It's a one sided telling of the story. How do we not know the opposite had taken place and Mr. Finger was taking credit? I don't know but opposition is never introduced. The documentarian makes this too much about him in parts. He accuses that Mr. Cane was an attention seeker but he is just as guilty. Most modern documentarians are guilty of this as well. The granddaughter seems like she's an attention seeker as well. Like most people today, notoriety is king. If this one sided story is true, it's sad and a definite injustice. But it would have been great if both sides were explored. I assume Mr. Cane has living relatives. Would have been the responsible thing to reach out.
😑 😒
😑 😒