MovieChat Forums > Cat Dancers (2008) Discussion > They should lock this Freak up.

They should lock this Freak up.

posted 15 years ago by larpine
19 replies | jump to latest

After watching the documentary, I'm only surprised that Ron Holiday wasn't charge with at least Manslaughter. The Killer Cat, Jupiter, was in Holiday control when the Cat killed both of it's victims.
The fact that the Cat was not down put down after it killed it first victim is absolutely unbelievable, but I felt Holiday was guilty when he discribes the incidents that lead to his wife's death.
Holiday leads Jupiter to his wife, who is intoxicated which he claims he did not know, and at the moment his wife is brutally killed, his response was, "Jupiter, you're inbread".
Holiday is involved in a threeway bi-sexual relationship between him, his wife and his friend. I believe he killed them both and I wish the film maker would have included information in the documentary in regard insurance pay offs and estates.
The movie is a very interesting watch, however, the only good that can come from it is possibly someone in the Florida may watch this who has the power to open an investigation. Murder, after all, has no statue of limitation. Then again, it's not likely, for Holiday has distroyed all the evidence.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] andalongcameaspider 15 years ago

How asinine,it wasn't murder either time. Did you even watch the movie? What a stupid conclusion. When you handle tigers and you get killed it is called an assumed risk.

[–] Fillumfan 15 years ago

Negligent homocide maybe? If the tiger has already killed one person and is unmanageable how do you lead your drunken, emaciated wife to it, and bring it out of the cage to be with her? He said the autopsy showed she was two times the legal limit of intoxication. He had no idea. He couldn't smell it? She went from 119 pounds to 89, stated she wanted to die, and he brings this killer tiger out of the cage over to her?

[–] andalongcameaspider 15 years ago

This lack of understanding in regards to legal definitions is exactly why people should not represent themselves in court. No crime was committed in this case. If he had been the drunk one it may have been a different story. Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea. The State's Attorney office would have pressed charges if there was a case.

[–] larpine 15 years ago

STFU Andalongcameaspider and your the stupid one for missing the point. Legal merit is not really the question here as much as to state the obvious that some degree of Quilt or liabiltity exist. An honest point considering Holiday goes through the entire movie protraying himself as a victim. Even in the reviews of this film, the question is brought up regarding the filmaker's belief of the integrity of his subject.

Holiday tells us that his wife was trying to take her life, but all we have is his word that this was true. Also, How could his wife be twice the legal alcohol limit and Holiday not know it??

I'm sure there is not enough here to make an legal case,, but then again, not quilty is by no means the same as being innocent.

[–] andalongcameaspider 15 years ago

I have stupid logic? Oh you are right, he must be QUILTY!! What is quilty? Learn the language. What is his motive to kill his wife? You really aren't smart enough to watch big person movies, stick with Power Rangers or Doogal, something more on your level...

[–] larpine 15 years ago

Go to Hell andalongcameaspider and keep your *beep* away from me.

[–] DeFajio 15 years ago

"Jupiter, you're inbread".

What, like a sandwich?

[–] larpine 14 years ago

Exactly..Let's say the man was not guilty, but he was by no means innocent.

[–] stu_157 14 years ago

How did you get such a view from that comment?

Sayonara, not to be confused with cyanide, which is, of course, goodbye in any language.

[–] mike-1730 14 years ago

Ron is a self centered freak, purely occupied with his own pathetic ego.
The fact that he had his so called beloved Cats put down says it all.
He could have got a place for them in any number of rescue centres, or a Zoo.
Most of his tears were Crocodile tears, I found him loathsome.

[–] larpine 14 years ago

"How did you get such a view from that comment? "

Because it was the moment when Ron's story lost any chance of creditablity.

[–] Gong5 13 years ago

at least you learned to write guilty instead o quilty you *beep* in g moron, these guys were handing cats for decades, and you can't spell or pronounce guilty you f.u. kc tard.

[–] so_cold 13 years ago

But Ron isn't completely innocent.

[–] Gong5 13 years ago

yes he is according to anyone else but yourself, so I think you should submit your evidence is you have any (which apparently you don't) or refrain from abusing him with such comments. that's the fair thing to do.

[–] so_cold 13 years ago

How can you believe Ron's one sided egostistical crap?

[–] Gong5 13 years ago

Well it's obviously one sided because he is the only survivor in this triangle. Is that his fault too? Should he resurrect them so we can here a multi sided story? Should he develop dissociative disorder so we can hear more sides from one person?

I am sure you would like to hear more people chiming in. But these people were outsiders of sorts to begin with, so it's not easy to find more people chiming in.

[–] so_cold 13 years ago

Agreed but there had to be one person that either Chuck or Joy talked to without Ron there.

[–] Gong5 13 years ago

yeah there must have been someone, I wonder if the director chose not to include them in this highly stylized documentary for aesthetic reasons what with the abundance of older footage, Ron's story and the 70 or so min. documentary time frame. We did hear Chuck's mom on the phone though, but this wasn't cbs and 48 hours after all but a film with aesthetic aspirations that seemed to take priority over investigative reporting considerations. Film and theatre directors have a tendency to prefer elliptical and artistic story telling to accuracy which is unfortunate for anyone wanting to dig their teeth (pun not intended) in a thicker slice of the truth here.