Cry Wolfe --Fake or real?

OK, so this is my first post to this forum, so if I don’t get it right, forgive me.

Anyway, I’ve seen a few episodes of Discovery ID’s “Cry Wolfe” series, a supposed reality show about a private detective. I’m becoming skeptical about whether or not it is real, or somehow enhanced for dramatic effect/reneacted, or just flat out phony.

I’ve seen three epsodes and all three seem to follw the same general plotline with a surprise twist towards the very end where it turns out to be someone else/in addition to whom we’d been led to believe was the main culprit.

ID uses a sort of visual language in other shows on their channel to suggest nudity without actualy showing (or blurring) it: the males wear boxer shrts and the females wear opaque but fancy underwear. Last night, Wolfe (and his female client) supposedly caught a school administrator (the client’s husband) in flagrante with a teacher and said administrator was supposedly running out in the backyard with his clothes in hand except for the boxer shorts while said teacher was wearing the usual fancy but totally opaque black bra and panties plus a short dressing gown (open so the camera could see the undies).

This same episode led viewers to believe it was the couple’s son who was having an affair with the teacher and also smoking pot, and possibly getting pot brownies from her. The mother had hired Wolfe to determine if the kid was or was not doing drugs. When confronted with the unexpected evidence of a possible affair (totally a surpriise to her), the monther whipped out a note she supposedly found in the dryer that said “I’ll give you a lesson you’ll never forget XXOOXX --[teacher’s initials]”; this to me (and I suppose other viewers) pretty much says there’s a teahcer-student thing going on, given the use of the word “lesson”. But the mother supposedly was totally clueless as to what that could have meant until Wolfe brought her evidence of a possible involvement.

They followed the kid’s car (a newer Meredes) around and even fond it at the teacher’s house at the episode end, leading everyne to believe they were going to bust in on the kid and teacher in the act. But as I said, it turns out that the father --who the mother convienently kept uninformed of the hiring of Wolfe-- was somehow drving the kid’s car that day and was the one caught dipping his pen in the teacher’s inkwell.

Is it just me, or does this all seem to be too good to be true?

On any “reality” show, anyone who’s face is not blurred is aware of and consented to be on the show. So anyone doing anything heinous or illegal with an unblurred face is doing so for the camera.

Even though most reality shows seem to be filmed openly, that’s not necessarily so. The filming can be done secretly, and consent given later. Candid Camera certainly didn’t inform people they were being filmed until after they were already filmed. If they didn’t sign a release, the footage wasn’t used on the show.

Here’s a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette newspaper article from 1961 about the show:

Now it’s easier to blur out those who won’t give consent.

I’ve never seen the show, but here’s the description on IMDb: