dedlin-696-890150
Joined Mar 2010
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews1
dedlin-696-890150's rating
I have been viewing this story as a TV mini-series here in New Zealand, where it made significant news due to relevant local connections.
Whilst I cannot fault the work of the principal actors/actresses in the story, I do feel that a number of liberties have been taken in its production, leading it somewhat askew from the details of the events as they actually occurred.
I refer here to the attempted murder of Ms. Drumm - Webster's second wife, in New Zealand, in 1999. From my recollection of the incident, the couple were driving in to the bank at which point Webster veered the car over two or three lanes of motorway before the car left the road as he pretended to be having a heart attack, not as the movie portrayed it, which involved parking up at a forest park where Webster was intending to torch the vehicle with Ms. Drumm inside.
A further anomaly here is the funds Webster misappropriated from Ms. Drumm's account. The story clearly portrayed the amount of funds in the account as $240,000, yet in historical news reports this is stated as $140,000.
I recall reading somewhere that some of the key witnesses were consulted prior to the making of this drama, so why did the production team find it so necessary to distort the facts in a case that will be remembered by so many for the events portrayed on-screen moreso than those given in the distantly remembered media coverage?
Whilst I cannot fault the work of the principal actors/actresses in the story, I do feel that a number of liberties have been taken in its production, leading it somewhat askew from the details of the events as they actually occurred.
I refer here to the attempted murder of Ms. Drumm - Webster's second wife, in New Zealand, in 1999. From my recollection of the incident, the couple were driving in to the bank at which point Webster veered the car over two or three lanes of motorway before the car left the road as he pretended to be having a heart attack, not as the movie portrayed it, which involved parking up at a forest park where Webster was intending to torch the vehicle with Ms. Drumm inside.
A further anomaly here is the funds Webster misappropriated from Ms. Drumm's account. The story clearly portrayed the amount of funds in the account as $240,000, yet in historical news reports this is stated as $140,000.
I recall reading somewhere that some of the key witnesses were consulted prior to the making of this drama, so why did the production team find it so necessary to distort the facts in a case that will be remembered by so many for the events portrayed on-screen moreso than those given in the distantly remembered media coverage?