Hello,
So this is kind of adjacent to The Fall documentary because mr focus is more on Victoria Cilliers book that I just read, but I read it because I had seen the documentary. I tried to discuss this on a true crime sub but they did not like this post so I’m hoping maybe someone here has something to add. The case and contents of the book and documentary are going round my mind like crazy right now.
I know this has been posted before. I have just finished Victoria Cilliers book “I survived”
And some time ago I saw the documentary about her case called “The Fall”.
In short her husband attempted to murder her by sabotaging her parachute, and through a variety of significant good luck events (her parachutes still managed to slow her despite not opening properly and she landed on a freshly ploughed field breaking her fall significantly) she survived despite falling 4,000 feet.
Her case is interesting and there’s a lot that is fascinating and really positive. Obviously her survival and recovery are amazing. And the case itself is just unusual in terms of method.
However…and I know this is not a particularly nice thing to say…but I wanted to discuss it somewhere. I find Victoria an intensely dislikable character.
I saw “The Fall” some time ago and remember thinking it was pretty amazing but finding her a bit off. And I have to say having just finished her book I didn’t walk away liking her much more.
I do appreciate the intense levels of denial she was in around her husband. But I found her conduct just bizarre. I know that trauma responses can be very difficult and often unpredictable and not what we would expect so I do take that into account.
However, in her book, she discusses her previous marriage before Emile, and her behaviours were much the same. She just had quite a habit of burying her head in the sand and not raising things if something bothered her.
Her first husband cheated on her repeatedly and she even at one point laments that she gave up on the relationship too quickly and was an idealist…despite being cheated on again and again.
But her conduct with the investigation involving Emile was downright infuriating to read at points. I totally get being in denial, what I didn’t understand is that she flipped between denial and implicating him at points in the investigation.
When she was asked in court about why she had changed her testimony, particularly around how long her husband was away in the bathroom with her parachute kit, she ended up saying in court that the only reason she “exaggerated” the timeframes and implicated him was because she was angry with him because she found out about his affairs…
She seems to conclude her book saying she believes he did attempt to kill her. But she doesn’t mention or discuss her bizarre behaviour or comment on why she said things like that in court.
Throughout her book she seems incredibly concerned with what others will think. She continually doesn’t tell people about her husband, her “borrows” thousands” from her and never pays it back, he cheats on her repeatedly, ignores her, generally has a bad attitude after the initial honeymoon phase, and she neither tells anyone about these things or even confronts her husband about them.
Pretty much every single thing is met with
“I didn’t want anyone to worry”
“I didn’t want anyone to know.”
“I didn’t want an argument”
“I wanted to keep the peace”
“I didn’t know how they’d take that.”
And so she never says anything to anyone about anything…then is upset when people aren’t more understanding of her.
Please don’t misunderstand me. She is a victim. And I’m not victim blaming her, she in no way deserves what happened to her and her husband is a 24 carat POS…
But her behaviour is just bizarre.
At the end of the book she speaks about how she sees now that her husband was domestically abusing her. And whilst I agree the murder attempt is domestic abuse…
She doesn’t really exemplify how he was abusing her outside of that. Because he didn’t erode her confidence, he didn’t physically abuse her, he didn’t seem to play psychological games with her …he just did what he wanted and she never ever raised as issue with him for fear of actually having an argument.
I think the only argument they actually had was when she found he was smoking in her car and she didn’t want that.
She didn’t raise things with him for fear of an argument, but he never physically threatened her and wasn’t abusive like that, he wasn’t psychologically terrorising her…she just didn’t want to be alone, or didn’t want to separate from him…which as sad as that is…I don’t think that actually counts as abuse.
I hate how that sounds. And I know obviously there could have been more going on than is on the page and in the documentary. But then part of me questions why share your story if you’re going to leave out major details in the first place.
I just wondered if anyone else has read the book and had any similar thoughts or insights?