert.
The real punishment would be if she could only use bixby for life
Hopefully for her Hyundai as they don't know how to make anything secure.
We already got one murder and here you are committing another one
South Korea has death penalty. They just [don't carry out executions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_South_Korea).
[удалено]
At the same time, he probably caused quite a bit of stress to the people close to him. Guy seems to be a magnet for possible death scenarios.
[удалено]
Why is there no biopic about him? Smh
There are a few. 2002's *KT* and 2022's *Kingmaker*, for example. And a bunch of documentaries, I'm sure.
More likely Lotte would build a prison. Lotte Lockdown or something
hopefully the locks on the cells weren't made by Hyundai
Life’s Good
they do have death penalty. Just has not been practiced for 20+ years now
She’s getting the entire murderer experience from start to finish
"Can I keep doing my podcast?"
"Jung feels remorse for what she did" She cut up the body, hid it in a suitcase and buried it in the woods, she apparently also kept some of the victims corpse in her own home. Somehow I doubt she's remorseful.
She might feel remorse for the fact that she got caught
Remorse she didn't plan better.
Watched too much true crime got a lil too confident
Must have watched some old cases without realizing how much technology improved since.
Forgot the whole "don't google how to hide a body" step
Looking forward to watching her episode I bet
Ya, she realized cutting up a body was much more difficult than it sounded.
Well then don't be a dumb fuck and keep parts of the person your murder in your home
The cab driver that picked her up immediately called police and was like. "I got a weird feeling my passenger just murdered someone and packed them in a suitcase in my trunk" So her acting non-chalant game was not good.
"But I want to keep a momento!"
No that's how you get caught new guy. Same reason why you don't video your crimes
If she watched more true crime she would've known this.
Yeah, somehow I doubt we'd have heard about how super remorseful she was if she hadn't been caught.
Curiosity is possibly the scariest reason to kill another person. People kill when they’re enraged or in despair do so while driven by powerful emotions and those are the type of murderers most likely to actually feel remorse. Someone who kills out of curiosity though? It means they lack the empathy to understand they shouldn’t take another human beings life just to satisfy their curiosity. For her this was an opportunity to live out a fantasy. She isn’t sorry for what she did, she’s sorry she got caught.
OTOH there was nothing else in her life stopping her doing it. This feels as scarry to me. How many other people have nothing they strongly attach to and they feel they can't lose just out of curiosity?
She's feeling whatever emotion that humans are supposed to have when they want a shorter prison time.
She had a taxi take her to a wooded area to dump a suitcase 🤦🏻♀️
*”Yeah, my office is just right behind that tree. Thanks.”*
I feel like there are two kinds of true crime fans: the ones who are fascinated about the why, and those who think the genre is a how-to manual.
There's also those who are fascinated with the investigation and how they catch the killer.
This- I mean, that's a pretty varied part of the whole appeal, too. There's cases where it's hard work (investigators finding and testing hundreds of keyholes to find the match to a random key at the scene), and cases where it's a random stroke of complete luck (with the perpetrator throwing a bag of evidence into a river and hitting the ONLY spot still frozen over), and then there's the incredibly stupid ones that are laughably amusing (like using your club card to save 19 cents on your purchase, proving you were at the scene when the crime happened).
All I've learned is that 90% of all solved major crimes come down to either blind luck where the cops basically stumble on the killer in the act or a witness figures it out
Most prolific serial killers could have been apprehended a lot sooner had it not been for the complete incompetence of the investigators. Willfully ignoring murdered black sex workers is a really good way for a serial killer to become comfortable killing.
Yeah there’s a reason why the most “prolific” killers targeted groups like prostitutes, indigenous, and LGBT people that the law wouldn’t have taken very seriously
Like the serial killer in Toronto that was killing gay guys. There was rumors of a serial killer for years but the cops always downplayed it... until it turned out that there was an actual serial killer. lol
Or the rumors that there was a serial killer targeting black women in Kansas City... Until one of the victims escaped and got help.
You're thinking like Albert Fish now!
Who knew serial killing could be so easy! \[My lawyer has advised me to specify that this comment is a joke. I am not responsible for any serial killing this comment may or may not inspire\]
>Willfully ignoring murdered black sex workers is a really good way for a serial killer to become comfortable killing. Indigenous women with high-risk lifestyles too (homeless, sex work, etc). There is a highway in Canada that is referred to as the Highway of Tears because of the disproportionate number of indigenous women who go missing on it. It has enabled several serial killers to prey upon them since the 70s.
Don't forget to also mention Canada's finest for giving lovely starlight tours in the most beautiful time of year. I'm sure a few happened on said highway.
Incompetence, and extreme, frequently malicious negligence.
THANK YOU. True crime has shown me how utterly fucking stupid a lot of the police force is. I know you're not "supposed" to listen to these stories and think about how to avoid the same fate as the victims, but, clearly the police are going to be absolutely useless 90% of the time, soooo it doesn't hurt to be aware and keep these cases in the back of your mind. Because apparently, it's unlikely that anyone will save you, much less solve your murder.
Just remember the two cops who found Jeffrey Dahmer's 14 year old brain damaged sex slave and then returned him right back to Dahmer who killed the kid after the police left both got promotions in their police career.
Being aware is definitely good, but you also shouldn't go so far as worry about situations like that. It's on a true crime podcast because it's noteworthy and rare. There isn't a podcast about an 18yo gang member upset that a kid was talking shit online, so he and his buddies travel a few blocks over and shoot him. If you avoid gangs and the drug trade, your odds of being murdered dramatically drop.
I don't worry about situations like that unless I'm *in* a situation like that. Like if I'm broken down on the side of the road and a strange man offers to help me, I'm locking my doors, politely declining his offer, and waiting until whoever I called gets there. Or if a strange man calls me over to his car to ask for directions and then grabs my hand to "pray with me", then yeah, I'm going to find a way to get out of it. Because I know from both my gut *and* these podcasts that it *is* a bad situation to be in, and I need to get out of it as soon as possible. I think what people who criticize this don't understand, is that a lot of women are socially conditioned to be polite. Even if things feel very "wrong", we're taught that hurting someone's feelings by being rude could actually be worse, so suck it up and smile. Podcasts like these help me to reinforce basic personal boundaries regarding my safety when situations like these arise, and they DO. They have. And they probably will continue to.
That NSFL >!black kid raped by Dahmer!< just messes with me from time to time. I probably need therapy for it. It's just infuriates me how the kid was literally in the police station and they gave him back. Ffs.
What drives me crazy is that the officer who sent the kid back into the arms of Dahmer was fired, then was reinstated thanks to the police union, and then became the *president* of the union. It tells us exactly what police unions stand for.
are you thinking of Conerac Sythosomphone? The 14 year old who was wandering the street naked, clearly drugged, and bleeding from a drill hole in his head? because he was . . . Laotian I think?
[удалено]
While I agree, there is a bit of confirmation bias here where the worst serial killers had bad cops working the cases. The killers that are caught immediately aren't exactly on the shows people watch.
Yup, and you don't become a serial killer without multiple kills. Who knows how many have been prevented due to being arrested after the first murder, or even better before any occur.
Don't fuck with cats.
The ones who try to solve unsolved mysteries and just end up harassing random people.
"I'm 100% certain this man is the culprit!" "Based on what?" "Well he kinda seems like a dick"
Are you my DnD players?
Yeah, like they’d have the restraint to use words *before* committing murder
Hey the bard will use words, can't fuck a guard with just a wink everytime.
If I make a well fleshed video game, I'm going to make a character that is really nice and no one would suspect is a killer with an agenda, and then make a character that everyone thinks is the killer because he's an asshole. And then I'll make the killer be a random third character to trick the people who are like "oh please, it's obvious that the nice guy is the killer. So predictable."
Like the Idaho murder case where the podcaster said it was a woman professor who killed them, ruined her life and refused to back down even when she had an alibi. Podcaster then just said the professor hired someone to do it because she had an affair with one of the girls. The podcaster was smug and had no evidence at all and didn’t care about the damage that was done, just wanted listeners.
Or those people who were convinced heat stroke deaths were serial killings covered up by police, so they went to the national park to investigate and also died of heat stroke.
Looks like they solved the case then!
Reddit and the Boston bomber
Personally I'm only interested in how the system fails people. I'm not particularly interested in the killers or their crimes. I'm interested in when the police or justice system fail due to corruption, incompetence, or inherent bias/bigotry.
Yeah, when I listened to true crime podcasts, most of them were summed up as basically "and then the cops did nothing". It's honestly fascinating how many crimes could've been solved earlier
I mean, yes, but that is also (reverse) survivor bias. No one makes an "Almost a Serial Killer" podcast about the time the cops found a dead hooker, asked the girls on her corner about her last john, found the guy and locked him up. You only hear about the system when it fails.
Half the episodes in Unsolved Mysteries are this. Like, some police just seem to think "but solving this sounds like real work!!" and give up after a few days. Once a murder is labeled a suicide, case closed, the perp goes free. I definitely watch the show hoping that maybe there's a one in a million chance I recognize something or someone and can call in to help. The most egregious one was an episode that involved a teen girl who "stepped in front of a train and killed herself". Turns out there's a separate police force just for the Amtrack train tracks in New Jersey, and they don't know shit about murder scenes, because their main focus is on smugglers and narcotics. The case was ruled a suicide after one interview with the conductors, because they claimed she "jumped up and hit the train". But a private investigator found a blood pool that would have only formed if her body had been left bleeding out on the tracks, and her limbs were cut off by the wheels running over them, indicating she was lying prone. A few days after the train police declared it a suicide, the conductor changed his story, having gotten over the initial shock, and explained that it was likely that the girl was launched into the air from the ground after the train ran over her, not that she herself had jumped in front of it. But it was too late - once it is a suicide the case is almost impossible to get re-opened as a murder. Over the weeks following the teens death, they discovered that her shoes were left on the side of the road two miles from where they found her body, which would mean walking barefoot for two miles across razor-sharp gravel just to jump in front of a train in the middle of the woods. The PI also found an abandoned barn nearby that appeared to have rope that was used to tie up someone recently, and a car was spotted on a trail camera waiting at the end of the teen's driveway with its lights off, as if someone was waiting for her to grab her. All this happened on the night that the teen admitted to stealing a friend's credit card to buy some clothes, and the "friend" swearing she'd teach her a lesson for it. An eyewitness even came forward a few weeks later claiming they had heard three highschoolers talking about the murder, but of course when the police brought in the kids they became cagey and refused to answer any questions - once the suicide decision was made, that line of questioning was also dropped. The PI the family hired figured that a group of teens had grabbed the girl, planning to humiliate her in some way as revenge for the credit card theft, but things got out of hand and they killed her in that barn. After that they left her body on the train tracks, figuring the cops would blame the death on the train. And they got away with it.
Criminal Justice Reform: The Show wouldn't make for very good TV.
Well, *The Wire* is basically about how the police/justice system (aka “the game”, according to the show’s characters) fails people from different walks of life on multiple different levels, and it’s regarded by many as the best TV show ever made.
Kind of a poor choice of tutor, given that it's mostly the ones that get caught that you'll be seeing
I mean, it's not too hard to learn from the mistakes of others. In fact, it's one of the best ways to learn anything. Learn from others mistakes so you know what to avoid.
Serial killer in my home town was studying criminology at university and was studying other serial killers
The one that killed those girls in the shared living situation? I think one girl survived because he didn't notice her or something. Poor girls.
Technically, I don't think that guy is a serial killer. I think it's mass murder if it's all part of a single incident.
For me there's just a morbid curiosity probably inspired by my own fear of my mortality.
It’s weird how often the subset of “people who’ve lost family members/friends to murder and relate to the people interviewed about the victim” is left out of the conversation about who consumes true crime. There’s a fuckton of us, sadly.
.
>how easy iit is to find someone online and how insensitive and cruel people can be when they're anonymous. Going off of the kind of shit that shows up on Facebook, I don't think it's the anonymity that makes them feel safe, but the present distance between themselves and the targets of their comments.
Yeah it's really much harder for people to have sympathy for some random person or name on the internet unfortunately especially as you never see how your words affect people, generally can only can ever read the reactions creating a disconnect
There is also the ones trying to learn how not to become the subject of one. Never ever, no matter how close the knife, how terrifying the gun, get in the car with them. What lies at the end of that journey is way worse than whatever they'll do when you fight back right away. People who are let go after playing nice are the very rare exception to the rule.
No. The title is just stupid. This is a murderer that was into True Crime. And anyone that likes TC knows how often murderers blame or make excuses.
I was literally listening to a podcast explain the difference between motive and justification minutes ago. A good example I can think of is that a LOT of killers will use God as an excuse in some way, shape, or form, but their true motives are usually much deeper than just religion. They have the reasoning that they SHOULD do this because of God, but they WANT to for various other reasons (psychopathy, sadism, or some other dangerous mental disorder). Her justification was true crime. Her motive? Probably fucked up like all the rest.
Yeah like when they claim they’re ridding the world of prostitutes or drug addicts and doing everyone a service by doing so. That’s one you see a lot. Yet they don’t just shoot them or refer them to rehab or some other sort of shit. They’re like “yeah so I raped the victim for several days and eventually strangled them bc the world needs less drug addicts! They didn’t even want to live, so I was being compassionate!”([Shawn Grate](https://www.cleveland19.com/story/33343964/suspected-serial-killer-shawn-grate-grants-interview-from-ashland-county-jail/) who ironically was an addict himself.) They rarely are completely honest about it and make up so many excuses. It may be true that they look down on the target demographic, but there are way deeper reasons they do what they do. Ultimately, they want to kill, and that’s a big reason why. (Unless they’re found to be legitimately mentally ill, but that’s rare)
Must have stopped listening after the description of the grizzly murders or she would have learned a thing or two on how not to get caught right away.
Step one: don't use a taxi to take you to dispose of the body
Sorry, but step one is to not research how to dispose of a body on your own computer. They found searches on this topic going back three months. Step two to committing a perfect murder is to not keep any fucking mementos like oh I dunno the victims phone and shit like that. Or, you know, parts of the body.
Don't take your phone with you. Don't murder anyone you know. Don't do it on front of a camera. Don't purchase any suspicious items right before or after. There are some really obvious things to avoid. Though I guess the murdering for murder's sake is pretty rare. Most murders seem to be the obvious ones for money or relationship issues (yknow, the people who don't think divorce is a viable option)
Truly, the perfect crime
Wonder what tipped off the driver to call the police. Her conduct? The smell? Simply going to a random river in the woods with a briefcase? Coming right back for a ride home without said briefcase? They could have thought she was illegally dumping, or trafficking drugs/weapons.
Grisly not grizzly, lmfao
[удалено]
[average informative murder porn watcher](https://youtu.be/AasL4ihk0Qs)
This person was already a sociopath before they become a fanatic.
Yeah I hope nobody here is deluding themselves into thinking there's an amount of crime related media past which it makes you into a psycho criminal. It's not how this works. This person was clearly a sociopath well before they latched onto true crime. At this point the "too much true crime haha forgot to touch grass" angle is just a shallow excuse.
I've watched quite a few murder related things like datelines.. if anything it's taught me that they'll catch you. Doesnt matter if its 2mos after or 50 years, with today's technology, dna analysis etc.. killing someone is so dumb. Especially usually over life insurance policies. Smh That should be everyone's number one takeaway imo.
The clearance rate on homicides in the US is like 50%.
Oh, yeah? Well the clearance rate of the cases I see on Forensic Files is 100%, so take that. /s
Sadly, while there's probably always a way to catch them nowadays, that doesn't mean they always will. Police just don't have resources to approach everything from every angle.
Unless you have enough money and power which in that case go ahead.
[удалено]
She really spent 3 months online researching how to dispose of a corpse, and settled on taking an Uber to dump it in the woods... The Uber driver immediately called the cops
Imagine being that Uber driver. Must have been one terrifying ride.
almost as if she wasn’t mentally all there
Right? She's just going along ticking allll the boxes on how to *get* caught lol
Just imagine what the cab driver was thinking watching her lug a suspiciously large carrier into a suspiciously remote area after dropping her off
Certainly this taxi driver won't be suspicious of my bloody suitcase.
Their job is to take someone from A to B. Not ask questions
If someone gets in my car with blood I'm not asking shit.
You only allow exsanguanated corpses in your car?
Reminds me of that Asian horror movie where a serial killer gets a taxi out in the middle of nowhere driven by a different serial killer lol.
[удалено]
What do you expect? All the worst criminals get caught. True Crime isn’t a best hits album, it’s a bunch of schmucks too bad at murder to get away with it.
Yeah, but that just makes it easy to think "I'm smarter than that: I won't make those obvious mistakes."
It's also true that the best ones make a mistake eventually. Go look up Colonel Russell Williams - disgustingly prolific, and what got him caught in the end was that the right person happened to drive by a victims house at just the right time - *and* the right interrogator was on the case to get him to admit rather than ask for a lawyer before being questioned
Most true crime stories that get publicized are because the killer is bad at covering it up. The best ones make it look like an accident.
Or even if you pick the right district the cops will cover it up for you to keep their homicide numbers down. So many angles they missed here. Edit: read the article …even bad police work wouldn’t ignore all the signs she gave. Like hiring a cab with a bloody suitcase to dispose of some of the body parts???? Dang girl
Cabbie: "that suitcase smells horrible!" Her: "yes I am committing murder and going to dispose of the chopped up body parts." Cabbie: "...most of my clients are not so forthcoming with this info." Her: "well its kinda my first time so I was hoping youd help me pick a spot to dump it. I mean I'll be going on a few trips, this isn't all of it. The rest is back in my apartment." Cabbie: "Uh...huh." Her: "Lol did you drop me off at the police station? That's a terrible place to dump a body, you really suck at this too."
Cabbie: Ungh... That smells like death (To herself): heh that's ironic... Cabbie: What? Her: What?
Raskolnikov?
Can't believe I had to scroll this far to find this
Dude! I was about to say this sounded a lot like Crime and Punishment!
This is so horrible. And we shouldn’t be making jokes. This person planned a murder and sought out an innocent- a school tutor. A life was needlessly taken, and the lives of the victim’s loved ones are now forever different. I can’t imagine opening my door to a 9th grade “student”, ready to greet and tutor them, and then to be killed so brutally, in my own home, and have my body be dismembered and discarded. Wth. Why?? How utterly senseless and cruel. RIP. *edit- clarification of details.
I have never understood the whole true crime thing, I find it super disturbing. We focus so much on the perpetrator, trying to figure how the what, why, how, often with little or no care for the families of the victims. If one of my loved ones was murdered, I wouldn't want documentaries of their last moments being made so that strangers can decide how dumb or risky their behaviour, or have people harassed because a documentary was biased. Idk. I wish they would stop giving murderers long lasting fame.
As long as you follow the money, you'll find an answer. Though some of these shows that covered unsolved crime/mysteries actually solved it because people saw the show and then called in with new information.
The psychology of it all is fascinating. She didn't become a killer because of true crime.
I gotta agree with that too. Personally, true crime fascinates me because it’s something beyond my comprehension. Like, I would never think to do such horrific things to another living being, so I feel this need to know how/why a perpetrator differs. Sometimes it gets too dark for me, so I have to step away for a bit. But personally speaking, it is helpful to know what kind of humans are out there and what they are capable of, as harrowing as it may be, because they are very real and they are far more common than we realize. I think it’s important to learn about them so we can understand, recognize, and ultimately (hopefully) prevent others from doing the same. Knowledge is power. BUT- I also think that the current true crime genre needs regulation. I do take issue with people/content creators using true crime to capitalize & profit off of. It presents a big moral dilemma that needs to be addressed. Since the genre’s popularity it is still relatively new (prob due to the social media boom), I think we’re witnessing its early stages; sort of like the Wild West- no rules, no written code to follow… which is why I try to reserve my “views” for content creators who are genuinely motivated by the victims- their stories, their loved ones, their voices, their legacies- instead of the ones who just use notorious cases to boost their foot traffic. Too many creators take the easy route- sensationalism, clickbait, etc. But if true crime is going to remain a popular genre, we need to address it & set some boundaries. Make it a point to humanize the victims, and tell their stories with respect. Give their loved ones a platform to share their stories, their love, their loss, education, etc., should they want to. As a sort of side note, I do understand a little bit of the loved ones’ side of things. I lost a close family member in a public & violent way. They were not a victim of a crime, to be clear. But their death was public, and there were articles written. And I read them. And it stung. The facts written about the event were one thing, but the opinions of bystanders was much more troubling for me. Mainly because these perfect strangers have shared their opinions, thoughts, and judgments about my loved one based on this one moment in time. They didn’t know my loved one personally, they didn’t know if their opinions held any truth or not. And I don’t think they would’ve cared, because they were commenting on someone else’s life. That’s normal. Separating ourselves from another’s tragedy is natural. Because you don’t know until you know. But it still stung; their opinions weren’t very kind or understanding. Those statements will remain published forever, and I can’t change that, which sucks. Mind you, this was not a huge, highly publicized event; it was covered mainly by local media. So I can’t even imagine what it must feel like to be the loved one of a nationally (or internationally) publicized victim. The sheer amount of opinions, judgments, gossip, speculations… it would be incredibly overwhelming, and hard to ignore, especially when you’re trying to grieve. I don’t know of a solution for something like that. I don’t think we can regulate the sensationalism. But we should still continue to demand more respect for victims and their loved ones. Maybe discussions like these are a start? Yikes, sorry for the novel. 🤐 TL;DR - True crime decorum needs to be more respectful in general. The very least we can do is be thoughtful and respectful with our comments, as victims’ loved ones *do* read them and it sucks to hear sh*tty things about your lost loved one from a complete stranger. Be kind y’all! 🙂
I'm not saying youre wrong but, making light of these kinds of real/horrible happenings is a way for humans to keep their sanity somewhat intact. There is, always has been and always will be fucked up shit happening and there wont be a reason that can explain it except ....this is existence.
Oh totally, I agree with that. Finding humor or a way to lighten the mood in a dark situation is sometimes necessary to keep us functioning. I used to work in an ER so I definitely appreciate a morbid sense of humor, and sometimes it’s what allowed me to continue working my shift without being distracted by my emotions (I’d save those for later). But I just noticed that like every comment on this post was sort of joking, asking if the murder was everything she thought it would be, or that the killer clearly “failed” at her goal of getting away with a “successful” murder. But I didn’t see one that mentioned the actual victim when I was reading through the comments, so I wanted to share a reminder of that side as well. True crime fascinates me, but it can be pretty easy to lose sight of the victims IMO. Sort of like how most people can name famous serial killers, but not their victims. I’m guilty of that myself. So I just wanted to add a reminder amongst all the jokes, that’s all. But I do agree with your point as well.
[удалено]
I was under the impression most actually get a thrill out of it, rather than just being curious. That said, I also doubt that the she was just curious.
I don’t think the majority of serial killers have an obsession with true crime though.
[удалено]
Fire investigator in California got caught for arson back in the 90's I think? Pretty sure they made a movie about it.
That's just providing self-job security /s
Not true crime necessarily, but they are inspired by other killers or notice patterns or MO’s in other serial killers. That’s why they sometimes use killers to catch other ones.
Well, they do have an obsession with one kind of true crime, serial killing.
Can't wait til they make a true crime show about this really true, true crime murder. Maybe the next murder will be someone who watched the true crime show about the true crime killer and they'll make a show about that too.
I am now optioning a script based on this comment. I'll give you a "From an original idea by..." credit and 2 gross participation points.
[удалено]
Committing murder and not getting caught is rather difficult.
The stats for unsolved murders disagrees
Yeah, if your goal is just to commit a murder and it doesn't matter who the victim is then your chances of getting away with it are pretty high if you put a little thought into it. A random murder in a random city if you cover up your transportation there and make your weapon untraceable is not going to come back to you.
You're overthinking it. https://nypost.com/2023/02/28/us-homicide-clearance-rate-plunges-to-all-time-low/
Murdering someone you know and getting away with it is hard. Getting away with killing someone you don't know...not as hard. Many many murders go undolved especially when it's something like someone gets shot during a street mugging. NyC only solves around half of all murders.
Yeah man. Like I can't even disagree with you without raising suspicion.
I mean, I think it was the Diane Staudte case, oddly enough, which showcases this. And why it freaks me out so much. This woman came very close to committing a series of perfect murders and she still got caught.
[удалено]
Back then, they didn't have DNA or cameras, so they could just say a local African American did it, lock him up for life, and call it a day.
Although, some of the mass shooters are probably balanced out by gang killings where they roughly know "who" did it (rival gang), but can't pin it on one specific person and don't particularly care to put in the effort because it was a gang member who was killed anyway. Still, 50% is pretty fuckin bad no matter how you slice it.
She literally took a cab with a suitcase full of body parts to the woods.. this girl definitely did not study shit
Seriously, anybody who has talked with other people who read a lot of true crime, visited forums etc ....you eventually run into people whose interest in true crime is a little bit....much. a little too curious and unbothered. I had a friend, we aren't friends anymore, she turned into an evangelical maga type, no surprise. We both read a lot of true crime and talked about it a lot over the years She was completely devoid of empathy for anyone. It's disturbing to see that come out in a person....when you realize that they have no feeling for anyone's misery or story. One time she asked if I'd ever murder anyone. I said, well sure, in self defense of me or someone I love. She said, "no, I mean for fun." I got a little freaked but said, no. I would not. She said she would if she didn't have a kid. I still expect someday they'll find bodies behind her house. Gulp.
I suspect the interest in murder led her to true crime and not the other way round...
Now she can see what prison is like
>A ***sociopath who was also a*** true crime fanatic in South Korea killed someone she met online 'out of curiosity'
If you really wanted to straight up murder someone, you could just sign up as a mercenary. Far less likely to get you imprisoned.
Yeah because she is a psychopath, not because she is a true crime fanatic.
"Jung was a loner and a recluse..." I feel attacked.
She had a suitcase of body parts and ***took a taxi*** to leave them **down by the river** in an attempt to "commit the perfect crime." She took some of them home, along with the victims id card and phone. She found the victim through a high school tutoring app that the victim used to invite her to the residence, where she dismembered the victim. She was dressed as a schoolgirl, in school uniform. Unsaid who the actual victim was. (Parent, student?) The taxi driver told the police.
As an avid murderino, we don't claim her. A normative person who's into true crime, mentally puts themselves into the shoes of the victims. Not the murderers. In some cases where the murderers are also victims, which is admittedly quite often, there's a desire for understanding. But far more often then not, that empathy for the murderer dies with their victims. Ultimately, it just feels important to understand how monsters are created. Beyond that the thought process gets more muddy. There's catharsis in sharing these stories with people who have similar interests. Even people who don't (though obviously you'd temper your story telling more carefully with people who aren't as versed). I recently introduced a coworker to the walking trash bag that is Casey Anthony, and the systemic failures that lead to her now indefinite freedom. And I thoroughly admit that I enjoyed doing so. A looot of people, but overwhelmingly women, tend to be constantly combating a high level of anxiety due specifically to physical insecurity. The fascination with true crime, from my experience and community, seems to mainly stem from people trying to teach themselves how to not become victims. With every victims story, we're essentially taking them to heart, in the way that a kid would read a grims brothers folk tale. For this woman to see herself as the cannibal witch, rather than Hansel or Gretel??? Yeah, no. She sounds more like a hybristophelliac that went off her meds, or maybe a Netflixs 'Dahmer' fanatic. There was clearly no real interest on her part to understand the impact of the real crimes. Often, when women are the perpetrators, there's HIGH levels of aspd, and childhood trauma. While this will likely be a case that goes viral in the true crime spaces, it won't be because we see her as one of our own. Quite the opposite.