Patrick McManus talks about non-violence John Wayne Gacy show ‘Devil in Disguise’

Spoiler alert: This story contains spoilers for “Devil in Disguise: John Wayne Gacy,” now available on Peacock.

When it comes to serious crime shows, especially TV shows about serial killers, most series have common elements. That’s violence. Some claim that they focus on the stories of the victims, but they also sometimes feature brutal depictions of murders and extensive backstories of the killers.

When Patrick McManus began his journey to create a series about the John Wayne Gacy case, it was the opposite of what he wanted to do. In fact, he refused to appear on the show unless it was strictly about the victims, and did not show any of the actual murders of Gacy’s 33 known victims.

Below, McManus reflects on initially turning down the series, working closely with GLAAD throughout the process, and reaching out to the families of the five victims, as well as a competitor in the true crime genre: Ryan Murphy.

You’ve appeared in several true crime series, most recently two seasons of “Doctor Death.” What specifically drew you to John Wayne Gacy’s crimes and his victims?

Simply put, I wasn’t drawn to the work. I said no several times before saying yes because I couldn’t foresee what it would be like. What I had in front of me at the time was another serial killer story, and I didn’t want to do another circular story. I’m so grateful that Universal and Peacock have backed me. I said I would do it if I could focus on the victims, the police, the lawyers, the families, but when I told them I didn’t know what that meant. It wasn’t until I got the room up and running that I realized I could create these short stories. I pitched it to the studio and asked, “Are you okay with me doing a story that has nothing to do with John Wayne Gacy, except for a little light shit here and there?” They said yes. I thought he was lying, but he was very cooperative from the beginning.

How do you think viewers would react if you didn’t show actual violence?

I’m really interested to see how this turns out. We know that certain ways of tilting the story into something that might seem a little more sordid or gratuitous work. I don’t know if a show that attracts people but doesn’t depict a murder case would work. Or, I don’t know if a show that slows down and just talks about hope or tragedy, dreams lost or found, love, or what it’s like to be a sex worker in Chicago in the ’70s would be more successful. I don’t know if it will work, but it was definitely worth a try.

Can you talk about the research process?

All of our research started with documentaries on NBC News and Peacock. In other words, they had an amazing treasure trove of research. We’ve created a range of books that you can rely on for information and inspiration. In addition to that, we have our civilian researcher, Patrick Murphy. He produced thousands of pages of research drawn from court documents, interviews, and cross-examinations.

From the beginning, we wanted to make every effort to reach all surviving family members and even the few surviving victims. So a list was compiled from many hours of research that I had nothing to do with, and I tracked down the home address, email address, and phone number of everyone we could find. In the end, only five people connected. We reached out to them knowing full well that they might be angry or hurt. The purpose of this issue is not for people to bless us. The point of this is to have their opinion heard, and it doesn’t interfere with the production of the show, but we wanted them to have the ability to tell us what they really thought and guide us as far as they could if they wanted. I can say that out of the 5 people we connected with, 5 of them wished us luck.

The trial was not shown at all. Have you ever discussed that as well?

No, I don’t like trials. “Doctor Death” is an example of strategically showing a trial because it was known from the beginning that surgery would be shown for the first time during the trial. In “The Devil in Disguise”, this trial was very familiar and well-worn.

The show’s music, composed by Leopold Roth and Nick Tuba, includes 33 songs, the number of known victims. Whose idea was it?

This was actually a late conversation with the composers, trying to figure out how to score the show in a way that honors the victims. Much of their work, and the reason I work with them over and over again, is because they are excellent at what they do. I don’t just mean scoring the shows, I mean fundamentally understanding the vision of what each show is. Full credit to them for listening to my ramblings and creating something so special with our score.

I know most of your writers’ room is queer, and you worked closely with GLAAD on this as well. What was that process like?

I knew early on in the process of developing the show, even before I got into the writers’ room, that there would be some part of the story about the underlying homophobia that goes on through the investigation of John Wayne Gacy. It was really important to me to have GLAAD as a partner. They looked at our brief and agreed to advise us on the script. They wanted to see the final product before formalizing the partnership, so they didn’t agree to serve as formal advisors at that time, which I completely understood. But I have to say, I don’t think I was nervous about anything during this process other than waiting for GLAAD to see the cut. I remember exactly where I was when I got the call from GLAAD that they were going to be an official and public partner of the show. That’s what I’m most proud of in this whole process. They gave us what we needed to know to tell this story correctly, truthfully, and respectfully.

Let’s take a closer look at formatting. Each episode focuses on a different victim’s story, but I found it interesting that the last two episodes were the stories of David Crum and Jeffrey Rignall (both survivors). How did you arrive at that decision?

With the high school rings tied to the story, there was no way to get rid of the madness, except for Johnny Thicke in the second episode, as it pertained to the order of the story. The David Crum story is difficult because there are many conspiracy theories about David Crum’s complicity in Gacy’s life. It was so contradictory that (prosecutor William) Kunkle decided not to investigate it outside of the moment he was questioning him. But I felt it was important to do the grooming story towards the end. It felt like a perfect fit.

And in the finale, you talked about Jeffrey Rignall.

When I was researching on my own before we had a writers’ room, I knew Rignar would be my last story. I knew this for two reasons. The first was the only story that could adequately encapsulate police neglect and systemic deficiencies. It was a story that fully encompassed all of that. The second reason is very subtle, but I’m not sure everyone understands it because it’s not stated explicitly. Because Jeffrey was part of a threesome, he was very free-spirited and sexually free. He lived life to the fullest. He was just so full of life and love. In the case of John Wayne Gacy, people tried to explain what he did because he came from an alcoholic and abusive father. They might try to explain that it was because he was struggling with his identity.

One thing we wanted to make clear to our viewers is that there are millions of people who suffer under the yoke of abusive parents. And there are millions of people struggling with their identity in the face of cultural bias, institutional bias, school bias, and family bias. However, none of the 33 people were killed. So by showing this life that was very free in every way, and would probably still be appreciated today, you’re making a statement that this queer person is just living life to the fullest and has nothing to do with debauchery.

In the finale, Gacy is only seen smoking with Rignar in his car. Was it a conscious decision not to let him see it?

Yes, but it didn’t start like that. There’s about 23 minutes of footage of Gacy in the scene we filmed. The original scripts were all about the day of his execution, and Gacy appeared in all of them. In the edit, I woke up one Sunday morning and felt it was wrong. I called my editor, Ryan Denmark, and asked if he could cut out Gacy. I said, “I feel like this is my last chance to tell the audience that Gacy is not the center of the story.” He did the cutting and we watched it together on Zoom. As we neared the end, I looked at him and said, “What do you think?” He said, “This is exactly how it should be.” I agree. Then I was afraid to tell Charnas. He saw it and completely understood. He asked me, “Did I get bad grades?” I was like, “No, no, no, your performance is great, but you know what?” He said, “Yes, I understand.” That scene with the answering machine? It’s really good.

Are you planning on watching any other upcoming shows about serial killers? Are you watching the competition?

I would never call them competitors, although I understand why you frame them that way. This is more than just a canning line. I have always believed that art is subjective, whether it’s television, film, dance, painting, or theater. And art has no objectivity. I’m a fan of many other people’s work. I say it clearly. I’m a huge fan of Ryan Murphy. It’s been around since “Nip/Tuck”. What Ryan does is always swing for the fences, and whether or not he strikes out every time is subjective. But more than anything, what Ryan has done from the beginning is that he was one of the first creators and showrunners to really widen the frontage of television and allow people to appear on television who don’t normally look like they belong or come from a certain background, and what he’s done for television deserves a tremendous amount of credit. So this is a long shot that I’m definitely going to check out and check out what he’s doing. Because, subjectively speaking, I’m always intrigued by what he’s doing, whether you like it or not.

This interview has been edited and condensed.