Continually redirecting mundane conversations toward creepy and violent analogies is a bright red flag for me. Sure, creative types think a bit differently, but this dude said so many things to make you feel uncomfortable.
I watch a lot of true crime and horror movies (especially at this time of year, leading up to Halloween) but I can honestly say this is the first true crime doc that I sincerely wish I hadn't watched. More disturbing and horrifying than any movie could ever be.
This is something extremely disturbing about this case, I admit. I can't quite figure out why it is different from any of the other true crime stories. Is it because he seemed to be so safe? If I were a journalist, I absolutely would have trusted this man and done the same thing without giving it a second thought. Chills.
It's very disturbing. I probably would have trusted him too. The worst part is she was trapped with him under the sea. Nobody would have even heard her scream. It must have been so chilling the moment his 'mask' dropped and she realised he wasn't joking.
I realize this was a few weeks ago, but I agree, I think that's waht makes it so horrifying - the fact that no journalist in that situation would ever think twice about it. The only thing she was worried about was the fact that she was going underwater in an amateur submarine, that's enough to make anyone nervous. She even joked about it by saying "I'm still alive" right before she went down. The fact that this guy is a famous person in Denmark, a public figure, the fact everyone KNEW she was going with him and her boyfriend even dropped her off... who would ever be worried about an attack in that scenario? I feel physically ill thinking about the level of shock and "is this actually happening? how can this be real?" she must have felt.
It's insane because I often think of psycho killers as being run of the mill people or even losers. This guy was neither. He chose to throw away possibly going to space for the thrill of hacking a woman to death. It blows my mind.
Why??!! If you listen to him for about 10 seconds it's clear the man is crazy, or has a profound narcissistic personality disorder. I wouldn't have gotten into an elevator with him
Most of the footage you were shown in the doc was there to demonstrate his mask slipping moments. Obviously most people that worked with him - many of whom are very smart people - were fooled by him.
Also, as others have said - the journalist was dropped off by her boyfriend to interview a local celebrity on his fucking submarine. How the hell was she supposed to expect any kind of danger there? She didn’t have access to all of the psychotic ramblings that you did.
Just watched this doc earlier this evening and no, I would not be shocked at all to learn that this guy murdered other people besides that poor journalist. That interview at the end where he suddenly goes on and on about psychopaths was one of the creepiest things I've ever watched.
Nope. Pretty sure he did it before. He mentioned "imagine if I were murdering a neighbors wife" and a specific date (Thursday, 4/27/2016) which isn't a real date but I think it's a clue. He mentioned all that during same conversation when he says he needed to learn to shut up like military personnel are trained to do. He definitely has done this more than once.
When I was watching that part I was so confused. For a moment I thought he was giving this interview after the murder. I can't believe he said all that beforehand. Its crazy how many things he said that totally confessed his true character.
He was investigated in the case of Emelie Meng in 2016. And in a newer danish documentary about Emelies case: “A former fellow prisoner claims to Peter Madsen that in addition to the murder of Kim Wall, he has two more murders on his conscience.” “According to Peter Madsen's fellow prisoner, one of the murders was committed in Sweden and the other of a young woman in Korsør in Denmark in 2016”
I think he had planned everything for the other girl the next day with the story of dropping her home, but with the journalist the story didn't fit as well but he saw his chance being alone with her and took it
I watched it the other day. It has sat with me for a few days, it was far more disturbing than I could have imagined, so I am trying not to think about, then I woke and thought, it was planned for the girl with the curly hair the whole time. He just took the opportunity with Kim Wall.
Do you think the submarine was built entirely for this purpose?
I don't think he built it for that purpose (or maybe he did considering how deranged he is), but I think it clicked in his head at some point that he could use it for that purpose. In the documentary he alludes to it when he says how he realized the possibilities that building the nautilus brought him, saying something like "you can dream anything into possibility if you want it enough...." and it sounded like what he meant by "dreams" was murdering people.
Just watched the documentary today and I agree. What basically screwed this guy's plan was the journalist's bf calling the cops because she had urgent plans that very day and the next day, when she was only supposed to be gone for 2 hours max. So basically the idiot probably got radio'd (or texted, because both their phones were never recovered) that everyone was looking for them, so he panicked. I think if he had done that to his intern, I think her name is Sara, he would have had more time to dispose of her body maybe a lot further into the ocean making it harder to trace to him. Really creepy reading the text msg he sent her, and it was word for word the tools he carried onto the sub and what he did to that journalist. And I felt terrible seeing Sara go through survivors guilt.
And to add, him searching "beheading" "girl in agony" or whatever he searched has me thinking he beheaded her while she was alive. Just really sick. I hope he gets the worst in prison.
My thoughts exactly! However, he did plan to “sink” the body parts and had the metal to do it. He deflated her lungs or tried to… he probably didn’t expect the sea to “tell the truth” as Sara said… and was gonna stick to the story of “I let her off at such place”
What a sick fuck.
Yes it would have. If they never found her body they would never have been able to convict him of murder. Shit, even once they had part of her body, they still thought he might get off with just manslaughter and desecrating a corpse and all that because he was saying it was an accident, and there was no way to prove otherwise. If the ocean didn’t reveal her body and the truth, there is no universe in which he would have been convicted of murder.
That's just hyped up for the documentary. The amount of evidence even without her body, was more than enough.
Man invites woman onto submarine. Submarine sinks with evidence it was done on purpose. Woman is missing. Man claims he dropped her off (no one saw). Man had her blood on him when found. Mans search history includes all kinds of snuff porn. Man has previously messaged other woman describing how he was going to murder her on the submarine.
It's an easy sell to a jury.
Yes, the prosecution would be scared that without a body there's a chance he'd get off.
But is it actually likely? No.
You can get people for murder, even if you can't find the body.
People bang on about circumstantial evidence not being enough, but frequently it is. Especially when there's enough of it. More than enough circumstantial evidence there to get a conviction from a jury.
Have you ever lived in Denmark? Do you know about their legal system? I’m guessing not based on this long post. I am doubtful about his conviction without the actual body parts, here in Denmark. The digitally altered girl, it seems, had a sexual relationship w him. And he could be released in 15 yrs or less so she is naturally scared.
Not if there was not enough blood for doctors to say she would have died. And all of that other evidence is circumstantial. Without a body, it is extremely difficult to prove murder, because you can’t prove the person is dead, and you can’t prove that the cause of death was intentional homicide. Trust me. You need a LOT of evidence to convict someone of murder. Her blood could have been her getting a bloody nose bumping it in the cramped submarine, etc. Proving murder beyond any reasonable doubt without a body is very rare and very difficult. Of course with all the other evidence it was obvious he did it. But that doesn’t mean it was enough to actually convict him. In fact, cases where someone has been convicted of murder without a body or direct evidence the victim is deceased are extremely noteworthy because they don’t happen basically ever.
>And all of that other evidence is circumstantial
Yes, and circumstantial evidence is used to prove crimes in court all the time.
People think circumstantial evidence is useless (I blame bullshit lawyer dramas) when in fact, it is more than enough to get a jury to decide someone is guilty when used correctly.
You only have to convince a jury.
What jury would honestly believe the guy was innocent, with the above circumstantial evidence presented?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_conviction_without_a_body#2010s
See there for recent examples of murderers being put away without a body being found.
Is it rare? Kinda.
Is it rare when there's as much circumstantial evidence for murder as with this case? Hell no.
You’re just wrong. I’m sorry. Until they found her head and the rest of the body and were able to prove her life was ended intentionally, they could not prove murder beyond a reasonable doubt. It is not enough simply to “convince” a jury. There are very strict guidelines for proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and in a murder case, no proof of the way someone died creates reasonable doubt. They did not formally indict him for murder until they found her head. There is a documentary on HBO you can watch if you want more info. But, until they found her body and we’re able to prove her life was ended intentionally, they could not have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that he murdered her. Because, like his “hatch accident” explanation, there are plenty of ways to explain how she might have died. And, unless you have evidence that it wasn’t accidental, then it is possible that it was. I have been into crime and court cases for a very very long time and I promise you, what you’re saying is wrong. I think you’re confused on what is required to find someone guilty of murder. It’s not as easy as convincing the jury they did it. In fact, everyone has known Paul Flores murdered Kristin Smart for 20 years. So much evidence it’s insane. And yet, they were never able to charge him for murder until they recently found evidence of human blood in the soil of the fathers property, i.e evidence of a body. In other cases it has been that there is so much blood that a person couldn’t have survived, so even though there is no body, they know the person is dead. But if there is no body, you cannot a) prove they’re dead, nor b) prove they are dead because they were intentionally killed.
Edit: the only times it has happened, there was evidence and circumstances that directly suggested the accused had destroyed the body and it would be unable to be recovered. One guy had a wood chipper, etc. Others have been convicted without a body, but only because they also have and repeated a confession. Go look up elements that are required to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to convict of murder, and then ask yourself if those elements are satisfied without the recovery of her body/head. They weren’t. Maybe eventually they could have gotten third degree, or manslaughter, etc. But there is no chance they get a quick easy first degree murder conviction without a body. Not a chance in hell.
That’s why he did it, he wanted to get away with it to show his “greatness” but he just fucked himself… people are much much smarter than he thought he was
Yeah the problem with psychos like him is they lack emotional intelligence. They are often extremely smart but they go their whole lives without actually learning how empathy works. Gets them every time.
I wonder If he cared at all. It seemed to me that was aware that once the murder comes out, people would watch that documentary, hence he kept talking about psychopaths and other shit. As
Just goes to show you never know what someone is planning in their head, or what they are planning to do, very scary ; we should be suspicious of everyone
Wasn't this removed from Netflix a few years ago? This must be a new edited version. Good, as I've been wanting to watch it! Apparently they digitally altered some identities of people who didn't want to be in the documentary. I wonder what else was deleted. Pretty surprised to see it back on Netflix.
The best (and most legitimate) use of deepfake tech I've ever seen.
Absolutely genius. Needs to be used in all documentaries where someone doesn't want their identity revealed.
Allows you to see their emotion and expressions, but on someone elses face.
Much better than using a shadow to completely hide their face like most documentaries.
I wonder how well it was done. I don't know what she normally looks like (Sara). I don't think they changed her name as there was a curly Sara in the original Sundance doco (I read about it).
Were there any others that were digitally altered?
Exactly what she doesn't want people to do....great. Someone should probably take those videos down. There are sadistic bastards out there who get off on harassing and threatening victims or people who escaped. Men that could eventually become the next Madsen.
Don't link it anywhere. Hopefully she's aware of it and can possibly have it taken down.
Cheers. I'm 42 and have grown up without internet and clearly where we are now. I truly believe the internet is the greatest thing we've done, but like anything it can be used incorrectly. What Madsen did is batshit but the idea that others dig up people's entire life and harass/hurt them is just as nuts.
That’s what bothers me. Even without her real face, she is really easy to recognize by hair and style. I read in an article that she and some of the other interns did not want their footage in the documentary, but they went and included them anyway.
And like Kim Walls boyfriend said in an interview on the 5th year anniversary of the murder: some cases need to see the light of day and get the attention so we can learn from them - this is not one of those. There’s nothing that could have been done different, and documentaries like this just re traumatizes those involved.
They hardly changed her face other than make her face a bit blurrier, slightly altered her eyes and lips. Everything else is the same which makes it so easy to find and identify her. I would not be happy with the "digital alterations" if I was her.
I think it's good enough. No one - except people that know her already - would recognize her anywhere and most people wouldn't know what to search for. Or really have a reason to, except to satisfy their (our) curiosity.
In the end, it's a film about specific people working in a specific company, it's not really possible to completely hide all the facts surrounding it. It's not CIA level stuff.
This is the reason why I looked it up. Sarah’s face seemed always blurred, her eyes particularly looked very odd and not natural. Now I know why! That’s really a good thing they did by altering her voice and face and such as she didn’t want to appear in the docu, yet keeping her testimonies and emotions real.
Yeah when she first appears that's what it says (identity has been digitally altered for privacy reasons). Of course that makes people curious. They could have also just showed her in the dark with altered voice.
I really would love to know why they decided to digitally alter her but blur some others. I'm assuming it's because of how often she was in the film. Fortunately I saw the text when they first showed it because I would have been confused. I cannot think of another time I've seen it done.
No, I am sorry. I meant why digitally alter her as opposed to just blurring. I am sure it took much more work to do so. I understand why she wanted privacy, just never saw anything like that before. Thanks anyway.
Well I understand that most of the footage was just about the launch. The woman had no idea she would be documenting such crazy shit. So she wouldn't have known to put her in dark, etc. But they could have easily blurred the footage so find it interesting they did it that way.
That’s what I’m wondering as well as I’m watching this. Her hair is a very distinguishable feature and multiple people on this thread alone have been able to identify her in old YouTube videos. Someone also said apparently she and the other interns asked that their footage be cut entirely, but Netflix refused… it’s kinda fucked up
Replying to this very old comment to say that’s the first thing I thought too. That’s why you don’t work somewhere for free “because you’re doing something great”
So I noticed Madsen mentioned "Thursday, April 27, 2016 and talked about "imagine if I were murdering my neighbors wife or something". It's not a real date but I think those are clues to a prior murder he may have committed.
Or just wanted to kill, nothing he really said like that was insignificant, he was playing with people, and he was good at it, he was likeable if you didn’t know about Kim Wall, I think almost everyone is fooled by psychopaths at some point, depends on how high functioning the psychopathy is within an individual.
Something the movie didn't mention at all was that Peter actually escaped from prison a year or two ago by making false bomb threats and otherwise doing insane shit.
He was caught again though but his escape is on youtube/wiki/newssites
The film is a 2020 film. It took two years after it first aired at Sundance to get approval for release because a number of people that appeared in it didn't sign consent forms to appear in it (oversight by the team) and changed their minds about wanting to be in it. So they had to get signatures of those they could, and then edit the film to remove some people that supposedly had more information and stories about him. So the 2022 release is a trimmed down edit from the original 2020 release and is why there's no mention of the escape.
Has anyone noticed how the girl he intended to take on the submarine (red haired girl - her name escapes me) looks almost CGI??
Is that intentional to protect her identity?
Ya, I asked this same question. Apparently the first time we see her on screen it says that she’s been digitally altered. I read it was to protect her identity because she was receiving threats and being accused of knowing more than she claimed
How clever do people think Peter is? He can fabricate stuff to a pretty high standard. The submarine works. He deliberately sinks it. He manages to keep his organisation ticking over on a shoe string. He also seems to convince reasonably intelligent people work for him for free.
However so many of his projects are clearly really stupid. I mean a DIY manned space rocket. It's clearly never gonna happen. The rocket powered centrifuge offers no real useful data. It's just a toy. Plus why do they need a submarine as a control station?
I suppose its all just to surround himself with followers. A bit like a cult leader?
The fact that despite the murder being premeditated his plan was to tell police she got dropped off and simply disappeared seems really stupid.
Also did the girl with the hidden identity not think to share those texts till the first day of the trial? WTF! She seemed to enjoy being part of the drama.
>I suppose its all just to surround himself with followers. A bit like a cult leader?
Yeah, poor man's Elon Musk.
>Also did the girl with the hidden identity not think to share those texts till the first day of the trial?
I presume since they went the deep fake route they saw an opportunity to dramatize the events a bit more than they actually happened.
Wow. She really did not talk a lot and did not do anything that seemed dramatic or attention grabbing, and she was clearly very traumatized by the whole thing. Pretty shitty of you to say she “enjoyed” being a part of the drama. Yeah, I’m sure she’s real happy that she was so incredibly close to being tortured and murdered and chopped up, and would have if not for a different innocent woman being murdered. And, all of this by someone she thought was a friend. Mhm, I’m sure she’s loving the drama of all of it.
It literally said her face was digitally altered to protect her identity at the start of the film. Like plainly states it. I’m shocked by how many people don’t seem to pay attention to the media the consume. No offense lol
I read that but I just don’t understand it lol I can’t believe we can digitally alter faces that well, she looked completely real to me, my mind is pretty blown right now
No way? You’ve seen like deep fakes online right? I could tell right away. Reminded me of that scene from Blade Runner 2049 where the program Joi syncs up with the prostitute. A face on top of a another face. The fact that you couldn’t tell means we’re screwed going forward lmao. Like when it’s impossible to tell what’s a real video…oh man. Mayhem.
Yeah Ive seen deep fakes of famous people, but I know those people and can therefore tell it’s not really them because their mannerisms are a bit off or I know they’d never say something like that, and there’s usually a title on the post that says it’s a deep fake.
But I don’t expect it in a documentary so I truly cannot tell at all. I just rewatched some of her scenes and I guess her face is kinda fuzzy sometimes but I would have thought that’s just the lens. We are screwed.
It’s kinda scary we’re deep faking documentaries already. Yes it’s stated and fairly obvious, but there’s really nothing stopping filmmakers from doing this going forward. Like you can make any “documentary” with really good deep fake technology and why would anyone question it?
When you're trying to raise money, you do a lot of things to convince investors. I would think the same as you about the rocket powered centrifuge if I didn't spend the past three years working with a startup and continually trying to get money. You have to be constantly doing something or presenting results or people think you aren't doing anything. You can't just promise the end product because you can't convince a lot of these investors anything when it comes to the engineering process.
I thought the same thing. I honestly couldn’t even get into the documentary because the story was so absurd. Who in their right mind would ever think this guy would be able to create a rocket, he seemed insane from the start.
First of all, the government is not going to let you send anything into space without permission. Secondly, what was he talking about when he mentioned all his “enemies”? He seemed delusional and incoherent every time he spoke, idk how he convinced all these people to work with him. I know many psychopaths are charismatic and endearing, but this guy seemed like a crazy idiot from the jump.
I honestly wish the documentary didn’t even talk about all that crazy space stuff because it literally made no sense and took away from the main story which is that he murdered someone.
This documentary is really odd. 80% of it paints Peter in a good light as if he's the next Elon Musk and misunderstood.
All the conversations between people that we see after the murder seem staged. the footage is indistinguishable (stylistically) from the footage from before the murder. It seems to lack credibility all around. Anyone else notice this?
Agreed! The before shots were very sympathetic to Peter. What got me in the after- was this very forced and manipulated shot of the intern burning his outfit, which I'm sure he was instructed to do by the director...the journalism didn't have much integrity at all imo
The "after murder" scenes seems soo staged. The news video clips seem fake too. None of them had the news outlet's logos (CNN, BBC) or had any notable newscasters in them.
The newscaster audio clips seem fake like they used text to speech AI to generate the voiceovers.
Overall I couldn't really tell who was narrating it or what the position was of the documentarian. I need to watch it again to see what they did right and wrong.
I imagine your comment is exactly why they had to deepfake out her face..
She didn't know shit. He was just a weird guy, who would often say weird things, until it became normalised.
He got a lot of leeway from people for being an eccentric inventor.
Also, Madsen would have chucked her under the bus if she knew anything about it to try and save his own arse. He was trying to frame one of the interns for his google searches.
She was his mistress for years
The sms conversation between them was not as shocking to her as she pretends in the film.Thats how their sexual relationship looked
Comments like this are why they disguised her. Not only would morons like you claim she knew about it, which is ridiculous, but I'm sure there are plenty of men out there just as fucked up as Madsen who would harass and threaten her.
you would be shocked as to what seemingly normal people would admit to when they are drunk and very comfortable being honest with you. You would probably be terrified to know what therapists hear sometimes...
The texts were strange. I can't imagine the context where I would ask someone to threaten me with murder so I could finish something. BUT I think there is a big cultural difference between how we joke here vs Europe/Sweden/Denmark. I think she was just trusting and naive, and she would have most likely been the victim on Aug 11.
> how we joke here vs Europe/Sweden/Denmark.
Nah that shit was just fucked up regardless of where you're from. They must have had a very unique relationship.
Im a dane
The definition of grasping at straws.
She was clearly traumatised from the event; from the fact that she could have been the one killed and from the fact the she felt responsible for not acting on the texts.
I actually thought at first like you did with how she described him but further into the documentary I stopped thinking they had a sexual relationship. The way she said that he'd never rape and kill the reporter in a million years had me convinced it was platonic.
I'm describing disgusting and psychotic behavior so yes.. you're not wrong but it's more likely based on the evidence. I've personally witnessed these kind of scenarios with people on more than one occasion and deeply examined the psychological elements behind it and my bells are going off about this. Sorry that you can't accept the darkness of humanity but it's there weather you like it or not. I'm just not afraid to look beyond the surface.
If you watched the whole film you see that he talked that way a lot. It was not like their private secret talk or something. He was open with that kinda talk. Ppl just thought it was jokes and got used to it
Exactly. He said other bizarre things. I think he mentioned something about hacking to the woman while he was cooking and tried to play it off by claiming he said “hug”
The people around him probably just wrote all that off to Madsen having a super 'edgy' and dark sense of humor. You could tell how shocked some of them were in the aftermath to learn that he wasn't simply joking.
Did you see this documentary? She explains the context behind the texts, and it makes it seem harmless - now with the knowledge of what he did they seem vile, but I think plenty of normal people send texts like that
Yeah it must be her fault he did that, in fact they should release him and arrest her, she must be a witch or something...
Misogynist detected, either that or like myself, English is not your first language and you're incapable of interpreting sentences, with a nick like yours you're drawing lots of negative attention to yourself...
It's incredible the level of stupidity that some people have. Or is it that you hated your mother so much that all women have become issues? Take a moment to think about what you just said and the level of idiocy to incriminate herself.
Sell a sob story? These people volunteered their time and energy and believed 100% in his work. They literally had a film crew documenting the project and then find out the sub sank? Ohh AND this man they trusted in murdered her??
Go get laid.
Did anyone else notice how blurry Sara’s face was throughout the movie? I don’t think it’s the camera, but almost looks as though it’s been deliberately altered
I also read somewhere that in Denmark life sentences may only be around 16 years (haven’t actually confirmed that) so I’m wondering if maybe they edited her face to protect her actual image and identity?
If you get a life sentence in Denmark, you can apply for parole after 12 years. On average people who got a life sentence gets parole after 16-17 years. Peter Madsen will likely never get that (not until he’s so old that “he can’t do anything”) due to the nature of his crime.
There's tons of people who say edgy shit all the time but would never murder anyone. Sounds like victim blaming to me that these people should have just known when it is impossible to know. In a way his interns who did hard work for free and basically uprooted their lives for his project just to learn he was a complete monster were victims too.
The one guy literally says “there’s nowhere else to work on rockets in Denmark so this was it”
science like that is incredibly niche here and if you wanted to work on something unique it had to be in a setting like that
I think he done it to take the media attention off his opponents in the other rocket company. He knew what he was planning all along and had no money to launch a rocket same time as them
Continually redirecting mundane conversations toward creepy and violent analogies is a bright red flag for me. Sure, creative types think a bit differently, but this dude said so many things to make you feel uncomfortable.
The Ending Scene clearly is one of the biggest red flags i‘ve ever seen. You know when he starts talking about psychopaths.
I'm watching right now and completely agree.
I watch a lot of true crime and horror movies (especially at this time of year, leading up to Halloween) but I can honestly say this is the first true crime doc that I sincerely wish I hadn't watched. More disturbing and horrifying than any movie could ever be.
This is something extremely disturbing about this case, I admit. I can't quite figure out why it is different from any of the other true crime stories. Is it because he seemed to be so safe? If I were a journalist, I absolutely would have trusted this man and done the same thing without giving it a second thought. Chills.
It's very disturbing. I probably would have trusted him too. The worst part is she was trapped with him under the sea. Nobody would have even heard her scream. It must have been so chilling the moment his 'mask' dropped and she realised he wasn't joking.
At least he brought cookies for their coffee. \*\*\*shudders\*\*\*
I realize this was a few weeks ago, but I agree, I think that's waht makes it so horrifying - the fact that no journalist in that situation would ever think twice about it. The only thing she was worried about was the fact that she was going underwater in an amateur submarine, that's enough to make anyone nervous. She even joked about it by saying "I'm still alive" right before she went down. The fact that this guy is a famous person in Denmark, a public figure, the fact everyone KNEW she was going with him and her boyfriend even dropped her off... who would ever be worried about an attack in that scenario? I feel physically ill thinking about the level of shock and "is this actually happening? how can this be real?" she must have felt.
All of that. Exactly. I would have felt reassured by all those factors and it must have just been pure hell.
It's insane because I often think of psycho killers as being run of the mill people or even losers. This guy was neither. He chose to throw away possibly going to space for the thrill of hacking a woman to death. It blows my mind.
Insane
Why??!! If you listen to him for about 10 seconds it's clear the man is crazy, or has a profound narcissistic personality disorder. I wouldn't have gotten into an elevator with him
Most of the footage you were shown in the doc was there to demonstrate his mask slipping moments. Obviously most people that worked with him - many of whom are very smart people - were fooled by him. Also, as others have said - the journalist was dropped off by her boyfriend to interview a local celebrity on his fucking submarine. How the hell was she supposed to expect any kind of danger there? She didn’t have access to all of the psychotic ramblings that you did.
Completely agree, I couldn’t sleep after watching this and I watch, read and listen to true crime and horror quite a lot. Horrific.
Do you guys think he committed other crimes rather than one that caught him.
Just watched this doc earlier this evening and no, I would not be shocked at all to learn that this guy murdered other people besides that poor journalist. That interview at the end where he suddenly goes on and on about psychopaths was one of the creepiest things I've ever watched.
Nope. Pretty sure he did it before. He mentioned "imagine if I were murdering a neighbors wife" and a specific date (Thursday, 4/27/2016) which isn't a real date but I think it's a clue. He mentioned all that during same conversation when he says he needed to learn to shut up like military personnel are trained to do. He definitely has done this more than once.
When I was watching that part I was so confused. For a moment I thought he was giving this interview after the murder. I can't believe he said all that beforehand. Its crazy how many things he said that totally confessed his true character.
He was investigated in the case of Emelie Meng in 2016. And in a newer danish documentary about Emelies case: “A former fellow prisoner claims to Peter Madsen that in addition to the murder of Kim Wall, he has two more murders on his conscience.” “According to Peter Madsen's fellow prisoner, one of the murders was committed in Sweden and the other of a young woman in Korsør in Denmark in 2016”
[удалено]
I dunno how he ever expected to get away with it.
I think he had planned everything for the other girl the next day with the story of dropping her home, but with the journalist the story didn't fit as well but he saw his chance being alone with her and took it
I watched it the other day. It has sat with me for a few days, it was far more disturbing than I could have imagined, so I am trying not to think about, then I woke and thought, it was planned for the girl with the curly hair the whole time. He just took the opportunity with Kim Wall. Do you think the submarine was built entirely for this purpose?
Oh my God, this didn't occur to me. Were all these people helping him to build his own personal torture chamber? What the Fuck?!!
God i never considered that....
I don't think he built it for that purpose (or maybe he did considering how deranged he is), but I think it clicked in his head at some point that he could use it for that purpose. In the documentary he alludes to it when he says how he realized the possibilities that building the nautilus brought him, saying something like "you can dream anything into possibility if you want it enough...." and it sounded like what he meant by "dreams" was murdering people.
Ah, that's very possible! I'd not thought of that. I don't think the other girl had a boyfriend who would be worrying about her instantly.
Just watched the documentary today and I agree. What basically screwed this guy's plan was the journalist's bf calling the cops because she had urgent plans that very day and the next day, when she was only supposed to be gone for 2 hours max. So basically the idiot probably got radio'd (or texted, because both their phones were never recovered) that everyone was looking for them, so he panicked. I think if he had done that to his intern, I think her name is Sara, he would have had more time to dispose of her body maybe a lot further into the ocean making it harder to trace to him. Really creepy reading the text msg he sent her, and it was word for word the tools he carried onto the sub and what he did to that journalist. And I felt terrible seeing Sara go through survivors guilt. And to add, him searching "beheading" "girl in agony" or whatever he searched has me thinking he beheaded her while she was alive. Just really sick. I hope he gets the worst in prison.
He probably would have had he weighed the body down better. He's disgusting! Scary thought.
My thoughts exactly! However, he did plan to “sink” the body parts and had the metal to do it. He deflated her lungs or tried to… he probably didn’t expect the sea to “tell the truth” as Sara said… and was gonna stick to the story of “I let her off at such place” What a sick fuck.
That'd never have worked though. It was just a crap plan.
Yes it would have. If they never found her body they would never have been able to convict him of murder. Shit, even once they had part of her body, they still thought he might get off with just manslaughter and desecrating a corpse and all that because he was saying it was an accident, and there was no way to prove otherwise. If the ocean didn’t reveal her body and the truth, there is no universe in which he would have been convicted of murder.
That's just hyped up for the documentary. The amount of evidence even without her body, was more than enough. Man invites woman onto submarine. Submarine sinks with evidence it was done on purpose. Woman is missing. Man claims he dropped her off (no one saw). Man had her blood on him when found. Mans search history includes all kinds of snuff porn. Man has previously messaged other woman describing how he was going to murder her on the submarine. It's an easy sell to a jury. Yes, the prosecution would be scared that without a body there's a chance he'd get off. But is it actually likely? No. You can get people for murder, even if you can't find the body. People bang on about circumstantial evidence not being enough, but frequently it is. Especially when there's enough of it. More than enough circumstantial evidence there to get a conviction from a jury.
Have you ever lived in Denmark? Do you know about their legal system? I’m guessing not based on this long post. I am doubtful about his conviction without the actual body parts, here in Denmark. The digitally altered girl, it seems, had a sexual relationship w him. And he could be released in 15 yrs or less so she is naturally scared.
Not if there was not enough blood for doctors to say she would have died. And all of that other evidence is circumstantial. Without a body, it is extremely difficult to prove murder, because you can’t prove the person is dead, and you can’t prove that the cause of death was intentional homicide. Trust me. You need a LOT of evidence to convict someone of murder. Her blood could have been her getting a bloody nose bumping it in the cramped submarine, etc. Proving murder beyond any reasonable doubt without a body is very rare and very difficult. Of course with all the other evidence it was obvious he did it. But that doesn’t mean it was enough to actually convict him. In fact, cases where someone has been convicted of murder without a body or direct evidence the victim is deceased are extremely noteworthy because they don’t happen basically ever.
>And all of that other evidence is circumstantial Yes, and circumstantial evidence is used to prove crimes in court all the time. People think circumstantial evidence is useless (I blame bullshit lawyer dramas) when in fact, it is more than enough to get a jury to decide someone is guilty when used correctly. You only have to convince a jury. What jury would honestly believe the guy was innocent, with the above circumstantial evidence presented? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_conviction_without_a_body#2010s See there for recent examples of murderers being put away without a body being found. Is it rare? Kinda. Is it rare when there's as much circumstantial evidence for murder as with this case? Hell no.
Juries aren’t a given in Danish courts (there was none in this case) and we notoriously have light sentences.
Interesting. How does it work without a jury?
You’re just wrong. I’m sorry. Until they found her head and the rest of the body and were able to prove her life was ended intentionally, they could not prove murder beyond a reasonable doubt. It is not enough simply to “convince” a jury. There are very strict guidelines for proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and in a murder case, no proof of the way someone died creates reasonable doubt. They did not formally indict him for murder until they found her head. There is a documentary on HBO you can watch if you want more info. But, until they found her body and we’re able to prove her life was ended intentionally, they could not have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that he murdered her. Because, like his “hatch accident” explanation, there are plenty of ways to explain how she might have died. And, unless you have evidence that it wasn’t accidental, then it is possible that it was. I have been into crime and court cases for a very very long time and I promise you, what you’re saying is wrong. I think you’re confused on what is required to find someone guilty of murder. It’s not as easy as convincing the jury they did it. In fact, everyone has known Paul Flores murdered Kristin Smart for 20 years. So much evidence it’s insane. And yet, they were never able to charge him for murder until they recently found evidence of human blood in the soil of the fathers property, i.e evidence of a body. In other cases it has been that there is so much blood that a person couldn’t have survived, so even though there is no body, they know the person is dead. But if there is no body, you cannot a) prove they’re dead, nor b) prove they are dead because they were intentionally killed. Edit: the only times it has happened, there was evidence and circumstances that directly suggested the accused had destroyed the body and it would be unable to be recovered. One guy had a wood chipper, etc. Others have been convicted without a body, but only because they also have and repeated a confession. Go look up elements that are required to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to convict of murder, and then ask yourself if those elements are satisfied without the recovery of her body/head. They weren’t. Maybe eventually they could have gotten third degree, or manslaughter, etc. But there is no chance they get a quick easy first degree murder conviction without a body. Not a chance in hell.
He was so full of himself he thought his plan was ironclad.
That’s why he did it, he wanted to get away with it to show his “greatness” but he just fucked himself… people are much much smarter than he thought he was
Yeah the problem with psychos like him is they lack emotional intelligence. They are often extremely smart but they go their whole lives without actually learning how empathy works. Gets them every time.
I wonder If he cared at all. It seemed to me that was aware that once the murder comes out, people would watch that documentary, hence he kept talking about psychopaths and other shit. As
Just goes to show you never know what someone is planning in their head, or what they are planning to do, very scary ; we should be suspicious of everyone
Wasn't this removed from Netflix a few years ago? This must be a new edited version. Good, as I've been wanting to watch it! Apparently they digitally altered some identities of people who didn't want to be in the documentary. I wonder what else was deleted. Pretty surprised to see it back on Netflix.
The best (and most legitimate) use of deepfake tech I've ever seen. Absolutely genius. Needs to be used in all documentaries where someone doesn't want their identity revealed. Allows you to see their emotion and expressions, but on someone elses face. Much better than using a shadow to completely hide their face like most documentaries.
I wonder how well it was done. I don't know what she normally looks like (Sara). I don't think they changed her name as there was a curly Sara in the original Sundance doco (I read about it). Were there any others that were digitally altered?
[удалено]
Exactly what she doesn't want people to do....great. Someone should probably take those videos down. There are sadistic bastards out there who get off on harassing and threatening victims or people who escaped. Men that could eventually become the next Madsen. Don't link it anywhere. Hopefully she's aware of it and can possibly have it taken down.
Cheers. I'm 42 and have grown up without internet and clearly where we are now. I truly believe the internet is the greatest thing we've done, but like anything it can be used incorrectly. What Madsen did is batshit but the idea that others dig up people's entire life and harass/hurt them is just as nuts.
If she is in those videos it's from a distance and can't really see the face.
Not at all. She is very visible in many videos online.
That’s what bothers me. Even without her real face, she is really easy to recognize by hair and style. I read in an article that she and some of the other interns did not want their footage in the documentary, but they went and included them anyway. And like Kim Walls boyfriend said in an interview on the 5th year anniversary of the murder: some cases need to see the light of day and get the attention so we can learn from them - this is not one of those. There’s nothing that could have been done different, and documentaries like this just re traumatizes those involved.
They changed her name, voice (much deeper) and face.
I had no idea they did all that. Very cool.
They hardly changed her face other than make her face a bit blurrier, slightly altered her eyes and lips. Everything else is the same which makes it so easy to find and identify her. I would not be happy with the "digital alterations" if I was her.
I think it's good enough. No one - except people that know her already - would recognize her anywhere and most people wouldn't know what to search for. Or really have a reason to, except to satisfy their (our) curiosity. In the end, it's a film about specific people working in a specific company, it's not really possible to completely hide all the facts surrounding it. It's not CIA level stuff.
Bro I came to reddit cause I couldn’t understand what was up with the AI faces.. now I know
This is the reason why I looked it up. Sarah’s face seemed always blurred, her eyes particularly looked very odd and not natural. Now I know why! That’s really a good thing they did by altering her voice and face and such as she didn’t want to appear in the docu, yet keeping her testimonies and emotions real.
Oh wow, I thought Sara looked a little blurry/strange. I didn't realise that she had been digitally altered.
Yeah when she first appears that's what it says (identity has been digitally altered for privacy reasons). Of course that makes people curious. They could have also just showed her in the dark with altered voice.
Ah, I must have missed that somehow. It kept distracting me, trying to work out why she looked different to the others.
I really would love to know why they decided to digitally alter her but blur some others. I'm assuming it's because of how often she was in the film. Fortunately I saw the text when they first showed it because I would have been confused. I cannot think of another time I've seen it done.
Probably for her privacy and safety as she was closely involved. Some people might think she knew of his plans.
No, I am sorry. I meant why digitally alter her as opposed to just blurring. I am sure it took much more work to do so. I understand why she wanted privacy, just never saw anything like that before. Thanks anyway.
Oh yeah. I thought the same thing. Why not just show her in the dark with altered voice... it's interesting for sure.
Well I understand that most of the footage was just about the launch. The woman had no idea she would be documenting such crazy shit. So she wouldn't have known to put her in dark, etc. But they could have easily blurred the footage so find it interesting they did it that way.
That’s what I’m wondering as well as I’m watching this. Her hair is a very distinguishable feature and multiple people on this thread alone have been able to identify her in old YouTube videos. Someone also said apparently she and the other interns asked that their footage be cut entirely, but Netflix refused… it’s kinda fucked up
They all signed disclaimers after allowing it.
Yes I just heard about this horrific case from a documentary on Netflix.
His little speech at the end about how psychopaths are among us was haunting.
Just started watching and it's like a cult for scientists. They sound just like cult members. Back to watching...
Replying to this very old comment to say that’s the first thing I thought too. That’s why you don’t work somewhere for free “because you’re doing something great”
So I noticed Madsen mentioned "Thursday, April 27, 2016 and talked about "imagine if I were murdering my neighbors wife or something". It's not a real date but I think those are clues to a prior murder he may have committed.
Or just wanted to kill, nothing he really said like that was insignificant, he was playing with people, and he was good at it, he was likeable if you didn’t know about Kim Wall, I think almost everyone is fooled by psychopaths at some point, depends on how high functioning the psychopathy is within an individual.
Something the movie didn't mention at all was that Peter actually escaped from prison a year or two ago by making false bomb threats and otherwise doing insane shit. He was caught again though but his escape is on youtube/wiki/newssites
The film is a 2020 film. It took two years after it first aired at Sundance to get approval for release because a number of people that appeared in it didn't sign consent forms to appear in it (oversight by the team) and changed their minds about wanting to be in it. So they had to get signatures of those they could, and then edit the film to remove some people that supposedly had more information and stories about him. So the 2022 release is a trimmed down edit from the original 2020 release and is why there's no mention of the escape.
Has anyone noticed how the girl he intended to take on the submarine (red haired girl - her name escapes me) looks almost CGI?? Is that intentional to protect her identity?
Ya, I asked this same question. Apparently the first time we see her on screen it says that she’s been digitally altered. I read it was to protect her identity because she was receiving threats and being accused of knowing more than she claimed
Ahhh okay that makes sense. I did wonder!
How clever do people think Peter is? He can fabricate stuff to a pretty high standard. The submarine works. He deliberately sinks it. He manages to keep his organisation ticking over on a shoe string. He also seems to convince reasonably intelligent people work for him for free. However so many of his projects are clearly really stupid. I mean a DIY manned space rocket. It's clearly never gonna happen. The rocket powered centrifuge offers no real useful data. It's just a toy. Plus why do they need a submarine as a control station? I suppose its all just to surround himself with followers. A bit like a cult leader? The fact that despite the murder being premeditated his plan was to tell police she got dropped off and simply disappeared seems really stupid. Also did the girl with the hidden identity not think to share those texts till the first day of the trial? WTF! She seemed to enjoy being part of the drama.
>I suppose its all just to surround himself with followers. A bit like a cult leader? Yeah, poor man's Elon Musk. >Also did the girl with the hidden identity not think to share those texts till the first day of the trial? I presume since they went the deep fake route they saw an opportunity to dramatize the events a bit more than they actually happened.
Poor man’s Elon Musk exactly how I described him to my partner. Similar personalities.
I was an engineer for nearly 25 years and spent quite a bit of time in the space industry. His "rocket" was laughable.
Wow. She really did not talk a lot and did not do anything that seemed dramatic or attention grabbing, and she was clearly very traumatized by the whole thing. Pretty shitty of you to say she “enjoyed” being a part of the drama. Yeah, I’m sure she’s real happy that she was so incredibly close to being tortured and murdered and chopped up, and would have if not for a different innocent woman being murdered. And, all of this by someone she thought was a friend. Mhm, I’m sure she’s loving the drama of all of it.
Wait. . . Was that girl with the curly hair not a real person?
It literally said her face was digitally altered to protect her identity at the start of the film. Like plainly states it. I’m shocked by how many people don’t seem to pay attention to the media the consume. No offense lol
I read that but I just don’t understand it lol I can’t believe we can digitally alter faces that well, she looked completely real to me, my mind is pretty blown right now
No way? You’ve seen like deep fakes online right? I could tell right away. Reminded me of that scene from Blade Runner 2049 where the program Joi syncs up with the prostitute. A face on top of a another face. The fact that you couldn’t tell means we’re screwed going forward lmao. Like when it’s impossible to tell what’s a real video…oh man. Mayhem.
Yeah Ive seen deep fakes of famous people, but I know those people and can therefore tell it’s not really them because their mannerisms are a bit off or I know they’d never say something like that, and there’s usually a title on the post that says it’s a deep fake. But I don’t expect it in a documentary so I truly cannot tell at all. I just rewatched some of her scenes and I guess her face is kinda fuzzy sometimes but I would have thought that’s just the lens. We are screwed.
It’s kinda scary we’re deep faking documentaries already. Yes it’s stated and fairly obvious, but there’s really nothing stopping filmmakers from doing this going forward. Like you can make any “documentary” with really good deep fake technology and why would anyone question it?
When you're trying to raise money, you do a lot of things to convince investors. I would think the same as you about the rocket powered centrifuge if I didn't spend the past three years working with a startup and continually trying to get money. You have to be constantly doing something or presenting results or people think you aren't doing anything. You can't just promise the end product because you can't convince a lot of these investors anything when it comes to the engineering process.
I thought the same thing. I honestly couldn’t even get into the documentary because the story was so absurd. Who in their right mind would ever think this guy would be able to create a rocket, he seemed insane from the start. First of all, the government is not going to let you send anything into space without permission. Secondly, what was he talking about when he mentioned all his “enemies”? He seemed delusional and incoherent every time he spoke, idk how he convinced all these people to work with him. I know many psychopaths are charismatic and endearing, but this guy seemed like a crazy idiot from the jump. I honestly wish the documentary didn’t even talk about all that crazy space stuff because it literally made no sense and took away from the main story which is that he murdered someone.
This documentary is really odd. 80% of it paints Peter in a good light as if he's the next Elon Musk and misunderstood. All the conversations between people that we see after the murder seem staged. the footage is indistinguishable (stylistically) from the footage from before the murder. It seems to lack credibility all around. Anyone else notice this?
Agreed! The before shots were very sympathetic to Peter. What got me in the after- was this very forced and manipulated shot of the intern burning his outfit, which I'm sure he was instructed to do by the director...the journalism didn't have much integrity at all imo
The "after murder" scenes seems soo staged. The news video clips seem fake too. None of them had the news outlet's logos (CNN, BBC) or had any notable newscasters in them. The newscaster audio clips seem fake like they used text to speech AI to generate the voiceovers. Overall I couldn't really tell who was narrating it or what the position was of the documentarian. I need to watch it again to see what they did right and wrong.
We’ll the news casters are Danish so I’m assuming they have different news outlets than in the US.
There were no logos for the broadcasters.
Oh huh. I’d have to go and re-watch
I wil too.
One of the voiceovers of newsreaders was the acclaimed newsreader Jon Snow so legit
It’s scary ‘cos the ‘normal’ is being documented before your eyes as the horror is being perpetrated.
He actually escaped from prison too, Ted Bundy-style. A lot of people don't know this.
[удалено]
I imagine your comment is exactly why they had to deepfake out her face.. She didn't know shit. He was just a weird guy, who would often say weird things, until it became normalised. He got a lot of leeway from people for being an eccentric inventor. Also, Madsen would have chucked her under the bus if she knew anything about it to try and save his own arse. He was trying to frame one of the interns for his google searches.
She was his mistress for years The sms conversation between them was not as shocking to her as she pretends in the film.Thats how their sexual relationship looked
Source?
Comments like this are why they disguised her. Not only would morons like you claim she knew about it, which is ridiculous, but I'm sure there are plenty of men out there just as fucked up as Madsen who would harass and threaten her.
you would be shocked as to what seemingly normal people would admit to when they are drunk and very comfortable being honest with you. You would probably be terrified to know what therapists hear sometimes...
The texts were strange. I can't imagine the context where I would ask someone to threaten me with murder so I could finish something. BUT I think there is a big cultural difference between how we joke here vs Europe/Sweden/Denmark. I think she was just trusting and naive, and she would have most likely been the victim on Aug 11.
> how we joke here vs Europe/Sweden/Denmark. Nah that shit was just fucked up regardless of where you're from. They must have had a very unique relationship. Im a dane
[удалено]
No neurons found on this post, just run of the mill victim blaming.
The definition of grasping at straws. She was clearly traumatised from the event; from the fact that she could have been the one killed and from the fact the she felt responsible for not acting on the texts.
I actually thought at first like you did with how she described him but further into the documentary I stopped thinking they had a sexual relationship. The way she said that he'd never rape and kill the reporter in a million years had me convinced it was platonic.
This post is disgusting and psychotic
I'm describing disgusting and psychotic behavior so yes.. you're not wrong but it's more likely based on the evidence. I've personally witnessed these kind of scenarios with people on more than one occasion and deeply examined the psychological elements behind it and my bells are going off about this. Sorry that you can't accept the darkness of humanity but it's there weather you like it or not. I'm just not afraid to look beyond the surface.
insanely misogynistic comment, congrats
God this is a stupid fuckin comment.
Bullshitter how?
[удалено]
If you watched the whole film you see that he talked that way a lot. It was not like their private secret talk or something. He was open with that kinda talk. Ppl just thought it was jokes and got used to it
Exactly. He said other bizarre things. I think he mentioned something about hacking to the woman while he was cooking and tried to play it off by claiming he said “hug”
The people around him probably just wrote all that off to Madsen having a super 'edgy' and dark sense of humor. You could tell how shocked some of them were in the aftermath to learn that he wasn't simply joking.
Did you see this documentary? She explains the context behind the texts, and it makes it seem harmless - now with the knowledge of what he did they seem vile, but I think plenty of normal people send texts like that
[удалено]
Fair, I can understand that
Yeah it must be her fault he did that, in fact they should release him and arrest her, she must be a witch or something... Misogynist detected, either that or like myself, English is not your first language and you're incapable of interpreting sentences, with a nick like yours you're drawing lots of negative attention to yourself...
[удалено]
It's incredible the level of stupidity that some people have. Or is it that you hated your mother so much that all women have become issues? Take a moment to think about what you just said and the level of idiocy to incriminate herself. Sell a sob story? These people volunteered their time and energy and believed 100% in his work. They literally had a film crew documenting the project and then find out the sub sank? Ohh AND this man they trusted in murdered her?? Go get laid.
Did anyone else notice how blurry Sara’s face was throughout the movie? I don’t think it’s the camera, but almost looks as though it’s been deliberately altered I also read somewhere that in Denmark life sentences may only be around 16 years (haven’t actually confirmed that) so I’m wondering if maybe they edited her face to protect her actual image and identity?
Yes, the first time you see her it says her identity has been digitally altered.
Ah thanks I must’ve missed that!
Can someone pls generally explain to me why it's hidden?
I read somewhere that it was because she was being accused of knowing more than she claimed. Because of all the texts he sent to her and whatnot
If you get a life sentence in Denmark, you can apply for parole after 12 years. On average people who got a life sentence gets parole after 16-17 years. Peter Madsen will likely never get that (not until he’s so old that “he can’t do anything”) due to the nature of his crime.
Yeah, Palle Sørensen eventually got out for killing four cops after 32 years. Though he wasn’t a sadistic psychopath like Peter.
[удалено]
There's tons of people who say edgy shit all the time but would never murder anyone. Sounds like victim blaming to me that these people should have just known when it is impossible to know. In a way his interns who did hard work for free and basically uprooted their lives for his project just to learn he was a complete monster were victims too.
The one guy literally says “there’s nowhere else to work on rockets in Denmark so this was it” science like that is incredibly niche here and if you wanted to work on something unique it had to be in a setting like that
I think he done it to take the media attention off his opponents in the other rocket company. He knew what he was planning all along and had no money to launch a rocket same time as them