This was a strange case and even stranger that this former New York City policeman and his parents would allow themselves to be filmed in such detail to complete this documentary. Not surprisingly there was no formal comments from his former employer, the FBI, the NYPD, nor from his ex-wife and/or her family.
On the other hand, Gilberto Valle, is under a no contact order from his ex-wife, and has been unable to see his daughter. I think the punishment fits his crime.
There should be a law whereby certain individuals are banned for life from accessing anything on the internet. We could call it Valle's Law.
I give this documentary a decent 7 out of 10 IMDb rating.
Thought Crimes: The Case of the Cannibal Cop
2015
Action / Crime / Documentary
Thought Crimes: The Case of the Cannibal Cop
2015
Action / Crime / Documentary
Keywords: woman director
Plot summary
Dubbed "The Cannibal Cop," Gilberto Valle was convicted in March 2013 of conspiring to kidnap and eat young women. Valle argued it was all a fantasy; the prosecution's narrative convinced jurors otherwise. Valle was facing a possible life sentence when filmmaker Erin Lee Carr began visiting him in prison. After 22 months behind bars, his conviction was overturned in a stunning reversal. The film was there for his release and subsequent house arrest to examine a life arrested. But the question remains: given the chance, would he, could he, have done it? "Thought Crimes" unravels the conflicting stories of a potentially dangerous young man and the unexpected consequences of our online activity.
Uploaded by: FREEMAN
Director
Top cast
Tech specs
720p.WEB 1080p.WEBMovie Reviews
I wonder if NYPD has re-evaluated their hiring process and psychological evaluation process?
Very interesting court documentary
Gilberto Valle, a New York cop, is a member on a website dealing with sexual fetishes. Together with two other guys they talk about his plans to kidnap 24 women, roast them and eat them. He also makes preparations. But at the same time they all specifically say that it's pure fantasy and none of them actually mean that. The place where he says he has a big oven is actually a basement with laundry machines. He is trialed for conspiracy (not attempt, which is totally different).
Where is the limit between fantasy and actual intent to commit a crime? Can you judge someone based only on his deviant thoughts? Why is it OK for a writer such as Stephen King to write horrible stories about murders, but not for a "regular" guy to have fantasies? This is a very unusual case and a very interesting documentary.
If you're interested to know what happened with the trial after the documentary, you can read about it on Wikipedia.
Highly recommended
Just OK
An interesting true crime case that could've been told in 45mins rather than an hour and a half.