Episode #71 "Death And The Lady"

[pahonu]

4 hours ago, ViceFanMan said:

This is probably the best episode of the season! Amazingly, hauntingly captivating! I don’t know if it’s still the case, but at one time the FBI used to claim that there were no actual real-life snuff films...they were just urban myths. Any porn flicks that were supposedly snuffs, were fake & it was all just simulated.  

I didn’t believe that then & I darn well don’t now.  There sadly is enough of a sick & perverted/evil ‘audience’ (as exclusive/secretive as they might be) to want & pay for horrific garbage such as what Glantz did in this episode. 

FBI data still shows that there hasn’t been any successful investigation or  prosecution of an actual murder depicted in a film, pornographic or otherwise.  This, is after over fifty years of investigations.  There have been many claims and none have provided any evidence of a filmed murder, including by serial killers like Henry Lee Lucas and others who claim to have filmed some of their horrific acts.  The closest any case investigated came to this included the mutilation and sodomizing of an already deceased corpse that was indeed an earlier murder.  There has certainly been a large amount of death depicted in footage from war zones and accidents, etc… but as for an actual industry murdering people for entertainment?   The phenomenon is no different than the bogus satanic panic of the 80’s. 

[ViceFanMan]

3 minutes ago, pahonu said:

FBI data still shows that there hasn’t been any successful investigation or  prosecution of an actual murder depicted in a film, pornographic or otherwise.  This, is after over fifty years of investigations.  There have been many claims and none have provided any evidence of a filmed murder, including by serial killers like Henry Lee Lucas and others who claim to have filmed some of their horrific acts.  The closest any case investigated came to this included the mutilation and sodomizing of an already deceased corpse that was indeed an earlier murder.  There has certainly been a large amount of death depicted in footage from war zones and accidents, etc… but as for an actual industry murdering people for entertainment?   The phenomenon is no different than the bogus satanic panic of the 80’s. 

Because of what is allowed in most pornographic, perverted, and graphically violent films, I’m sure it’s very hard to actually prove in a court of law that it truly was a murder being filmed while it happened. But, that doesn’t mean that it didn’t or hasn’t happened, just because a court won’t acknowledge it.

 With all of the sick, perverted, horrible garbage that is basically been exposed and outed nowadays (and sadly almost made to seem “normal”) on the Internet and in movies, just because the FBI, or any other form of law-enforcement, claims they have not been able to “prove” it, does NOT by any means make me think that it hasn’t actually happened at some point. 

That’s like knowing Jack-the-ripper was in an alley full of hookers one night...but when there’s suddenly a bunch of mutilated prostitutes the next morning, you say we don’t think he did it because there isn’t supposedly proof good enough for a court.  

There’s sadly been Satanic cult activities long before the 80s, and still are. I’ve known some people who were involved in that in the past...and not everything is fake or made up just because Hollywood goes nuts with it. 

[pahonu]

1 hour ago, ViceFanMan said:

Because of what is allowed in most pornographic, perverted, and graphically violent films, I’m sure it’s very hard to actually prove in a court of law that it truly was a murder being filmed while it happened. But, that doesn’t mean that it didn’t or hasn’t happened, just because a court won’t acknowledge it.

 With all of the sick, perverted, horrible garbage that is basically been exposed and outed nowadays (and sadly almost made to seem “normal”) on the Internet and in movies, just because the FBI, or any other form of law-enforcement, claims they have not been able to “prove” it, does NOT by any means make me think that it hasn’t actually happened at some point. 

That’s like knowing Jack-the-ripper was in an alley full of hookers one night...but when there’s suddenly a bunch of mutilated prostitutes the next morning, you say we don’t think he did it because there isn’t supposedly proof good enough for a court.  

There’s sadly been Satanic cult activities long before the 80s, and still are. I’ve known some people who were involved in that in the past...and not everything is fake or made up just because Hollywood goes nuts with it. 

The Jack the Ripper comparison is not analogous.  There is no doubt that their were murders and mutilations.  The lack of a conviction does not negate the crime.  
 

For a snuff film, the claim is that the footage featured on camera is an actual murder committed for the audience.  It is a very specific charge.  It would require a murder being depicted, an actual murder victim, and evidence that the murder was in fact real and not a special effect.  
 

Despite all the claims, there has never been a case where this has been shown to have happened.  The investigations have proven the use of special effects with corroborating witnesses or other physical evidence, that the supposed victim is still in fact alive, or that a death occurred accidentally and is not a murder.  

The footage of the death of Vic Morrow and two child actors in The Twilight Zone film was captured on film but was accidental.  The death and impalement in Cannibal Holocaust was widely claimed to be a murder until the special effects were explained and the “murdered” actress was found still alive.  The death of reporter Christine Chubbuck was also captured on film but was a suicide.  Finally, the horrific footage from I Lunatic I Ice Pick was indeed the mutilation, sodomizing, and apparently unreleased footage of canibalization, of a murder victim.  However the victim was previously deceased and the corpse was subsequently used in the footage.  Claims by serial killers that they have footage of their murders has also turned up none.

You can believe all you want that it probably or likely has happened, but the claims made about snuff films is that they have footage of an actual murder, not a death or a corpse, but an actual murder depicted in the film for the audience to see.  Many films have been marketed with that claim, but no such footage has ever been found.  
 

As to the “satanic cult” activity I referenced, there is certainly a church of satan and satanic worship.  That hasn’t been denied and it still occurs.  The claims from the 80’s, however, were about large scale, ritualistic satanic activities permeating all parts of society and claiming unwilling victims across the nation.  This was simply not accurate.  Case after case led nowhere and ruined the lives of many innocent people.  Clinical psychologists now study this as an example of moral panic, not unlike the Salem Witch Trials.

[ViceFanMan]

1 minute ago, pahonu said:

The Jack the Ripper comparison is not analogous.  There is no doubt that their were murders and mutilations.  The lack of a conviction does not negate the crime.  
 

For a snuff film, the claim is that the footage featured on camera is an actual murder committed for the audience.  It is a very specific charge.  It would require a murder being depicted, an actual murder victim, and evidence that the murder was in fact real and not a special effect.  
 

Despite all the claims, there has never been a case where this has been shown to have happened.  The investigations have proven the use of special effects with corroborating witnesses or other physical evidence, that the supposed victim is still in fact alive, or that a death occurred accidentally and is not a murder.  

The footage of the death of Vic Morrow and two child actors in The Twilight Zone film was captured on film but was accidental.  The death and impalement in Cannibal Holocaust was widely claimed to be a murder until the special effects were explained and the “murdered” actress was found still alive.  The death of reporter Christine Chubbuck was also captured on film but was a suicide.  Finally, the horrific footage from I Lunatic I Ice Pick was indeed the mutilation, sodomizing, and apparently unreleased footage of canibalization, of a murder victim.  However the victim was previously deceased and the corpse was subsequently used in the footage.  Claims by serial killers that they have footage of their murders has also turned up none.

You can believe all you want that it probably or likely has happened, but the claims made about snuff films is that they have footage of an actual murder, not a death or a corpse, but an actual murder depicted in the film for the audience to see.  Many films have been marketed with that claim, but no such footage has ever been found.  
 

As to the “satanic cult” activity I referenced, there is certainly a church of satan and satanic worship.  That hasn’t been denied and it still occurs.  The claims from the 80’s, however, were about large scale, ritualistic satanic activities permeating all parts of society and claiming unwilling victims across the nation.  This was simply not accurate.  Case after case led nowhere and ruined the lives of many innocent people.  Clinical psychologists now study this as an example of moral panic, not unlike the Salem Witch Trials.

The Jack-the-Ripper reference was more in goofy humor , but meaning just because they haven’t gotten a hold of or found any proof for a court proceeding doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened.

I’m sure the majority of “claimed” snuff films are fake, or have been set up. However, footage of someone actually dying during the filming of something, or of a body of someone already dead doesn’t really constitute a snuff film, per-say, at least in my “book”. 

But, just because the government or the media calls something a conspiracy theory or urban myth...doesn’t necessarily mean it is, or isn’t true. Some conspiracy theories, or urban myths/legends stem from some actual event or person...although by the time they are labeled the ‘conspiracy’ or ‘legend’ the exaggerations & added fabrications make the story unbelievable...or unprovable.

 I personally think most so-called snuff films are fake...but with all of the perversion, sexual predators, sick fetishes, glorified violence, serial killers, sociopaths, evil, etc...in our world, I don’t doubt at all that a real snuff film of some kind has probably been done at some point. It just hasn’t been able to be proved good enough for a court of law...and the FBI doesn’t want to look bad if they haven’t been able to stop them or arrest anyone associated with them. So, of course they say they don’t exist.  

[Mr. Vigilante]

I think the reason that this episode is so haunting is the fact that this probably HAS happened at some point, and has not been proven one way or the other.  There was a Nicolas Cage movie years ago about this very subject that I never had the stomach to watch. 

[pahonu]

1 hour ago, ViceFanMan said:

But, just because the government or the media calls something a conspiracy theory or urban myth...doesn’t necessarily mean it is, or isn’t true.

 I personally think most so-called snuff films are fake...but with all of the perversion, sexual predators, sick fetishes, glorified violence, serial killers, sociopaths, evil, etc...in our world, I don’t doubt at all that a real snuff film of some kind has probably been done at some point. It just hasn’t been able to be proved good enough for a court of law...and the FBI doesn’t want to look bad if they haven’t been able to stop them or arrest anyone associated with them. So, of course they say they don’t exist.  

Again, you can believe what you want, but there have been no examples of any law enforcement agency finding examples of an actual murder recorded on film for the purpose of entertaining an audience…a snuff film.  Is it possible, of course it is.  Have there been many claims, numerous.  Is there any credible evidence to prove people suspicions, no.  That’s all I’m claiming.  

[ViceFanMan]

2 minutes ago, pahonu said:

Again, you can believe what you want, but there have been no examples of any law enforcement agency finding examples of an actual murder recorded on film for the purpose of entertaining an audience…a snuff film.  Is it possible, of course it is.  Have there been many claims, numerous.  Is there any credible evidence to prove people suspicions, no.  That’s all I’m claiming.  

I’m sure there have been many claims, and I’m sure most are false & lies. But, with all the perverted depravity out there...I find it hard to believe that it has never happened, just because the FBI says they have no credible evidence.

For whatever reasons, the FBI and/or law enforcement may not have enough evidence a court would accept. So the idea remains supposedly just an urban legend.

But, whether in the U.S. or in other countries, there sadly is an “audience” that is obsessed with sexual violence and torture. The odds that at some point a snuff film of some kind has probably been done are pretty high. 

[RedDragon86]

11 hours ago, ViceFanMan said:

The Jack-the-Ripper reference was more in goofy humor , but meaning just because they haven’t gotten a hold of or found any proof for a court proceeding doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened.

I’m sure the majority of “claimed” snuff films are fake, or have been set up. However, footage of someone actually dying during the filming of something, or of a body of someone already dead doesn’t really constitute a snuff film, per-say, at least in my “book”. 

But, just because the government or the media calls something a conspiracy theory or urban myth...doesn’t necessarily mean it is, or isn’t true. Some conspiracy theories, or urban myths/legends stem from some actual event or person...although by the time they are labeled the ‘conspiracy’ or ‘legend’ the exaggerations & added fabrications make the story unbelievable...or unprovable.

 I personally think most so-called snuff films are fake...but with all of the perversion, sexual predators, sick fetishes, glorified violence, serial killers, sociopaths, evil, etc...in our world, I don’t doubt at all that a real snuff film of some kind has probably been done at some point. It just hasn’t been able to be proved good enough for a court of law...and the FBI doesn’t want to look bad if they haven’t been able to stop them or arrest anyone associated with them. So, of course they say they don’t exist.  

It's funny, the term conspiracy theory was invented by the CIA in 1967 to disqualify those who questioned the official version of John F Kennedy’s assassination and doubted that his killer, Lee Harvey Oswald, had acted alone.

Cannibal Holocaust came under suspicion for being a snuff film, the impalement scene was examined by the courts to determine whether the violence depicted was staged or genuine.

The director Ruggero Deodato was found not guilty but for such a tacky low budget film the impalement scene was so well done, I still have my suspicions on it. 

[ViceFanMan]

28 minutes ago, RedDragon86 said:

It's funny, the term conspiracy theory was invented by the CIA in 1967 to disqualify those who questioned the official version of John F Kennedy’s assassination and doubted that his killer, Lee Harvey Oswald, had acted alone.

Cannibal Holocaust came under suspicion for being a snuff film, the impalement scene was examined by the courts to determine whether the violence depicted was staged or genuine.

The director Ruggero Deodato was found not guilty but for such a tacky low budget film the impalement scene was so well done, I still have my suspicions on it. 

Exactly...and lots of the so-called “conspiracy” theories regarding the assassination of President Kennedy are very plausible and even some basically proved (such as the magic bullet theory).  Oswald did not act alone...if he was even one of the shooters at all.

But, the government sometimes likes to use the conspiracy theory idea to try and squelch or hide the truth—or convolute everything with false info that eventually the truth gets “lost” or destroyed. With everything or every major event? Of course not...but there are those events that do NOT add up, regardless of what they try to claim. Same thing with the death of Marilyn Monroe. 

But, after so long evidence is destroyed or “lost”, and people involved with those cases die over the decades. This is true with both the Kennedy assassination & Marilyn. Hardly anyone from those cases are still alive anymore. We pretty much know what happened (and probably by who)...but they’re no longer provable in a court of law. So they’ll always remain just conspiracy theories or urban myths. 

[RedDragon86]

8 minutes ago, ViceFanMan said:

Exactly...and lots of the so-called “conspiracy” theories regarding the assassination of President Kennedy are very plausible and even some basically proved (such as the magic bullet theory).  Oswald did not act alone...if he was even one of the shooters at all.

But, the government sometimes likes to use the conspiracy theory idea to try and squelch or hide the truth—or convolute everything with false info that eventually the truth gets “lost” or destroyed. With everything or every major event? Of course not...but there are those events that do NOT add up, regardless of what they try to claim. Same thing with the death of Marilyn Monroe. 

But, after so long evidence is destroyed or “lost”, and people involved with those cases die over the decades. This is true with both the Kennedy assassination & Marilyn. Hardly anyone from those cases are still alive anymore. We pretty much know what happened (and probably by who)...but they’re no longer provable in a court of law. So they’ll always remain just conspiracy theories or urban myths. 

I doubt the mob, cubans/oswald had the capability of killing the president, the security that day was a joke and secret service changed the route in the last minute, that says it all and that magic bullet theory is ridiculous. The final shot was from the fence, witnesses saw a man dressed as a cop with a rifle running away (The Badge Man)

 

[ViceFanMan]

1 hour ago, RedDragon86 said:

I doubt the mob, cubans/oswald had the capability of killing the president, the security that day was a joke and secret service changed the route in the last minute, that says it all and that magic bullet theory is ridiculous. The final shot was from the fence, witnesses saw a man dressed as a cop with a rifle running away (The Badge Man)

 

Exactly...there’s no way one bullet from where Oswald supposedly fired from, would do what happened to the president and secret service. There was more than one shooter. 

Just to add to Marilyn’s case: in the early 80s actress Veronica Hamel (from Hill Street Blues) and her husband bought Marilyn’s old Brentwood home. They were having some remodeling done and in the attic area they found a bunch of old wiring & electronic devices. They thought it was just old phone lines/wires, but when they had the phone company come check them out, they told them that it was definitely not phone lines...but older, very sophisticated surveillance and bugging equipment! So, at one point Marilyn was obviously being watched & her house bugged—most likely by the mob, or the Kennedys...or both. 

[pahonu]

11 hours ago, RedDragon86 said:

It's funny, the term conspiracy theory was invented by the CIA in 1967 to disqualify those who questioned the official version of John F Kennedy’s assassination and doubted that his killer, Lee Harvey Oswald, had acted alone.

Cannibal Holocaust came under suspicion for being a snuff film, the impalement scene was examined by the courts to determine whether the violence depicted was staged or genuine.

The director Ruggero Deodato was found not guilty but for such a tacky low budget film the impalement scene was so well done, I still have my suspicions on it. 

The actress in the impalement scene of Cannibal Holocaust appeared in court along with other cast members who had signed agreements to keep quiet that it WASN’T a snuff film.  Deodato was presenting it as a snuff film as a PR stunt to get attention and many fell for it.

Edited September 23, 2021 by pahonu

[RedDragon86]

13 hours ago, pahonu said:

The actress in the impalement scene of Cannibal Holocaust appeared in court along with other cast members who had signed agreements to keep quiet that it WASN’T a snuff film.  Deodato was presenting it as a snuff film as a PR stunt to get attention and many fell for it.

Was the actress in court? why was it necessary for Deodato to show a photograph of her apparently after the scene if she was in court anyway?

The director, Ruggero Deodato, was said to be extremely cruel on set. The natives were treated horribly, and even made to act in dangerous situations, such as being filmed in a burning shack for several hours. Here is where my theory starts. After learning this, I rewatched the movie and noticed a few scenes that were extremely realistic. Too realistic, even for this film. One is of a dying, severely burnt tribesman, only shown in a short shot for a few seconds. The moans from the man are all too real, and he really did appear to be severely burned. I believe its possible he could've accidentally been burnt in the shack, and the director decided to film his suffering and keep the footage. Since the tribespeople were not officially citizens with paperwork and such, its very possible that this man was killed during the making of this film with no consequence to the producers. Its just to real.

Edited September 23, 2021 by RedDragon86

[pahonu]

2 hours ago, RedDragon86 said:

Was the actress in court? why was it necessary for Deodato to show a photograph of her apparently after the scene if she was in court anyway?

The director, Ruggero Deodato, was said to be extremely cruel on set. The natives were treated horribly, and even made to act in dangerous situations, such as being filmed in a burning shack for several hours. Here is where my theory starts. After learning this, I rewatched the movie and noticed a few scenes that were extremely realistic. Too realistic, even for this film. One is of a dying, severely burnt tribesman, only shown in a short shot for a few seconds. The moans from the man are all too real, and he really did appear to be severely burned. I believe its possible he could've accidentally been burnt in the shack, and the director decided to film his suffering and keep the footage. Since the tribespeople were not officially citizens with paperwork and such, its very possible that this man was killed during the making of this film with no consequence to the producers. Its just to real.

The actress and other performers appeared in court as witnesses after a lawsuit was filed against Deodata.  Others were depositions about their experiences on the set.  It was determined that Deodata was responsible for the killing of several animals in cruel circumstances but no other deaths occurred.

You’re certainly entitled to your own thoughts on it but “It’s just too real” is conjecture, not evidence.  The whole point of these Mondo films is to make the viewer think what they’re viewing is real.  That’s why the documentary format is typically used, when they are actually fictional.  It’s so effective. 

[Miami Beau]

On 7/22/2020 at 5:35 PM, AndrewRemington said:

Great episode here! This is one I’ve rewatched countless times. The other songs used are also very good! I really like the scene of Crockett driving at night, but wish they would have added new shots of him inside the car for proper continuity.

Yes, what a fantastic montage yet subtlety ruined by the fact they decided to include interior car shots of Crockett from Season 3. It has always bugged me because this really is an utterly fantastic episode of Vice. 
This is how the montage should of looked like. 
 

[ViceFanMan]

We’ll see if this link works, but saw this online earlier today. Sad...but sadly not totally surprising & proves my point from previous discussions, that snuff films have been done & do exist:

https://app.republicanscoop.net/index.php/campaigns/sp820ns7te1d5/track-url/lm16913gez095/fa5cbfd911977d3632e8caac9fcc2c15e445bf02

[pahonu]

51 minutes ago, ViceFanMan said:

We’ll see if this link works, but saw this online earlier today. Sad...but sadly not totally surprising & proves my point from previous discussions, that snuff films have been done & do exist:

https://app.republicanscoop.net/index.php/campaigns/sp820ns7te1d5/track-url/lm16913gez095/fa5cbfd911977d3632e8caac9fcc2c15e445bf02

What are the credentials of app.republicanscoop.net?

I can’t find any references to them beyond their own website.

Similarly, here’s a link to a story about thousands of snuff film deaths.  They’re happening almost daily it seems, and it even has “independent news” in the webpage banner:

https://m.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0412/S00166/indymedia-1000s-women-murdered-for-snuff-movies.htm

Like they say, if it’s on the internets, it must be true!

Sorry if that sounds facetious but a man showed up to a DC pizzeria with weapons to bust a child porn ring in the business’s basement.  Known as “Pizzagate”, the business not only didn’t operate any such activity, it didn’t even have a basement.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/03/26/521545788/conspiracy-theorist-alex-jones-apologizes-for-promoting-pizzagate

 

 

[ViceFanMan]

39 minutes ago, pahonu said:

What are the credentials of app.republicanscoop.net?

I can’t find any references to them beyond their own website.

Similarly, here’s a link to a story about thousands of snuff film deaths.  They’re happening almost daily it seems, and it even has “independent news” in the webpage banner:

https://m.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0412/S00166/indymedia-1000s-women-murdered-for-snuff-movies.htm

Like they say, if it’s on the internets, it must be true!

Sorry if that sounds facetious but a man showed up to a DC pizzeria with weapons to bust a child porn ring in the business’s basement.  Known as “Pizzagate”, the business not only didn’t operate any such activity, it didn’t even have a basement.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/03/26/521545788/conspiracy-theorist-alex-jones-apologizes-for-promoting-pizzagate

 

 

I’ve seen many other references to the article I posted other places, I just happened to choose the one I copied the link from. I’ve also seen articles about snuff films before, as well. These were/are all news networks or sites, and are reporting world news events. They’re not some ‘Billy-Joe Bob’s’ website...operating out of his pizza parlor basement. 

These things sadly are happening, whether you want to acknowledge it or not—but not meaning every single story out there is true...this is true as well. There’s also plenty of hoaxes or made-up stories. However, going with just: because the ‘FBI’ says it’s not true, it must not be true...is about as ridiculous as because the internet said it, it must be true.  

Edited April 4, 2022 by ViceFanMan

[pahonu]

On 4/3/2022 at 4:41 PM, ViceFanMan said:

I’ve seen many other references to the article I posted other places, I just happened to choose the one I copied the link from. I’ve also seen articles about snuff films before, as well. These were/are all news networks or sites, and are reporting world news events. They’re not some ‘Billy-Joe Bob’s’ website...operating out of his pizza parlor basement. 

These things sadly are happening, whether you want to acknowledge it or not—but not meaning every single story out there is true...this is true as well. There’s also plenty of hoaxes or made-up stories. However, going with just: because the ‘FBI’ says it’s not true, it must not be true...is about as ridiculous as because the internet said it, it must be true.  

It’s not just FBI statistics I’m using to make my argument.  My original point many posts ago was that there are zero court cases reflecting the successful prosecution of the making of a snuff film despite multiple charges filed and dramatically more accusations made, none of which could provide any acceptable evidence for prosecution. This is not just in the US, but in Europe, and elsewhere.

So I guess my point would be that making accusations and failing to successfully provide evidence for any prosecution are nothing more than that… accusations.  Just as you argue it’s hard to believe it hasn’t happened, I find it hard to believe that despite all these accusations, it hasn’t been successfully proven in a court of law.  How is something that some argue is not just happening but rampant, never been proven?

Sadly, there has been a case of an individual obsessed or otherwise enamored of the idea of snuff films, who have been successfully charged with killing individuals.  In this case they even gruesomely recorded some of their activities in the killing and particularly with the dead body.  It was reported on by the BBC a few years back in the UK, and is absolutely tragic, but doesn’t fit the definition of a snuff film as we have been discussing.

[ViceFanMan]

1 minute ago, pahonu said:

It’s not just FBI statistics I’m using to make my argument.  My original point many posts ago was that there are zero court cases reflecting the successful prosecution of the making of a snuff film despite multiple charges filed and dramatically more accusations made, none of which could provide any acceptable evidence for prosecution. This is not just in the US, but in Europe, and elsewhere.

So I guess my point would be that making accusations and failing to successfully provide evidence for any prosecution are nothing more than that… accusations.  Just as you argue it’s hard to believe it hasn’t happened, I find it hard to believe that despite all these accusations, it hasn’t been successfully proven in a court of law.  How is something that some argue is not just happening but rampant, never been proven?

Sadly, there has been a case of an individual obsessed or otherwise enamored of the idea of snuff films, who have been successfully charged with killing individuals.  In this case they even gruesomely recorded some of their activities in the killing and particularly with the dead body.  It was reported on by the BBC a few years back in the UK, and is absolutely tragic, but doesn’t fit the definition of a snuff film as we have been discussing.

Although they’ve occurred before, the recent events I posted about included the guy torturing & murdering people while videoing it...then selling the videos for money. It’s not dealing with rich, high-society people (such as depicted in the MV episode), but it qualifies as snuff. 

[Robbie C.]

I suspect we might know more one way or the other if operations like Facebook and TikTok didn't force their content moderators to sign NDAs. Some of the things that come up in related lawsuits against both companies are truly chilling, but since those tend to be civil cases they don't have the same evidentiary requirements. Also, the intent is to demonstrate the parent companies don't do enough to provide for the mental wellbeing of moderators (most such cases end up being settled out of court, which tells me they have merit and the parent companies don't want to risk massive jury settlements).

There are any number of reasons a case might not result in a successful prosecution, and it isn't always a lack of evidence (physical or otherwise). This episode does a good job of highlighting some of those reasons (lack of a complaining witness, contradictory eyewitness testimony, and so on). Jurisdiction can also play an important role. I'm not saying these films have to exist, mind, but no successful prosecutions also doesn't mean they don't.

And considering the FBI wouldn't even admit the Mafia existed until the '60s, I don't know that I consider their word about things definitive...

[pahonu]

9 hours ago, ViceFanMan said:

Although they’ve occurred before, the recent events I posted about included the guy torturing & murdering people while videoing it...then selling the videos for money. It’s not dealing with rich, high-society people (such as depicted in the MV episode), but it qualifies as snuff. 

I guess that’s where we differ.  A person recording something horrible they do on their phone, even if they make some money selling it, isn’t what all the accusations of snuff films over the decades were about.  They were about actual films produced with actors and crew where In many cases the accusations of being a snuff film originated with the producers themselves as PR to increase audience awareness and earn bigger box office.  These don’t seem the same to me.

[Robbie C.]

4 minutes ago, pahonu said:

I guess that’s where we differ.  A person recording something horrible they do on their phone, even if they make some money selling it, isn’t what all the accusations of snuff films over the decades were about.  They were about actual films produced with actors and crew where In many cases the accusations of being a snuff film originated with the producers themselves as PR to increase audience awareness and earn bigger box office.  These don’t seem the same to me.

I tend to agree with this as well, although things like Super 8 and home video did exist so it may not be possible to rule out a "home movie" snuff film. Something like Glanz would have been very hard to pull off, at least in what was then considered the First World.

[ViceFanMan]

3 minutes ago, pahonu said:

I guess that’s where we differ.  A person recording something horrible they do on their phone, even if they make some money selling it, isn’t what all the accusations of snuff films over the decades were about.  They were about actual films produced with actors and crew where In many cases the accusations of being a snuff film originated with the producers themselves as PR to increase audience awareness and earn bigger box office.  These don’t seem the same to me.

A snuff film is basically a film made by someone that shows the actual death or murder of someone on film, then usually secretly sold to someone or select group of people for profit. Or, it could be a sicko making one for himself. But a snuff film (“snuffing” a life out) is a real life murder on film. 

I am sure there’s been lots of people that have purposely lied and created certain sick movies to look like one, then claimed they were one for either money or Note-oriety. But there have been actual ones done before. 

[pahonu]

10 hours ago, ViceFanMan said:

A snuff film is basically a film made by someone that shows the actual death or murder of someone on film, then usually secretly sold to someone or select group of people for profit. Or, it could be a sicko making one for himself. But a snuff film (“snuffing” a life out) is a real life murder on film. 

I am sure there’s been lots of people that have purposely lied and created certain sick movies to look like one, then claimed they were one for either money or Note-oriety. But there have been actual ones done before. 

That’s quite a broad definition.   It would seem to even include someone simply recording an ordinary event that ends in the accidental death or even intentional killing of someone.  There have been news recordings that captured the killing of individuals such as the infamous execution of the Viet Cong guerrilla during the Tet Offensive in 1968.  A South Vietnamese General executed him in the street as a photographer shot the image and and an NBC TV camera rolled.

There’s also the tragedy of the Florida TV reporter Christine Chubbuck who became the first person to commit suicide on the air in the 70’s.  Is the news station guilty of making a snuff film in either of the cases?  They were certainly filming for profit as a news outlet when the event occurred.  I don’t think they are, but your definition would indicate such.

Collections of existing footage such as the Faces of Death series weren’t considered snuff films when released and the producers who compiled the footage weren’t prosecuted.  These simply aren’t snuff films as the term was understood at the time.

My understanding of the definition for several decades is that it is a film made deliberately to depict the actual killing of a performer with the intent of making a profit based on the viewers knowledge of the death.  Such claims were made in the past repeatedly in the porn industry and the genre of Mondo films.

I don’t think your broader definition really fits with the meaning as it was used in the past and particularly when this MV episode was filmed.  Today, new technology certainly allows the recording of almost anything at anytime by just a single individual.  That wasn’t easily done in the past and though it is routine today, such recordings don’t fit the definition of a snuff film for me.