I just finished episode 6 and I have a theory. It’s just a theory and I could be totally wrong.
[Spoiler]I’m thinking that it may be that two unrelated events - the murder and the sexual abuses - are being conflated by the amateur detectives, and that they’re doing so because of real repressed memories about real abuse combined with false memories about a trip into the woods.
I say that because the repressed memories of sexual abuse seem to be corroborated by other women’s accounts, while the description of the body in the woods seems to be at odds with police reports regarding the presence of maggots.
Also, because it now appears that the murder involved neighbors of the victim, and some sort of weird nun fetish, rather than an attempt to silence the victim. [/spoiler]
As practiced by charlatans and fakes, sure it’s bunk. When diagnosed by professionals, not so much. It’s also called “dissociative amnesia” and is in the DSM-IV. Surely you’re not saying that all those folks who study such things are wrong? That would dismiss a large part of PTSD and other traumatic events. .
I’ve only watched 2 1/2 episodes. It’s so upsetting that I can’t decide whether to quit or keep watching. I have a pit in my stomach. Part of me wants to burn through it to get over this feeling because I want closure and part of me wants to quit. Plus a lot in the middle of those 2 things. I was so distracted while thinking about it this afternoon that I almost backed into someone in the parking lot.
How I feel is disgusted and horrified, both before and after seeing 6. What I think regarding the identity of the murderer: [spoiler]As I stated, the maggots weren’t my only reason for thinking that the murder may be unconnected to Maskell and the abuse.
Some of Sister Cathy’s neighbors seem to have been involved, and seemed to have had a fascination with Nun outfits, and don’t seem too have much connection to Maskell.
Also, there’s the second murder, which has parallels to Sister Cathy’s murder, but a victim who seems to have no connection to Maskell.
Those things leave me with reasonable doubt which isn’t overcome by a recovered memory which may or may not be real.[/spoiler]
I thought it was o.k. I think at least one or two of the theories were totally in left field and not enough focus put on the similarities of the second murder victim. Maybe it was a coincidence but if they were going to mention her at all, why didn’t they do more of a comparison of the two crimes because that does seem more likely to be related than some of the other theories.
I would continue watching at least until the interview with the County chief who gets told about important evidence for the first time on camera. His reaction is pretty interesting I thought. If that letter existed, I think it points to someone closer to her than even Maskell…
The reviews all said that there is no resolution to the crimes, just speculation. But I think that the story ended up being the gradual revelations of how this man and his friends abused their positions and adversely impacted the lives so many young people, rather than just about the murder.