Please allow me interject something here. First, Unsolved Mysteries is a GREAT show. I used to watch it religiously. ( I was also a great fan of the "In Search Of" series with Spock.) What I have come to realize over the years, however, is that they would not have had a show if they gave info on mysteries, then followed that by critical analysis. It was purely for entertainment and NOT for research. Sure, they may have interviewed all sorts of people supporting the Dorothy Allison story, but they may NOT have interviewed others who would have given a different story. I'm not saying they did this as I have no proof on that particular episode, but logic tells me that if they had interviewed those who dispute the story, they wouldn't have had a program and they were, remember, in the business to make a profit.
Take, for example, the Bermuda Triangle. They showed an episode on the mysteries of this area. Charles Berlitz wrote a NYT Bestseller and sold millions. Since then, however, this whole mystery is being exposed as nothing (at least from us "skeptics" point of view). (We can start another thread if need be so I don't want to go into detail on the Triangle here.)
The point I'm trying to make is that even though there was a TV show, a book, and interviews, that does not mean you have heard the entire story or that many of the things you have heard haven't been embelished.