That’s exactly what Mark N 1’s post made me think of, and I had the same reaction-- disposals have no center axle. Duncan was in a 1927 sports car with open spokes, and an open rear axle that came out several inches from under the car.
With everything that happens on TV anymore, I’m kinda surprised that the only time I’ve seen someone die from a scarf caught In an auto axle was once when the biopic of Duncan with Vanessa Redgrave was broadcast.
No one in an episode of any crime or hospital show has ever died from a scarf caught in some kind of axle?
There’s no few accident videos of people being wrapped up in lathes, etc by loose clothing. One shows how a woman was scalped when her hair was caught in her car’s fan belt. Even long beards can be hazard. Those old washing machines had an emergency-stop bar at the top, due to the origin of the expression “don’t get your tit in a wringer.”
IIRC, one Monk episode features someone who hadn’t planned on murdering anyone — and, in fact, was about to help a guy extricate himself from a difficult situation — but, hey: so long as you obligingly got your necktie caught in the vehicle’s whirring machinery when you took a look under the hood, could I try for the perfect crime by, well, simply not helping with my hands, while instead just moving my feet from, y’know, here to there? Yep, that did the trick.
“13 April 2009 The 54-year-old former Major League Baseball pitcher of the Detroit Tigers died while working underneath his dump truck. His clothes became entangled with the power take- offdrive shaft, suffocating him.”
I know a guy who watched a skiier get the oversized hood of an army polar jacket sucked into the gears of a rope tow (this was back in the '40s, so no safety gate).
Hm, it’s starting to seem like “strangulation by a scarf getting caught in machinery” is something that is extremely common in real life but almost never happens in TV or movies.
They did it in a Batman comic book: the soon-to-be-dead guy is in costume as a WWI aviator, complete with a long and fancy scarf, and, well, the movie business being what it is, maybe going for authenticity with those old-timey biplanes wasn’t the wisest choice…
I think SNL once did a bit with a well-adjusted Vietnam veteran: everyone is having a good time at a backyard barbecue, until the guy in question drops to the ground as a helicopter passes overhead — because he, y’know, saw a coin on the ground right then, and was picking it up with a smile, without actually noticing that helicopter. And, of course, the whole skit just goes on like that from there…
Police detectives are called to the scene of a homicide. It turns out to be a dirt-common impulse killing after a drunken argument escalated into a fight.
With as many responses as this thread has, I’m sure this has been mentioned, so please point me to them.
I’m rewatching White Collar, up to s5, and while there might be more, two things have happened that get to me. The first is when a character makes big motions to make it obvious to the audience but the person looking right at them doesn’t notice or react. In this case, Burke was being talked to by someone and Burke turns and looks at Caffrey. This goes on for several seconds, with Burke shaking his head no, right in front of the person talking to Burke. They never turn to look at who Burke is looking at, nor does anyone with them. It’s so egregious. The second thing is a double, I guess? In TV, all evidence has to point to guilty, naming the bad guy, or catching them in the act, when sometimes it’s a lot of circumstantial evidence. By the time of s5, there are so many examples of Burke looking the other way, of Neal being close to where a crime happened, that it should have ended the deal a long time ago. At a minimum, Caffrey has too much freedom, with only an anklet. Further, Burke’s close rate was stated to the in the 80s without Caffrey and in the 90s with. Would he get a deal when Burke is already a top closer?
police officer who spends - for months - his days, nights and weekends to follow the bad guy around.
Do they just work on one case at a time…
IF they HAVE to work on another case, it miraculously ends up being somehow related to the first.
My guess IRL, cops do what they can within a given amount of time/resources to solve any crime that life throws at them, and then move on to the next crime the next day with the same attitude - “juggling” a portfolio of 10-20 cases (e.g. coroner’s report with potentially relevant information coming in next week, etc…).
Yeah. No Chief of Detectives will let one of their detectives work for years on a case about a stolen loaf of bread. If it is super high profile- liek the assassination of a politician, there will be a team.
Each detective has a large caseload- so this idea that they will fight like tigers to keep a case from being transferred away is ridiculous .
Yep.
I laughed when I watched Longmire the series and the detective who made it his life’s work to track down whoever killed a scum druggie killer. His Boss would pull him off within a week.
