November 7, 2025 • 46 mins
Live from the TenderfootTV booth at CrimeCon – Jodi Tovay (Wisecrack) and Dennis Cooper (Culpable) sit down with Producer Jaime Albright to discuss the central theme of culpability and explore its intricate layers that extend beyond guilt and innocence.
Join them as they pull back the curtain on how systemic failures, particularly within mental health treatment and the justice system, often fuel tragedy and ultimately shape, or hinder, how a case is covered and resolved.
Binge the entire season ad-free. Subscribe to Tenderfoot+ at tenderfootplus.com or on ApplePodcasts.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Wisecrack is released weekly and brought to you absolutely free,
but if you want exclusive bonuses and early access, subscribe
to tenorfoot plus. Enjoy over thirty shows, including Wisecrack, and
over one thousand episodes completely ad free. For more information,
check out the show notes. Enjoy the episode, Hey Wisecrack.
(00:27):
I'm extremely excited to share a conversation that I had
at Denver Crime Con called When Systems Fail Culpability on Trial.
The conversation is myself, producer Jamie Albright, and host of
Culpable Dennis Cooper. We talk about what is a system
failure and how do we, as pretty flawed humans, hold
an unwieldy system to account. Honestly, it was one of
(00:50):
my favorite conversations that we had at Crime Con. Both
Jamie and Dennis are such prose and hearing their perspectives
on the criminal justice system was really I open. If
you're not thoroughly exhausted of me and Ed, we do
hope that you'll join us for an Instagram live Q
and A on Friday, November fourteenth at eight o'clock Eastern
Standard time. It's going to be super informal. You can
(01:13):
just pop on the live and ask your questions or
if you want, you can submit your questions in advance
to at Wisecrack podcast on IG and we'll read and
answer them in real time. There will likely be a
special guest appearance by Ed and my various dogs being
Edie and Mando. So there you go, a real reason
to join the live. Thank you so much, and we'll
(01:33):
talk to you then.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
When systems fail culpability on trial.
Speaker 3 (01:43):
Okay, before we get too deep, Cash tell you because
I to get to talk to you. Amazing last night
and I cannot wait to listen to wisecrack.
Speaker 4 (01:52):
Seriously. I mean, I'm so moved. It was a good turnout.
Speaker 1 (01:55):
It was a yeah, really was Oh I'm so glad.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
Well we've had nothing but positive feedback here at the booth,
So congratulations.
Speaker 1 (02:04):
Thank you so much. I appreciate that.
Speaker 2 (02:07):
So our panel today is when systems fail Culpability on Trial,
and we're joined today by Dennis Cooper, host of Culpable,
writer producer host all of that let me make sure
I say that, and Jody Tovey, producer of Wisecrack, as
well as the individual who found this powerful story. So
(02:28):
both of you have new releases this month. How does
it feel after working so long and so hard to
share this story with the world. Will start with Jody.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
It feels incredible, but it also feels I'm very tired. Well,
it's exhausting and very exciting, and you know, it took
almost almost nine years to get this out there for people.
The crime that we're talking about in wisecrack happened in
twenty fifteen, so it feels like even an even better
(02:59):
opper tunity to share with everybody just because we've been
sitting on the story for a second. So it's great
to share, yeah, danis.
Speaker 4 (03:07):
Yeah for me.
Speaker 3 (03:08):
You know, it's funny because people here asks like how
long do you spend on these cases? When you look
at them and always feel so extreme, saying like, you know,
on average, i'd say probably two years, maybe sometimes a
little less. Granted they're they're with you till the end.
You know, you follow them along, they'll be a part
of me forever. But I hear nine, you know years
(03:29):
or whatever, and I think like, wow, now that, I mean,
that's almost a lifetime.
Speaker 4 (03:34):
That's crazy.
Speaker 3 (03:36):
So sorry to pivot the question because I'm just curious
fan boying, Now, how long did you know of that story?
Speaker 4 (03:42):
Is it nine?
Speaker 3 (03:42):
Years or is that just when are you using that
as a reference of when the crime happened?
Speaker 1 (03:46):
I met, Yes, nine years was when the crime happened.
I met ed the following year when he performed his
set at the Fringe Festival. Okay, and so, and you know, honestly,
it just took I knew it was the thing. I
knew it was a story that needed to be shared,
but because it was such an unusual story, a lot
of people said no. Yeah, so there was a lot
of nos before Tenderfoot came in and said yes, we're
(04:08):
interested and kind of saw how you can take those
two feelings of laughter and drama and sadness and how
closely those feelings live. So yeah, yeah, it was Yeah,
it was a lifetime. That's not it's not inaccurate.
Speaker 4 (04:21):
That is wild. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (04:22):
So well, I'm glad that that all worked out. Yeah
for me, Like I for season three, I'll just reference
that I've been following it for over two years now,
and it's you know, still unfolding, Like I have stuff
I need to do and catch up on when I
get out of here, So you know, that's just the
nature of things. And then you know, I look back
now I can reflect on season one that was I
(04:44):
started following I think in twenty eighteen, so so I've.
Speaker 4 (04:48):
Almost reached my nine year status on that one.
Speaker 3 (04:50):
You know, I'm still I just did a follow up
with the mother in that case just a month ago, so,
you know, like I said, it's these things are a long,
ongoing journey to try and find justice or resolution for
these victims.
Speaker 4 (05:04):
But you know, we love doing it.
Speaker 2 (05:07):
Yeah, And these are both tough cases in different ways.
And so when you share the story and you're wanting
to know kind of what the reaction from people will be,
what's that like for you as producers?
Speaker 1 (05:22):
Well, you first, you've been through so many seasons.
Speaker 4 (05:24):
To see the reaction from listeners.
Speaker 3 (05:27):
Yeah, yeah, it's always special. I mean, you know, and
seeing reviews online or getting direct messages on social media,
those types of things can be so moving. And I'm
so thankful that this community is so passionate about this
stuff that they care enough to do those things and
(05:49):
care enough to tell you, hey, maybe do something different
next time.
Speaker 4 (05:53):
Maybe you know, I didn't love this part or what ever.
Speaker 3 (05:55):
And we need that criticism too, Like, I never want
to think that I'm got this figured out, you know, Uh,
in every case and every story is different. But but yeah,
I I love seeing that stuff. I'm not I'm not
an overly confident person, and so to be totally honest,
I love nothing more than to see that positive reaction
(06:16):
from from audience and and probably nothing beats being at
a place like this and actually getting to have one
on one interactions with people and and see them light
up and think like, oh.
Speaker 4 (06:27):
My gosh, like you're you're the host of this show.
Speaker 3 (06:30):
And you know, I'd be lying if I said that
didn't make me feel feel really good.
Speaker 4 (06:34):
So I love to see that feedback.
Speaker 3 (06:36):
And uh, to help segue over to you, Jody, I've
I've loved watching, you know, kind of vicariously at the
reactions to wise Crack so far, because it's just been
very resounding. And I've been in that position, you know,
seeing a show climb up charts and seeing all the
good feedback, and I'm just I'm just so happy for
for all of you all and your your team, because
I know how much work's probably gone under that.
Speaker 1 (06:58):
I I probably have the least experience interacting here with
crime con people. I mean, I'm getting information literally live
right now from the booth like, we love the show
and it feels great. It feels good. I do think
that's what's interesting though about this genre in general, is
that they will give you notes, but they also will
absolutely give you your props and say that really moved me,
(07:21):
that was touching. And I can't say the same about
other styles of podcasting or other forms of media. So
I think that in crime con particularly to like put
faces to the comments, I think is something super special.
And I think that at least for our show, since
it has a live performance element to it, where there's
a stand up comedian, Ed talks about his experience. You know,
it's great to watch people in the audience reacting real time,
(07:45):
as we just said, probably off microphone, but it was.
It's really rewarding to see that real time feedback. It's nice,
and you know, and everybody everyone's so different too, you know.
It's I looked out last night when during our Q
and A and I all that, you know, people looked,
some people were confused, and I think they were trying
to process how they felt about it, because people were laughing,
(08:09):
people were crying. Ed's had people run up on stage
and give him a hug in the middle of the set,
people have these very emotional responses to Ed's story and
to Ed in general, just because he's a nice guy
and really cool. But yeah, it's very rewarding. It feels
really nice.
Speaker 3 (08:23):
Can I see one more thing on that? Just in
case I don't have the chance to connect with him.
I talked to him briefly last night, just because I
just really wanted to give him, you know, his props
and tell him how moved I was by the performance
last night. But if you feel comfortable, can you speak
at all on what it's felt like maybe for for
Ed to see this reaction totally, He's.
Speaker 1 (08:47):
Very hard on himself, so if people I think that
his currency is laughs, but his story is both laughs
and tears, and so to be I think that, you know,
he's also trying to process real time that feedback as well.
But I mean, I think that he's people love him
in America in general. I think that he's and he's
(09:09):
also such a lovely, kind person as well, and so
I think he's used to, like I'm he just used
to fans and reception that's really positive. So I think
being here and receiving that is great, And I you know,
I don't want to. I don't want to speak for
him too much, but I think that this show is
so different, and I don't want to speak as a
comedian because I'm most certainly not, but there's there's a
(09:32):
lot of feelings going on in the show as well,
and so you're not you know, when you're used to
people just like bent over sobbing for laughing, and you
don't see people doing that immediately. I think it can
be confusing too, but I think it's because they're confused. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (09:45):
Yeah, it's an emotional rollercoaster. Yeah, someone said that this morning,
and I thought that's the perfect way describe it. And
I love that Ed was vulnerable at the end, and
I think that that's reason that Tenderfoot saw this as
so powerful. It's a different way to deliver a very
important story as well. And so both Wisecrack and Culpable
(10:09):
take a look at culpability in very different ways. With Culpable,
it's ongoing questions, often unanswered. With Wisecrack, there is resolution,
but still questions about culpability. So I want to talk
a little bit about that. What do you think when
with that question or statement, just.
Speaker 3 (10:27):
The various forms of you knowlpability for culpable. Yeah, well
that was like the cool thing with with coming up
with you know that that title for the series was
you know I say sometimes like it can seem like
such a very direct word. A lot of people hear
that and they just assume like it's more of like
(10:49):
this finger pointing, like you know, who's to blame for this?
And absolutely like in terms of finding justice and resolution
a case, like someone has to be to blame. So
that is an element of it, but it was also
a way to you know, keep a somewhat broad series
that can touch on so many different things.
Speaker 5 (11:09):
You know.
Speaker 3 (11:10):
The first series was focused on, you know, was this
a suicide versus a murder and exploring both of those
and you know, to to give an example, a real
example there that was that challenged me was you know,
when when everything felt like it was leaning in the
direction of homicide, I got I received these these text messages.
Speaker 4 (11:33):
That have been on earthed from from the victim that
you know.
Speaker 3 (11:37):
I think the easiest way to label it would be,
you know, suicidal like texts, you know, threats of you know,
not being happy with life and you know, I, you know,
threatening to harm myself. And this was years removed from
when the crime happened, but it's still opened that door
to like, you know, I didn't realize that the victim
(11:58):
had this going on, and so that was tough. You know,
it's like, wow, well we need to include this, which
you know is hard because there's always that element with
the family too and you know, one to protect them.
But it was, it was it was relevant, and it
kind of you know, moved the needle in a different
direction and it needed to be part of the story.
So it's looked different with with every case, but with culpability,
(12:21):
I just wanted to have a way to look at
all the different elements of that from from the justice
system and how it may fail people to you know,
mental health issues and how that could lead to.
Speaker 4 (12:34):
To some of these tragedies we come across.
Speaker 3 (12:36):
I mean, on case review, we've explored you know, things
like as intricate as like Castle Lull and as far
as like you know, crimes that happen on your front doorsteps.
So you know, I want to be able to explore
every single avenue because I think at the end of
the day, there's so many things that can tie into
to that term.
Speaker 1 (12:56):
There's I think that's a great way to say it,
which is there's obviously lead to the you know, for
all of our cases, there's it's an open and shut case, right,
you know that that's what they is, that what they
say on law and orders for a minute. But but
there's shades of culpability and there's systems in place that
don't do great service to some people. We don't set
(13:18):
people up for success in many ways, and I think
that that's something that really resonates with me about what
you're saying. Particularly for the murder that we talk about
Brett Rodgers in Wisecrack, there's a big question about what
his mental health state was. In his mental state when
he left the scene of the crime, was it a
(13:40):
crime of passion? Was even in his right mind at
that point if you ask the criminal justice system, the
answer is he absolutely was. He was unable to be
declared incapacitated in any way and was tried as an
average person. My instincts, having now researched the case, I
feel the opposite. But also in the same way. You know,
(14:02):
in the UK we have social they have socialized medicine,
which is a huge piece of this story that we unfortunately,
you know, give me some more episodes, dontled. I'd love
to go into it, and I'd love to me to
help me, truthfully, But like, I do think that that
is one of those things that made a very big
impact in our story that we need to continue to
explore how how certain certain organizations fail and when, and
(14:29):
also they're not inclined to help. There's numbers they have
to meet, you know, we have to get people in,
we have to get people out. If we give you
this diagnosis, then this is the chain reaction that we
will then have to pick up for the rest of
your natural life. So we're loathed to give you said diagnosis.
We're to load to give you access to X, Y
(14:49):
and Z, and so I think that's a big piece
of this story that I think we still want to explore. Truthfully.
Speaker 4 (14:57):
Yeah, I was just gonna just to add to that.
Speaker 3 (14:59):
Like with the season three specifically, it's been interesting because
again when I did season one, I felt very surprised,
sort of blindsided to realize like, oh, there's a mental
health element to this, whereas with season three, I was
coming from experience then was kind of excited to look
(15:23):
at a case like Danny's where he was diagnosed bipolar,
he was prescribed lithium, and these things come into the
story as you listen to it, and very much informed
the popular narrative around the town of what probably happened
to him, that you know that he probably did this
(15:44):
to himself in some way. It was you know, he
either took his own life or he had this episode
or had some.
Speaker 4 (15:52):
Sort of drug overdose interaction.
Speaker 3 (15:54):
I mean, it was crazy to me, and it moved
me to want to like really find out what happened
to him, because you know, it just felt like they
had made this bucket there, like it had to be
some one of.
Speaker 4 (16:04):
These things that happened to him.
Speaker 3 (16:06):
He was very imperfect, and his family'd be the first
to tell you that, and I think that very much
informed the narrative there. But interestingly enough, looking at from
the the you know, the authorities perspective is to get
that contrast again, like with Christian Andreacchio's case, it was
forty five minutes open, closed suicide, and I was like.
Speaker 4 (16:27):
It doesn't seem right. You know, I don't come from
that experience.
Speaker 3 (16:29):
You know, maybe that's maybe that's a normal time to
spend an investigation.
Speaker 4 (16:32):
I don't think it seems like enough, so that bothered me.
Speaker 3 (16:35):
But with Danny's case, I mean, they investigated it despite
despite feeling like, you know, it was probably some freak
accidental death or even a suicide.
Speaker 4 (16:44):
They did work that case like it was a homicide.
Speaker 3 (16:46):
And that was an interesting element to dive into because
I didn't expect that when we got the case files.
I I genuinely expected to not see a whole lot
of investigation, not see a lot of hard questions being asked,
those types of things, And I was humbled when I
saw otherwise and realized, like, Okay, they.
Speaker 4 (17:04):
Took this seriously despite the common narrative there.
Speaker 2 (17:07):
Yeah, I remember when you were able to get access
to the interviews and to the docs. I felt surprised
by that because it seemed the case of been forgotten.
Speaker 1 (17:16):
And I think that's when you realize.
Speaker 2 (17:17):
That there's multiple things happening at the same time. So
how do you balance the narrative and storytelling when you're
looking at so many different pieces that might have played
into what occurred.
Speaker 3 (17:32):
Well, it's always a challenge. I mean for me, I
just lean into it as much as possible. You know,
I've always I've always been attracted cases that just they
challenge you, They challenge your view of things, They make
you think of all these different possibilities, and so for me,
I definitely don't shy away from it. If anything, I
jump at those cases usually. I think that's why I
(17:54):
was probably so moved by listening to the performance of
Wisecrack last night, is because I mean, that's just so
up my alley, because I got enough of a taste
of it to realize, like, oh, this is one that
will probably challenge me to the end of how I
feel about how I feel about the victims, how I
feel about the the the perpetrator in that, and these
(18:14):
different things, Like you could tell that there's a lot
more to that story that's going to come out in
the podcast that I'm stoked to to to listen through.
Speaker 4 (18:24):
I just I've always enjoyed those types of things. I
don't want to.
Speaker 3 (18:28):
I don't want to lead anyone to a conclusion, even
though the ultimate goal is to to find the truth
and get resolution. I don't want to tell a story
in a way that's that's pointed or leaned in one
direction that you know everyone's going to come to the
same conclusion at the end. I would rather you know,
give people what they need to to understand the case
and the ins and outs of it, and let them
(18:49):
come to their own conclusion as far as what they
think happened to.
Speaker 4 (18:52):
The victim, who's culpable, uh.
Speaker 3 (18:55):
And and and those various you know, layers of culpability
like that could that could have played into it, you know,
how they feel about the characters and at the victims,
those types of things. You know, I want to keep
people on their toes and kind of let them come
to their own conclusions.
Speaker 4 (19:09):
Through to the end.
Speaker 1 (19:10):
I feel the exact same way. I think the hardest
part of telling these stories. We know what the facts
are if we've done our job. We present obviously what
law enforcement knows and what they're willing to share, and
then you collect the interviews of the personal anecdotes from
the potential victims, eyewitnesses, whatever. But outside of that, I
(19:31):
think the trick is just making sure that you show
all those various shades of interaction within the facts of
the story. It's really hard, you know, it's really hard
because again I don't want to you know, I worked
on this one for a second, and I was the
same way with the roller coaster. What is going on.
I mean, truly, we have a meager six episodes, but
(19:54):
the arc really is do I trust this person? Do
I not trust this person? And then obviously the bigger question,
which is why I did the bully come to Ed's
house that night? What was on his mind? You know,
in some way we're not asking what or who because
we know what and who. It's why and how, and
those questions are much more gray than they are black
(20:16):
and white for the what and who, and so it's hard.
But I also, yeah, it's challenging.
Speaker 4 (20:24):
I like beings. You know, people want to hear.
Speaker 1 (20:27):
I think people want to hear those stories. We are
so far deep into the true crime genre and television,
film and podcasting and storytelling books. We've got narrative nonfiction
and all kinds of things. And the end of the day,
you know, I think that these super fans that we're
with right now, they're interested in those gray areas as
much as they're interested in the black and white, and
(20:48):
so it's it's nice that I think they the fans,
have evolved with the genre and that it's something that
you and I actually like to do.
Speaker 4 (20:56):
Yeah, we prefer those kinds of things. That's a great
way of putting it, for sure.
Speaker 3 (21:00):
You know, for me, I always I never wanted to
tell it in a way that's like I've figured this out,
and here's my presentation on me figuring it out.
Speaker 4 (21:10):
It was more supposed to be a feel.
Speaker 3 (21:13):
Live and in the moment, and you're learning it as
I'm learning it, and come along for the ride with me.
Because there's a lot of very smart people, a lot
of very passionate people in this community who have helped
me tremendously, you know, sending in ideas, tips, those types
of things, and so you know, I always wanted to
make it feel like, you know, hey, armchair detectives like you,
(21:34):
come along for this with me. You know, you're in
this with me. It's not just me telling this this
journey that I was on, like, I want you to
feel a part of it too. So so yeah, I've
always tried to mimic that, you know, as I've done
each season as culpable.
Speaker 5 (21:56):
I hope you're enjoying this episode live from Crime Con.
Want to get aha, I'd start on Crime Con twenty
twenty six in Vegas right now. You can save ten
percent of your tickets with our exclusive promo code. Just
head to crimecon dot com to grab your standard badge
today and use promo code tenderfoot at checkout. Don't wait
locking your spot now for the ultimate true crime experience,
and we'll see you in Las Vegas next May. Now
(22:19):
back to the show.
Speaker 2 (22:25):
So you touched on this a little bit earlier, but
in wise Crag Brett was found legally competent to stand trial. Yes,
did you think that would be the case when you
first learned about the case and did you ever change
your opinion at any point?
Speaker 1 (22:40):
The first thing that I saw once ed told me
the name. So in the set when I first listened
to it in Edinburgh, he used a different name. So
I had to like hunt this person down and become
a stocker myself to find out exactly what this person's
name is. But that moment when you told me his
name is Brett Rodgers, you go to your Google machine
and the first thing you see is all the very
(23:00):
bloody details of the crime. It does not look like
a crime just on the very surface from the three
ten thousand foot view that it is somebody who's of
right in their right mind at that moment, and so
just being very frank, that's what that was my first
instinct when I looked at that. It was across three hours.
(23:21):
It was using like household kitchen knives that would break
and then he'd grab another one, and you know, lots
of defensive wounds. But ultimately the victims, his victims were
you know, very much under the influence. But it made
it a very bloody crime as a result because their
blood was so viscous. It was everywhere. So when you
read the details, you're just like, this doesn't feel like
(23:44):
a planned thing. That was a minimum the first instinct,
and that's kind of and that's how I started into
that process. I mean, just being honest, like you know,
I we try to stay unbiased as possible, but that
was my first thought. And then when you actually look
at the courtroom, to the trial itself, if you just
(24:05):
read the transcripts, didn't know any of the context, you
would one hundred percent believe that this person was also
of sound mind when they did this. But the more
that you talk to his dad, the more that we
talk to everybody who knew him, there there was some
shades of illnesses that might have been undiagnosed. That's just
the reality. But how much does that play into it.
(24:27):
I don't know, yeah, you know, and that's kind of
still the mystery.
Speaker 3 (24:30):
That's the part I'm most excited to follow along with.
I think in that is the probably what will be
I'm assuming an evolving journey around around Brett and your
maybe your thoughts on him or why he did this,
you know, like you said, because it's interesting from my
perspective because more often than not, you know, when I
(24:53):
pick a case, you know, I start with the family,
and you know, for the most part, families are going
to paint the victim and as good of a light
as possible. You know, some are more forthcoming than others,
and some don't hold back. But for the most part,
you're gonna get, you know, a really good image of them.
And I'm sure it's got to be a totally different
(25:16):
animal coming from the different side like you all did
and seeing this, you know, if what you said is true,
as far as starting with the crime scene, it's probably
got to be a challenge to see this, like to
only be able to see this person is probably a
monster off part, just based off this crime scene and
what they did.
Speaker 4 (25:32):
And then you know, to slowly peel.
Speaker 3 (25:34):
Back the layers and we realize like, huh, you know,
there's there's a lot more to his story there that probably.
I mean, I guess I have to imagine that'd be
a challenge, because I know it is on my end,
you know, always getting this this good picture of this victim.
The more you dig, you realize like they're human, just
like any of us. They've made mistakes along the way.
You know, who knows, maybe they even have a degree
(25:55):
of culpability. And so it's like from your angle is
like total opposite to that, And that's why I'm excited
to check that out. As far as the first image
you got of him versus probably your thoughts and your
image of him now years removed.
Speaker 1 (26:10):
You're our best promoter for this podcast. Thank you so much.
Appreciate it.
Speaker 4 (26:16):
Yeah, no profit.
Speaker 2 (26:17):
One thing I will say is I think that's what
I love about working at tender Front. I mean, Dennis
was literally like, do I get to me ed after
the show? We're like, yes, we are, We're a team here.
But just the love and the support from one creator
to the other, and I think that just shows you
what a wonderful job you guys have done in crafting
this story. And you mentioned something I want to touch
(26:38):
on a bit. Has your personal definition of justice changed
while looking into cases, peeling back the layers and exploring culpability,
And that's.
Speaker 4 (26:51):
Actually for both of you, I think it has to
an extent. I mean, at the end of the day,
it's hard to.
Speaker 3 (26:58):
Not associate justice with resolution closure for victims in these
cold cases that I look that I look in to investigate.
Speaker 4 (27:08):
I mean, you can't separate the two.
Speaker 3 (27:11):
But what I have learned over time is again there's
a lot of depths to culpability. There's every case is different,
every victim is different, and you realize, like getting that
justice and resolution is a long shot. It's what we
strive for no matter what, and we'll continue to in
these cases until they are resolved.
Speaker 4 (27:32):
But at the same time, so.
Speaker 3 (27:35):
Many of these cases need attention, They need a new break,
a new lead, They need people like us to tell
those stories. And so for me, while it may not
be getting justice by definition, I've connected with enough families
now and worked enough cases to realize that for some
(27:56):
of them, it still feels like a degree of justice
just to be able to get that story out there,
to be able to get a new lead, some new information,
to be able to bring life back into this investigation
that set their cold for many years, and so so
I always can take you know, I think some bit
of rest in that and knowing that just like some
(28:17):
progress was made and that these things have been revealed,
like let's learn from them. You know, maybe you shouldn't
spend a little longer than forty five minutes on that investigation.
Speaker 4 (28:26):
Maybe you should.
Speaker 3 (28:27):
Have done a little more digging, you know, before ruling
it a suicide.
Speaker 4 (28:31):
Those types of things.
Speaker 3 (28:32):
Again, I could list them all day, because every case
is different, and the good things in them and the
mishaps in them look different with every case. But ultimately,
I just want there to be some takeaway at the end,
at the very least of like how can we learn
and grow from this as a society, as you know,
law enforcement agency, as the justice system, you name it.
Speaker 1 (28:56):
I definitely agree with you every and yes, absolutely every different.
I just think that my sense of sense of justice
has not changed necessarily. Right is right and wrong is wrong.
There are consequences for actions, and we live in certain
governments and these are these are side consequences for actions.
But I think it's made me question how are we
(29:21):
helping people? Are we even helping people is healthy? Does
helping actually while might be under the guise of helping,
is it actually hurting? Which is really important because I
think that there's a lot of people who are part
of these checks and balances, but they're not part of
like the how often do we do post mortems on
(29:43):
autopsies and post mortems right? And how all these agencies
work together or against some of these people. What's really
what's interesting about this particular case that happened in England
for Wisecrack is that they had a separate document called
the domest to Comma Side Report, and that really, I
think once we were able to get access to that
(30:04):
just blew my mind. Which is an impartial, charitable agency
that does receive government funds to do evaluations on domestic
violence cases and family cases in particular, and they get
access to everyone and then they compile that report and
then they say, here's what we did wrong, here's what
we did right. Wow, it's interesting spoiler alert. They mostly
(30:25):
say they did things right, but if you read the report,
I think you might feel a little bit differently. And
it's you know, and it's not intended to be critical,
it's just intended to gather information and follow trends. And
I just think that that's one piece that we don't
have in America. And I know that there's lots of people,
lots of even government agencies that are responsible for that,
(30:46):
but not in a open published way. You google Brett
Rodgers Domestic Comma side Report, you will find it. You
will find one hundred families link. So if you are
just a concerned citizen who's interested, everyone has access to
this information, you know. And I don't feel the same way.
I think over here in America it's a lot harder.
It's a lot more mercurial. You need the dentists and
(31:07):
the jodies to bother people until they're like, fine, take
it right. And I agree with you.
Speaker 2 (31:14):
Looking at that report or the analysis of him, it
almost allowed you. It allowed you to dive deeper into
who he was and what he may have been experiencing,
which made me again go, how was he found legally
competent stand trial?
Speaker 1 (31:28):
He was being treated with medication that would have been
treatments for schizophrenia, but never ever received the diagnosis, and
that even in prison after he had been convicted and
went to prison for thirty two years, he was also
still receiving that treatment. They moved him around a different jails,
but they put him in a prison that was specifically
(31:49):
designed to help people who very obviously have mental health issues.
So we all knew what was going on, but we
never actually said it. It was never written down, it
was never recorded. And I and listen, I know that
that's a big stigma as well for someone to accept
that I have fill in the blank issue. But at
the same time, I don't know. The more that I
(32:11):
think about these cases and the things that we're talking about,
I just think that isn't it just better to be
transparent and to record the metrics in the same way
that we know when people turn off our podcasts. Yeah,
don't you want to actually know where we stand as
a society? Yeah, and what's you know, who's helping, who's not,
who's intending to help but is harming. I just think
that's the data is really important.
Speaker 2 (32:46):
Are there any risk of exploring culpability when storytelling?
Speaker 1 (32:54):
The first thing that comes to my mind is lawsuits.
Speaker 3 (32:57):
Dennis can compuse that.
Speaker 1 (33:01):
Yeah, I just obviously the highest risk. But even outside
of those kinds of things, Yeah, Yeah, you don't make
tons of friends doing what we do. Now, Yeah, someone's
always going to be mad in some way about how
their story was represented, regardless even again, like I got
(33:26):
a woman who sent me a message on Instagram the
other day who listened to the podcast, and she said,
I think that Ed and Pete, who was the father
of a murderer of Brett, are heroes and they're absolutely incredible.
I was not expecting that feedback, but it was because
and I think and I think the context that she
was implying was that because they sought help, the survivor
(33:47):
sought help and came out on the other side, and
so But but again, these are all just like I'm
just constantly surported by the responses in general. But yeah,
there's a lot of risks because I again, I thought
it would have gone the other way. I thought it
would have been finger pointing against X, Y and Z
and it wasn't. So yeah, I think, but you but yeah,
(34:08):
I think if you're trying to be like a darling
in a Sweetheart, this might not be the jump for Yeah.
Speaker 3 (34:12):
No, I really couldn't put it any better than that.
I mean, just from the start. Yeah, probably probably the
biggest risk.
Speaker 4 (34:18):
Is on the legal side.
Speaker 3 (34:20):
You know, and that's we've we've learned that that can happen,
and we've come out on the other side of that
and in a good way, and you learn from it.
Speaker 4 (34:28):
But even on a small.
Speaker 3 (34:31):
Scale, Yeah, like, at the very least, you are going
to upset some people doing this, whether it's law enforcement,
whether it's you know, persons of interest in the case,
whether it's the victim's family. All those things are are possibilities.
I've done all of those, you know. I've I've upset
a mother really badly and then had to you know,
(34:53):
try to mend that relationship and thankfully was able to.
I've definitely upset persons of interest, definitely, you know, upset
law enforcement.
Speaker 4 (35:03):
So those things are just kind of part of it,
you know.
Speaker 3 (35:07):
I just try to be as as respectful and honest
as as possible. I'm you know, and just you just
hope for the best. But but that's just kind of
the nature of it, because these are very, very sensitive
and vulnerable topics and stories we're exploring, and and the
(35:29):
nature of putting the truth out there is like the
truth is going to make a lot of people uncomfortable.
Speaker 4 (35:34):
But at the end of the day, that's that's what
we have to put out there is the truth.
Speaker 1 (35:38):
So you just.
Speaker 4 (35:41):
It is what it is.
Speaker 1 (35:42):
Really, Yeah, you just kind of have to take a
journalist spirit and be tough question Mark.
Speaker 4 (35:48):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (35:49):
Yeah, And I do think some people forget that another
risk could be stigmatizing someone with mental health or stigmatizing
stigmatizing someone with substances. It's important to know that people
can be a offender regardless of the background, and they
could be an offender regardless.
Speaker 1 (36:06):
If they have any of those isms.
Speaker 2 (36:08):
Right, So, I think that you both do a wonderful
job of peeling back the layers without just saying this
is why it happened, and we should blame this person.
Speaker 1 (36:19):
In the story.
Speaker 4 (36:21):
So I applaud you both for that. Appreciate that, Thank you,
thank you.
Speaker 3 (36:24):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (36:25):
So listeners often want conclusion beginning, middle end. Jody, you
have so much experience, and you know production and award
winning and your your big way out here. How do
you meet the audience where they are and ensure they're
getting a full story, even if it's not a clean ending,
which Dennis knows culpable often isn't.
Speaker 1 (36:47):
Yeah, it's so, it really is so difficult. You want
to I want to offer whoever spending the time with
our storytelling as much of a conclusion that I can offer.
I mean, in theory, that's what they expect, right, Like,
there's some sort of expectation and promise from a listener
to a host or a narrator or whatever you want
to call it. But I think at the end of
(37:10):
the day, for at least I can what I can say,
at least for Wisecrack is that you know, I think
that Ed's character arc across the episodes, it is very
much as much of a roller coaster that he's on
about learning about himself and looking back at his childhood
and saying, oh, that wasn't at all what I thought
it was. If you are hopefully invested in him as
(37:31):
a person, I think you will find a satisfying conclusion.
But if you are I really just being very frank,
if you're somebody who is just in it for the
blood and the gore and wants to get in and
get out and find out guilty not guilty, this might
not be the one for you. There is some very
interesting shades that we explore and hope, and I guess
(37:53):
my biggest hope is that myself and Charles who wrote
the podcast. At least you're invested in Ed's transformation using
the information that we uncover, and that would be then
hopefully a satisfying conclusion.
Speaker 3 (38:08):
Yeah, back to your question from earlier about you know,
the definition of justice for us again, like the best
conclusion for us, for families, for audiences is always going
to be resolution to the case and the nature of
what I do. It's like, that's not in any way
(38:29):
a guarantee. It's just something that you're striving for. Uh,
And so you know, I always say like the last
episode has always been the hardest one to write because
you just that would be the only true ending that
would like I probably leave you and what you would feel,
like your audience, how they would feel about it's fully satisfied.
Speaker 4 (38:52):
But that's at the end of the day, a long
shot that we're striving for.
Speaker 3 (38:56):
Not every story is going to end like you know,
like the Terrigrin's case and up in Vanish that's not
It can happen, but it's not a guarantee.
Speaker 4 (39:05):
It's just something that we strive for.
Speaker 3 (39:07):
So that last episode is always so hard to write
because one you're trying to find the best way to
put a Bow on this very long, emotional roller coaster
investigation that you've been on. But you also realize, like
if you haven't reached that conclusion you're striving for, that
the story's not technically over with yet, So like you
(39:28):
also have this feeling of like is this even really
going to be the end of the series, Like do
we need to come back and do more, because you
know we're going to keep exploring this until we get
that resolution.
Speaker 4 (39:40):
So like, I'm still working on I'm still looking.
Speaker 3 (39:43):
Into cases that I've wrapped up, like season one Christian Dracus,
season two, Brittany Stikes.
Speaker 4 (39:48):
I'm still following up those families.
Speaker 3 (39:49):
I'm still looking into those when I wrap up season three,
I got a list of things I want to do
with those, So you know, I don't even know if
the end that I.
Speaker 4 (39:56):
Told to those is actually the end of those stories yet.
Speaker 3 (39:59):
So that's all always the hardest one to write, because
you know, you want to give audiences the best conclusion
possible and they're going to have their opinions on that,
but we just got to do the best we can.
Speaker 1 (40:11):
It's hard because you don't go again, the point being
we're not We're normal people who just like look at
things and go, well, I kind of have an opinion
about that, but at the end, But at the end
of the day, I think if we come in with
the end of the story in mind, we never did
a real investigation. Absolutely, so it is a real risk
I think on our part because we spent so much
time and we're like, oh no, there's no end to
(40:32):
point whether how do you tell the story?
Speaker 4 (40:34):
Is it?
Speaker 5 (40:35):
You know?
Speaker 1 (40:35):
And I you know, you go to someone and they're like, well,
there's no end, and I'm like, good point, excellent, excellent work.
We got to keep working. And so Wise Crack is out. Yes,
what can listeners expect from this season? Why should they
tune in? And what's next for you? Well, we've just
(40:56):
launched I guess I'm not sure when this is coming out,
but at the beginning of What led the Wey in September,
so we'll be running through October with new episodes. Very exciting,
I think the again, I think if you're I kind
of see this for fans like a true crime one
oh two. It's not a one oh one because it's
much more of a character exploration and again we're asking
(41:16):
the question why, if why is something that you find
yourself asking a lot. This is the story for you.
If you've ever been bellied before as a child and
then had that person come back in your life, this
is a story for you. I think that if you
like stand up comedy, obviously this is a story for you.
Ed's hilarious. But I also think that there's two families
(41:39):
involved in this story that live right next door to
each other, had very similar lives, and their children were
very similar and then went in complete opposite directions. So
I hope that you know, I think we can all
look back in our childhood and think of the family
that we were all friends with, and now you're like,
where are they, what are they doing? Or what happened
(41:59):
if something this thing dramatic had happened. So I think
that those if you're interested in any of those three things,
I think this would be something that people might enjoy.
And I hope that they'll listen what's next. I just
told you I'm taking a nap, and then an app
is so hard in the car. That's where I'm goness
And yeah, I don't you know this is a close
(42:21):
ended story. You mean, we know who the killer is,
and we did an exploration and obviously of all the
people involved in the case. But I have a feeling
based on all the reactions of what we've seen at
Crime Con, particularly as performance last night, I don't think
that this is the end, because it's amazing how everybody
wants to share their own personal stories of trauma. So
(42:44):
you know, season two, it's probably with amongst the listeners
is the reality for us, and so I'd certainly encourage
people to reach out and share their opinions and thoughts,
and also if you need an event, if you need
to talk about stuff, we're here for you too, well.
Speaker 2 (42:58):
Culpable yes out.
Speaker 4 (43:01):
What can they expect this season, Yeah, a little bit
of everything.
Speaker 1 (43:07):
You know.
Speaker 3 (43:07):
For one, I think you can if you enjoyed season
one of colpol Christiandiaki, I do think there's some parallels
to that.
Speaker 4 (43:13):
I think there's some shades of that in this story.
So I think fans of that season will certainly enjoy
digging into this with me. It's kind of like a
meshing of.
Speaker 3 (43:28):
Time frames as far as like you're going to hear
reporting from ninety eight and you're gonna hear reporting from
two thousand or twenty twenty four to twenty twenty five,
you're gonna hear recordings from nineteen ninety eight, and you're
gonna hear recordings from twenty four and twenty twenty five.
And so it's been a real challenge to work that
because you know, the cases I worked before, Christian and
(43:50):
Britney's were nowhere near as old as this. When I
started following Danny's case, it was a twenty five year
old cold case. We're coming up on in October twenty seven,
it'll be twenty seven years. So it's been it's been
an interesting one, in a challenging one because you learn
that with time. You know, obviously the case changes hands
several times, people pass away, people move on people. One
(44:13):
thing I've really learned in this season, this will come
up throughout it is like how it challenging to think,
like how well can you trust people's memory that much longer,
especially when you can hear what they said in nineteen
ninety eight versus what they're saying now, And it'll really
kind of make you think.
Speaker 4 (44:30):
And I think you'll be on your toes to the end.
Speaker 3 (44:32):
I think you'll again, like I've always wanted to lean
into that, I don't I want it to feel like
there's a lot of possibilities there because genuinely there are,
and I think you're going to feel that with this
case as far as not knowing, you know, was was
he killed or or did someone murder him as as
a homicide or did some other accident happen? How did
(44:53):
he end up in that field? You know, did somebody
put him there or or is that where the crime happened.
And then as far or as who's responsible, I think
you're going to have all sorts of thoughts on who
may have played a role in this in some way
or who may have more information.
Speaker 4 (45:08):
So I think you'll be on your toes at the end.
I know I have been.
Speaker 3 (45:11):
It's actively releasing right now, and like I said, I'm
still digging into it and I'm still working on the
story as it's unfolding in kind of real time. So
you know, if you're into that, then then you'll enjoy
this too, because it's about is about as a live investigative,
you know, in real time as you can be with
this type of with this type of work we do
so cool and.
Speaker 2 (45:32):
Then well, I applaud you both for the work that
you do, diving deep into stories, looking into culpability, looking
deeper than what's on the surface. So congratulations to your
success and I can't wait to see and hear what's next.
Speaker 4 (45:45):
Thank you, Thanks Jamie,
Wisecrack is released weekly and brought to you absolutely free,
but if you want exclusive bonuses and early access, subscribe
to tenorfoot plus. Enjoy over thirty shows, including Wisecrack, and
over one thousand episodes completely ad free. For more information,
check out the show notes. Enjoy the episode, Hey Wisecrack.
(00:27):
I'm extremely excited to share a conversation that I had
at Denver Crime Con called When Systems Fail Culpability on Trial.
The conversation is myself, producer Jamie Albright, and host of
Culpable Dennis Cooper. We talk about what is a system
failure and how do we, as pretty flawed humans, hold
an unwieldy system to account. Honestly, it was one of
(00:50):
my favorite conversations that we had at Crime Con. Both
Jamie and Dennis are such prose and hearing their perspectives
on the criminal justice system was really I open. If
you're not thoroughly exhausted of me and Ed, we do
hope that you'll join us for an Instagram live Q
and A on Friday, November fourteenth at eight o'clock Eastern
Standard time. It's going to be super informal. You can
(01:13):
just pop on the live and ask your questions or
if you want, you can submit your questions in advance
to at Wisecrack podcast on IG and we'll read and
answer them in real time. There will likely be a
special guest appearance by Ed and my various dogs being
Edie and Mando. So there you go, a real reason
to join the live. Thank you so much, and we'll
(01:33):
talk to you then.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
When systems fail culpability on trial.
Speaker 3 (01:43):
Okay, before we get too deep, Cash tell you because
I to get to talk to you. Amazing last night
and I cannot wait to listen to wisecrack.
Speaker 4 (01:52):
Seriously. I mean, I'm so moved. It was a good turnout.
Speaker 1 (01:55):
It was a yeah, really was Oh I'm so glad.
Speaker 2 (01:59):
Well we've had nothing but positive feedback here at the booth,
So congratulations.
Speaker 1 (02:04):
Thank you so much. I appreciate that.
Speaker 2 (02:07):
So our panel today is when systems fail Culpability on Trial,
and we're joined today by Dennis Cooper, host of Culpable,
writer producer host all of that let me make sure
I say that, and Jody Tovey, producer of Wisecrack, as
well as the individual who found this powerful story. So
(02:28):
both of you have new releases this month. How does
it feel after working so long and so hard to
share this story with the world. Will start with Jody.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
It feels incredible, but it also feels I'm very tired. Well,
it's exhausting and very exciting, and you know, it took
almost almost nine years to get this out there for people.
The crime that we're talking about in wisecrack happened in
twenty fifteen, so it feels like even an even better
(02:59):
opper tunity to share with everybody just because we've been
sitting on the story for a second. So it's great
to share, yeah, danis.
Speaker 4 (03:07):
Yeah for me.
Speaker 3 (03:08):
You know, it's funny because people here asks like how
long do you spend on these cases? When you look
at them and always feel so extreme, saying like, you know,
on average, i'd say probably two years, maybe sometimes a
little less. Granted they're they're with you till the end.
You know, you follow them along, they'll be a part
of me forever. But I hear nine, you know years
(03:29):
or whatever, and I think like, wow, now that, I mean,
that's almost a lifetime.
Speaker 4 (03:34):
That's crazy.
Speaker 3 (03:36):
So sorry to pivot the question because I'm just curious
fan boying, Now, how long did you know of that story?
Speaker 4 (03:42):
Is it nine?
Speaker 3 (03:42):
Years or is that just when are you using that
as a reference of when the crime happened?
Speaker 1 (03:46):
I met, Yes, nine years was when the crime happened.
I met ed the following year when he performed his
set at the Fringe Festival. Okay, and so, and you know, honestly,
it just took I knew it was the thing. I
knew it was a story that needed to be shared,
but because it was such an unusual story, a lot
of people said no. Yeah, so there was a lot
of nos before Tenderfoot came in and said yes, we're
(04:08):
interested and kind of saw how you can take those
two feelings of laughter and drama and sadness and how
closely those feelings live. So yeah, yeah, it was Yeah,
it was a lifetime. That's not it's not inaccurate.
Speaker 4 (04:21):
That is wild. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (04:22):
So well, I'm glad that that all worked out. Yeah
for me, Like I for season three, I'll just reference
that I've been following it for over two years now,
and it's you know, still unfolding, Like I have stuff
I need to do and catch up on when I
get out of here, So you know, that's just the
nature of things. And then you know, I look back
now I can reflect on season one that was I
(04:44):
started following I think in twenty eighteen, so so I've.
Speaker 4 (04:48):
Almost reached my nine year status on that one.
Speaker 3 (04:50):
You know, I'm still I just did a follow up
with the mother in that case just a month ago, so,
you know, like I said, it's these things are a long,
ongoing journey to try and find justice or resolution for
these victims.
Speaker 4 (05:04):
But you know, we love doing it.
Speaker 2 (05:07):
Yeah, And these are both tough cases in different ways.
And so when you share the story and you're wanting
to know kind of what the reaction from people will be,
what's that like for you as producers?
Speaker 1 (05:22):
Well, you first, you've been through so many seasons.
Speaker 4 (05:24):
To see the reaction from listeners.
Speaker 3 (05:27):
Yeah, yeah, it's always special. I mean, you know, and
seeing reviews online or getting direct messages on social media,
those types of things can be so moving. And I'm
so thankful that this community is so passionate about this
stuff that they care enough to do those things and
(05:49):
care enough to tell you, hey, maybe do something different
next time.
Speaker 4 (05:53):
Maybe you know, I didn't love this part or what ever.
Speaker 3 (05:55):
And we need that criticism too, Like, I never want
to think that I'm got this figured out, you know, Uh,
in every case and every story is different. But but yeah,
I I love seeing that stuff. I'm not I'm not
an overly confident person, and so to be totally honest,
I love nothing more than to see that positive reaction
(06:16):
from from audience and and probably nothing beats being at
a place like this and actually getting to have one
on one interactions with people and and see them light
up and think like, oh.
Speaker 4 (06:27):
My gosh, like you're you're the host of this show.
Speaker 3 (06:30):
And you know, I'd be lying if I said that
didn't make me feel feel really good.
Speaker 4 (06:34):
So I love to see that feedback.
Speaker 3 (06:36):
And uh, to help segue over to you, Jody, I've
I've loved watching, you know, kind of vicariously at the
reactions to wise Crack so far, because it's just been
very resounding. And I've been in that position, you know,
seeing a show climb up charts and seeing all the
good feedback, and I'm just I'm just so happy for
for all of you all and your your team, because
I know how much work's probably gone under that.
Speaker 1 (06:58):
I I probably have the least experience interacting here with
crime con people. I mean, I'm getting information literally live
right now from the booth like, we love the show
and it feels great. It feels good. I do think
that's what's interesting though about this genre in general, is
that they will give you notes, but they also will
absolutely give you your props and say that really moved me,
(07:21):
that was touching. And I can't say the same about
other styles of podcasting or other forms of media. So
I think that in crime con particularly to like put
faces to the comments, I think is something super special.
And I think that at least for our show, since
it has a live performance element to it, where there's
a stand up comedian, Ed talks about his experience. You know,
it's great to watch people in the audience reacting real time,
(07:45):
as we just said, probably off microphone, but it was.
It's really rewarding to see that real time feedback. It's nice,
and you know, and everybody everyone's so different too, you know.
It's I looked out last night when during our Q
and A and I all that, you know, people looked,
some people were confused, and I think they were trying
to process how they felt about it, because people were laughing,
(08:09):
people were crying. Ed's had people run up on stage
and give him a hug in the middle of the set,
people have these very emotional responses to Ed's story and
to Ed in general, just because he's a nice guy
and really cool. But yeah, it's very rewarding. It feels
really nice.
Speaker 3 (08:23):
Can I see one more thing on that? Just in
case I don't have the chance to connect with him.
I talked to him briefly last night, just because I
just really wanted to give him, you know, his props
and tell him how moved I was by the performance
last night. But if you feel comfortable, can you speak
at all on what it's felt like maybe for for
Ed to see this reaction totally, He's.
Speaker 1 (08:47):
Very hard on himself, so if people I think that
his currency is laughs, but his story is both laughs
and tears, and so to be I think that, you know,
he's also trying to process real time that feedback as well.
But I mean, I think that he's people love him
in America in general. I think that he's and he's
(09:09):
also such a lovely, kind person as well, and so
I think he's used to, like I'm he just used
to fans and reception that's really positive. So I think
being here and receiving that is great, And I you know,
I don't want to. I don't want to speak for
him too much, but I think that this show is
so different, and I don't want to speak as a
comedian because I'm most certainly not, but there's there's a
(09:32):
lot of feelings going on in the show as well,
and so you're not you know, when you're used to
people just like bent over sobbing for laughing, and you
don't see people doing that immediately. I think it can
be confusing too, but I think it's because they're confused. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (09:45):
Yeah, it's an emotional rollercoaster. Yeah, someone said that this morning,
and I thought that's the perfect way describe it. And
I love that Ed was vulnerable at the end, and
I think that that's reason that Tenderfoot saw this as
so powerful. It's a different way to deliver a very
important story as well. And so both Wisecrack and Culpable
(10:09):
take a look at culpability in very different ways. With Culpable,
it's ongoing questions, often unanswered. With Wisecrack, there is resolution,
but still questions about culpability. So I want to talk
a little bit about that. What do you think when
with that question or statement, just.
Speaker 3 (10:27):
The various forms of you knowlpability for culpable. Yeah, well
that was like the cool thing with with coming up
with you know that that title for the series was
you know I say sometimes like it can seem like
such a very direct word. A lot of people hear
that and they just assume like it's more of like
(10:49):
this finger pointing, like you know, who's to blame for this?
And absolutely like in terms of finding justice and resolution
a case, like someone has to be to blame. So
that is an element of it, but it was also
a way to you know, keep a somewhat broad series
that can touch on so many different things.
Speaker 5 (11:09):
You know.
Speaker 3 (11:10):
The first series was focused on, you know, was this
a suicide versus a murder and exploring both of those
and you know, to to give an example, a real
example there that was that challenged me was you know,
when when everything felt like it was leaning in the
direction of homicide, I got I received these these text messages.
Speaker 4 (11:33):
That have been on earthed from from the victim that
you know.
Speaker 3 (11:37):
I think the easiest way to label it would be,
you know, suicidal like texts, you know, threats of you know,
not being happy with life and you know, I, you know,
threatening to harm myself. And this was years removed from
when the crime happened, but it's still opened that door
to like, you know, I didn't realize that the victim
(11:58):
had this going on, and so that was tough. You know,
it's like, wow, well we need to include this, which
you know is hard because there's always that element with
the family too and you know, one to protect them.
But it was, it was it was relevant, and it
kind of you know, moved the needle in a different
direction and it needed to be part of the story.
So it's looked different with with every case, but with culpability,
(12:21):
I just wanted to have a way to look at
all the different elements of that from from the justice
system and how it may fail people to you know,
mental health issues and how that could lead to.
Speaker 4 (12:34):
To some of these tragedies we come across.
Speaker 3 (12:36):
I mean, on case review, we've explored you know, things
like as intricate as like Castle Lull and as far
as like you know, crimes that happen on your front doorsteps.
So you know, I want to be able to explore
every single avenue because I think at the end of
the day, there's so many things that can tie into
to that term.
Speaker 1 (12:56):
There's I think that's a great way to say it,
which is there's obviously lead to the you know, for
all of our cases, there's it's an open and shut case, right,
you know that that's what they is, that what they
say on law and orders for a minute. But but
there's shades of culpability and there's systems in place that
don't do great service to some people. We don't set
(13:18):
people up for success in many ways, and I think
that that's something that really resonates with me about what
you're saying. Particularly for the murder that we talk about
Brett Rodgers in Wisecrack, there's a big question about what
his mental health state was. In his mental state when
he left the scene of the crime, was it a
(13:40):
crime of passion? Was even in his right mind at
that point if you ask the criminal justice system, the
answer is he absolutely was. He was unable to be
declared incapacitated in any way and was tried as an
average person. My instincts, having now researched the case, I
feel the opposite. But also in the same way. You know,
(14:02):
in the UK we have social they have socialized medicine,
which is a huge piece of this story that we unfortunately,
you know, give me some more episodes, dontled. I'd love
to go into it, and I'd love to me to
help me, truthfully, But like, I do think that that
is one of those things that made a very big
impact in our story that we need to continue to
explore how how certain certain organizations fail and when, and
(14:29):
also they're not inclined to help. There's numbers they have
to meet, you know, we have to get people in,
we have to get people out. If we give you
this diagnosis, then this is the chain reaction that we
will then have to pick up for the rest of
your natural life. So we're loathed to give you said diagnosis.
We're to load to give you access to X, Y
(14:49):
and Z, and so I think that's a big piece
of this story that I think we still want to explore. Truthfully.
Speaker 4 (14:57):
Yeah, I was just gonna just to add to that.
Speaker 3 (14:59):
Like with the season three specifically, it's been interesting because
again when I did season one, I felt very surprised,
sort of blindsided to realize like, oh, there's a mental
health element to this, whereas with season three, I was
coming from experience then was kind of excited to look
(15:23):
at a case like Danny's where he was diagnosed bipolar,
he was prescribed lithium, and these things come into the
story as you listen to it, and very much informed
the popular narrative around the town of what probably happened
to him, that you know that he probably did this
(15:44):
to himself in some way. It was you know, he
either took his own life or he had this episode
or had some.
Speaker 4 (15:52):
Sort of drug overdose interaction.
Speaker 3 (15:54):
I mean, it was crazy to me, and it moved
me to want to like really find out what happened
to him, because you know, it just felt like they
had made this bucket there, like it had to be
some one of.
Speaker 4 (16:04):
These things that happened to him.
Speaker 3 (16:06):
He was very imperfect, and his family'd be the first
to tell you that, and I think that very much
informed the narrative there. But interestingly enough, looking at from
the the you know, the authorities perspective is to get
that contrast again, like with Christian Andreacchio's case, it was
forty five minutes open, closed suicide, and I was like.
Speaker 4 (16:27):
It doesn't seem right. You know, I don't come from
that experience.
Speaker 3 (16:29):
You know, maybe that's maybe that's a normal time to
spend an investigation.
Speaker 4 (16:32):
I don't think it seems like enough, so that bothered me.
Speaker 3 (16:35):
But with Danny's case, I mean, they investigated it despite
despite feeling like, you know, it was probably some freak
accidental death or even a suicide.
Speaker 4 (16:44):
They did work that case like it was a homicide.
Speaker 3 (16:46):
And that was an interesting element to dive into because
I didn't expect that when we got the case files.
I I genuinely expected to not see a whole lot
of investigation, not see a lot of hard questions being asked,
those types of things, And I was humbled when I
saw otherwise and realized, like, Okay, they.
Speaker 4 (17:04):
Took this seriously despite the common narrative there.
Speaker 2 (17:07):
Yeah, I remember when you were able to get access
to the interviews and to the docs. I felt surprised
by that because it seemed the case of been forgotten.
Speaker 1 (17:16):
And I think that's when you realize.
Speaker 2 (17:17):
That there's multiple things happening at the same time. So
how do you balance the narrative and storytelling when you're
looking at so many different pieces that might have played
into what occurred.
Speaker 3 (17:32):
Well, it's always a challenge. I mean for me, I
just lean into it as much as possible. You know,
I've always I've always been attracted cases that just they
challenge you, They challenge your view of things, They make
you think of all these different possibilities, and so for me,
I definitely don't shy away from it. If anything, I
jump at those cases usually. I think that's why I
(17:54):
was probably so moved by listening to the performance of
Wisecrack last night, is because I mean, that's just so
up my alley, because I got enough of a taste
of it to realize, like, oh, this is one that
will probably challenge me to the end of how I
feel about how I feel about the victims, how I
feel about the the the perpetrator in that, and these
(18:14):
different things, Like you could tell that there's a lot
more to that story that's going to come out in
the podcast that I'm stoked to to to listen through.
Speaker 4 (18:24):
I just I've always enjoyed those types of things. I
don't want to.
Speaker 3 (18:28):
I don't want to lead anyone to a conclusion, even
though the ultimate goal is to to find the truth
and get resolution. I don't want to tell a story
in a way that's that's pointed or leaned in one
direction that you know everyone's going to come to the
same conclusion at the end. I would rather you know,
give people what they need to to understand the case
and the ins and outs of it, and let them
(18:49):
come to their own conclusion as far as what they
think happened to.
Speaker 4 (18:52):
The victim, who's culpable, uh.
Speaker 3 (18:55):
And and and those various you know, layers of culpability
like that could that could have played into it, you know,
how they feel about the characters and at the victims,
those types of things. You know, I want to keep
people on their toes and kind of let them come
to their own conclusions.
Speaker 4 (19:09):
Through to the end.
Speaker 1 (19:10):
I feel the exact same way. I think the hardest
part of telling these stories. We know what the facts
are if we've done our job. We present obviously what
law enforcement knows and what they're willing to share, and
then you collect the interviews of the personal anecdotes from
the potential victims, eyewitnesses, whatever. But outside of that, I
(19:31):
think the trick is just making sure that you show
all those various shades of interaction within the facts of
the story. It's really hard, you know, it's really hard
because again I don't want to you know, I worked
on this one for a second, and I was the
same way with the roller coaster. What is going on.
I mean, truly, we have a meager six episodes, but
(19:54):
the arc really is do I trust this person? Do
I not trust this person? And then obviously the bigger question,
which is why I did the bully come to Ed's
house that night? What was on his mind? You know,
in some way we're not asking what or who because
we know what and who. It's why and how, and
those questions are much more gray than they are black
(20:16):
and white for the what and who, and so it's hard.
But I also, yeah, it's challenging.
Speaker 4 (20:24):
I like beings. You know, people want to hear.
Speaker 1 (20:27):
I think people want to hear those stories. We are
so far deep into the true crime genre and television,
film and podcasting and storytelling books. We've got narrative nonfiction
and all kinds of things. And the end of the day,
you know, I think that these super fans that we're
with right now, they're interested in those gray areas as
much as they're interested in the black and white, and
(20:48):
so it's it's nice that I think they the fans,
have evolved with the genre and that it's something that
you and I actually like to do.
Speaker 4 (20:56):
Yeah, we prefer those kinds of things. That's a great
way of putting it, for sure.
Speaker 3 (21:00):
You know, for me, I always I never wanted to
tell it in a way that's like I've figured this out,
and here's my presentation on me figuring it out.
Speaker 4 (21:10):
It was more supposed to be a feel.
Speaker 3 (21:13):
Live and in the moment, and you're learning it as
I'm learning it, and come along for the ride with me.
Because there's a lot of very smart people, a lot
of very passionate people in this community who have helped
me tremendously, you know, sending in ideas, tips, those types
of things, and so you know, I always wanted to
make it feel like, you know, hey, armchair detectives like you,
(21:34):
come along for this with me. You know, you're in
this with me. It's not just me telling this this
journey that I was on, like, I want you to
feel a part of it too. So so yeah, I've
always tried to mimic that, you know, as I've done
each season as culpable.
Speaker 5 (21:56):
I hope you're enjoying this episode live from Crime Con.
Want to get aha, I'd start on Crime Con twenty
twenty six in Vegas right now. You can save ten
percent of your tickets with our exclusive promo code. Just
head to crimecon dot com to grab your standard badge
today and use promo code tenderfoot at checkout. Don't wait
locking your spot now for the ultimate true crime experience,
and we'll see you in Las Vegas next May. Now
(22:19):
back to the show.
Speaker 2 (22:25):
So you touched on this a little bit earlier, but
in wise Crag Brett was found legally competent to stand trial. Yes,
did you think that would be the case when you
first learned about the case and did you ever change
your opinion at any point?
Speaker 1 (22:40):
The first thing that I saw once ed told me
the name. So in the set when I first listened
to it in Edinburgh, he used a different name. So
I had to like hunt this person down and become
a stocker myself to find out exactly what this person's
name is. But that moment when you told me his
name is Brett Rodgers, you go to your Google machine
and the first thing you see is all the very
(23:00):
bloody details of the crime. It does not look like
a crime just on the very surface from the three
ten thousand foot view that it is somebody who's of
right in their right mind at that moment, and so
just being very frank, that's what that was my first
instinct when I looked at that. It was across three hours.
(23:21):
It was using like household kitchen knives that would break
and then he'd grab another one, and you know, lots
of defensive wounds. But ultimately the victims, his victims were
you know, very much under the influence. But it made
it a very bloody crime as a result because their
blood was so viscous. It was everywhere. So when you
read the details, you're just like, this doesn't feel like
(23:44):
a planned thing. That was a minimum the first instinct,
and that's kind of and that's how I started into
that process. I mean, just being honest, like you know,
I we try to stay unbiased as possible, but that
was my first thought. And then when you actually look
at the courtroom, to the trial itself, if you just
(24:05):
read the transcripts, didn't know any of the context, you
would one hundred percent believe that this person was also
of sound mind when they did this. But the more
that you talk to his dad, the more that we
talk to everybody who knew him, there there was some
shades of illnesses that might have been undiagnosed. That's just
the reality. But how much does that play into it.
(24:27):
I don't know, yeah, you know, and that's kind of
still the mystery.
Speaker 3 (24:30):
That's the part I'm most excited to follow along with.
I think in that is the probably what will be
I'm assuming an evolving journey around around Brett and your
maybe your thoughts on him or why he did this,
you know, like you said, because it's interesting from my
perspective because more often than not, you know, when I
(24:53):
pick a case, you know, I start with the family,
and you know, for the most part, families are going
to paint the victim and as good of a light
as possible. You know, some are more forthcoming than others,
and some don't hold back. But for the most part,
you're gonna get, you know, a really good image of them.
And I'm sure it's got to be a totally different
(25:16):
animal coming from the different side like you all did
and seeing this, you know, if what you said is true,
as far as starting with the crime scene, it's probably
got to be a challenge to see this, like to
only be able to see this person is probably a
monster off part, just based off this crime scene and
what they did.
Speaker 4 (25:32):
And then you know, to slowly peel.
Speaker 3 (25:34):
Back the layers and we realize like, huh, you know,
there's there's a lot more to his story there that probably.
I mean, I guess I have to imagine that'd be
a challenge, because I know it is on my end,
you know, always getting this this good picture of this victim.
The more you dig, you realize like they're human, just
like any of us. They've made mistakes along the way.
You know, who knows, maybe they even have a degree
(25:55):
of culpability. And so it's like from your angle is
like total opposite to that, And that's why I'm excited
to check that out. As far as the first image
you got of him versus probably your thoughts and your
image of him now years removed.
Speaker 1 (26:10):
You're our best promoter for this podcast. Thank you so much.
Appreciate it.
Speaker 4 (26:16):
Yeah, no profit.
Speaker 2 (26:17):
One thing I will say is I think that's what
I love about working at tender Front. I mean, Dennis
was literally like, do I get to me ed after
the show? We're like, yes, we are, We're a team here.
But just the love and the support from one creator
to the other, and I think that just shows you
what a wonderful job you guys have done in crafting
this story. And you mentioned something I want to touch
(26:38):
on a bit. Has your personal definition of justice changed
while looking into cases, peeling back the layers and exploring culpability,
And that's.
Speaker 4 (26:51):
Actually for both of you, I think it has to
an extent. I mean, at the end of the day,
it's hard to.
Speaker 3 (26:58):
Not associate justice with resolution closure for victims in these
cold cases that I look that I look in to investigate.
Speaker 4 (27:08):
I mean, you can't separate the two.
Speaker 3 (27:11):
But what I have learned over time is again there's
a lot of depths to culpability. There's every case is different,
every victim is different, and you realize, like getting that
justice and resolution is a long shot. It's what we
strive for no matter what, and we'll continue to in
these cases until they are resolved.
Speaker 4 (27:32):
But at the same time, so.
Speaker 3 (27:35):
Many of these cases need attention, They need a new break,
a new lead, They need people like us to tell
those stories. And so for me, while it may not
be getting justice by definition, I've connected with enough families
now and worked enough cases to realize that for some
(27:56):
of them, it still feels like a degree of justice
just to be able to get that story out there,
to be able to get a new lead, some new information,
to be able to bring life back into this investigation
that set their cold for many years, and so so
I always can take you know, I think some bit
of rest in that and knowing that just like some
(28:17):
progress was made and that these things have been revealed,
like let's learn from them. You know, maybe you shouldn't
spend a little longer than forty five minutes on that investigation.
Speaker 4 (28:26):
Maybe you should.
Speaker 3 (28:27):
Have done a little more digging, you know, before ruling
it a suicide.
Speaker 4 (28:31):
Those types of things.
Speaker 3 (28:32):
Again, I could list them all day, because every case
is different, and the good things in them and the
mishaps in them look different with every case. But ultimately,
I just want there to be some takeaway at the end,
at the very least of like how can we learn
and grow from this as a society, as you know,
law enforcement agency, as the justice system, you name it.
Speaker 1 (28:56):
I definitely agree with you every and yes, absolutely every different.
I just think that my sense of sense of justice
has not changed necessarily. Right is right and wrong is wrong.
There are consequences for actions, and we live in certain
governments and these are these are side consequences for actions.
But I think it's made me question how are we
(29:21):
helping people? Are we even helping people is healthy? Does
helping actually while might be under the guise of helping,
is it actually hurting? Which is really important because I
think that there's a lot of people who are part
of these checks and balances, but they're not part of
like the how often do we do post mortems on
(29:43):
autopsies and post mortems right? And how all these agencies
work together or against some of these people. What's really
what's interesting about this particular case that happened in England
for Wisecrack is that they had a separate document called
the domest to Comma Side Report, and that really, I
think once we were able to get access to that
(30:04):
just blew my mind. Which is an impartial, charitable agency
that does receive government funds to do evaluations on domestic
violence cases and family cases in particular, and they get
access to everyone and then they compile that report and
then they say, here's what we did wrong, here's what
we did right. Wow, it's interesting spoiler alert. They mostly
(30:25):
say they did things right, but if you read the report,
I think you might feel a little bit differently. And
it's you know, and it's not intended to be critical,
it's just intended to gather information and follow trends. And
I just think that that's one piece that we don't
have in America. And I know that there's lots of people,
lots of even government agencies that are responsible for that,
(30:46):
but not in a open published way. You google Brett
Rodgers Domestic Comma side Report, you will find it. You
will find one hundred families link. So if you are
just a concerned citizen who's interested, everyone has access to
this information, you know. And I don't feel the same way.
I think over here in America it's a lot harder.
It's a lot more mercurial. You need the dentists and
(31:07):
the jodies to bother people until they're like, fine, take
it right. And I agree with you.
Speaker 2 (31:14):
Looking at that report or the analysis of him, it
almost allowed you. It allowed you to dive deeper into
who he was and what he may have been experiencing,
which made me again go, how was he found legally
competent stand trial?
Speaker 1 (31:28):
He was being treated with medication that would have been
treatments for schizophrenia, but never ever received the diagnosis, and
that even in prison after he had been convicted and
went to prison for thirty two years, he was also
still receiving that treatment. They moved him around a different jails,
but they put him in a prison that was specifically
(31:49):
designed to help people who very obviously have mental health issues.
So we all knew what was going on, but we
never actually said it. It was never written down, it
was never recorded. And I and listen, I know that
that's a big stigma as well for someone to accept
that I have fill in the blank issue. But at
the same time, I don't know. The more that I
(32:11):
think about these cases and the things that we're talking about,
I just think that isn't it just better to be
transparent and to record the metrics in the same way
that we know when people turn off our podcasts. Yeah,
don't you want to actually know where we stand as
a society? Yeah, and what's you know, who's helping, who's not,
who's intending to help but is harming. I just think
that's the data is really important.
Speaker 2 (32:46):
Are there any risk of exploring culpability when storytelling?
Speaker 1 (32:54):
The first thing that comes to my mind is lawsuits.
Speaker 3 (32:57):
Dennis can compuse that.
Speaker 1 (33:01):
Yeah, I just obviously the highest risk. But even outside
of those kinds of things, Yeah, Yeah, you don't make
tons of friends doing what we do. Now, Yeah, someone's
always going to be mad in some way about how
their story was represented, regardless even again, like I got
(33:26):
a woman who sent me a message on Instagram the
other day who listened to the podcast, and she said,
I think that Ed and Pete, who was the father
of a murderer of Brett, are heroes and they're absolutely incredible.
I was not expecting that feedback, but it was because
and I think and I think the context that she
was implying was that because they sought help, the survivor
(33:47):
sought help and came out on the other side, and
so But but again, these are all just like I'm
just constantly surported by the responses in general. But yeah,
there's a lot of risks because I again, I thought
it would have gone the other way. I thought it
would have been finger pointing against X, Y and Z
and it wasn't. So yeah, I think, but you but yeah,
(34:08):
I think if you're trying to be like a darling
in a Sweetheart, this might not be the jump for Yeah.
Speaker 3 (34:12):
No, I really couldn't put it any better than that.
I mean, just from the start. Yeah, probably probably the
biggest risk.
Speaker 4 (34:18):
Is on the legal side.
Speaker 3 (34:20):
You know, and that's we've we've learned that that can happen,
and we've come out on the other side of that
and in a good way, and you learn from it.
Speaker 4 (34:28):
But even on a small.
Speaker 3 (34:31):
Scale, Yeah, like, at the very least, you are going
to upset some people doing this, whether it's law enforcement,
whether it's you know, persons of interest in the case,
whether it's the victim's family. All those things are are possibilities.
I've done all of those, you know. I've I've upset
a mother really badly and then had to you know,
(34:53):
try to mend that relationship and thankfully was able to.
I've definitely upset persons of interest, definitely, you know, upset
law enforcement.
Speaker 4 (35:03):
So those things are just kind of part of it,
you know.
Speaker 3 (35:07):
I just try to be as as respectful and honest
as as possible. I'm you know, and just you just
hope for the best. But but that's just kind of
the nature of it, because these are very, very sensitive
and vulnerable topics and stories we're exploring, and and the
(35:29):
nature of putting the truth out there is like the
truth is going to make a lot of people uncomfortable.
Speaker 4 (35:34):
But at the end of the day, that's that's what
we have to put out there is the truth.
Speaker 1 (35:38):
So you just.
Speaker 4 (35:41):
It is what it is.
Speaker 1 (35:42):
Really, Yeah, you just kind of have to take a
journalist spirit and be tough question Mark.
Speaker 4 (35:48):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (35:49):
Yeah, And I do think some people forget that another
risk could be stigmatizing someone with mental health or stigmatizing
stigmatizing someone with substances. It's important to know that people
can be a offender regardless of the background, and they
could be an offender regardless.
Speaker 1 (36:06):
If they have any of those isms.
Speaker 2 (36:08):
Right, So, I think that you both do a wonderful
job of peeling back the layers without just saying this
is why it happened, and we should blame this person.
Speaker 1 (36:19):
In the story.
Speaker 4 (36:21):
So I applaud you both for that. Appreciate that, Thank you,
thank you.
Speaker 3 (36:24):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (36:25):
So listeners often want conclusion beginning, middle end. Jody, you
have so much experience, and you know production and award
winning and your your big way out here. How do
you meet the audience where they are and ensure they're
getting a full story, even if it's not a clean ending,
which Dennis knows culpable often isn't.
Speaker 1 (36:47):
Yeah, it's so, it really is so difficult. You want
to I want to offer whoever spending the time with
our storytelling as much of a conclusion that I can offer.
I mean, in theory, that's what they expect, right, Like,
there's some sort of expectation and promise from a listener
to a host or a narrator or whatever you want
to call it. But I think at the end of
(37:10):
the day, for at least I can what I can say,
at least for Wisecrack is that you know, I think
that Ed's character arc across the episodes, it is very
much as much of a roller coaster that he's on
about learning about himself and looking back at his childhood
and saying, oh, that wasn't at all what I thought
it was. If you are hopefully invested in him as
(37:31):
a person, I think you will find a satisfying conclusion.
But if you are I really just being very frank,
if you're somebody who is just in it for the
blood and the gore and wants to get in and
get out and find out guilty not guilty, this might
not be the one for you. There is some very
interesting shades that we explore and hope, and I guess
(37:53):
my biggest hope is that myself and Charles who wrote
the podcast. At least you're invested in Ed's transformation using
the information that we uncover, and that would be then
hopefully a satisfying conclusion.
Speaker 3 (38:08):
Yeah, back to your question from earlier about you know,
the definition of justice for us again, like the best
conclusion for us, for families, for audiences is always going
to be resolution to the case and the nature of
what I do. It's like, that's not in any way
(38:29):
a guarantee. It's just something that you're striving for. Uh,
And so you know, I always say like the last
episode has always been the hardest one to write because
you just that would be the only true ending that
would like I probably leave you and what you would feel,
like your audience, how they would feel about it's fully satisfied.
Speaker 4 (38:52):
But that's at the end of the day, a long
shot that we're striving for.
Speaker 3 (38:56):
Not every story is going to end like you know,
like the Terrigrin's case and up in Vanish that's not
It can happen, but it's not a guarantee.
Speaker 4 (39:05):
It's just something that we strive for.
Speaker 3 (39:07):
So that last episode is always so hard to write
because one you're trying to find the best way to
put a Bow on this very long, emotional roller coaster
investigation that you've been on. But you also realize, like
if you haven't reached that conclusion you're striving for, that
the story's not technically over with yet, So like you
(39:28):
also have this feeling of like is this even really
going to be the end of the series, Like do
we need to come back and do more, because you
know we're going to keep exploring this until we get
that resolution.
Speaker 4 (39:40):
So like, I'm still working on I'm still looking.
Speaker 3 (39:43):
Into cases that I've wrapped up, like season one Christian Dracus,
season two, Brittany Stikes.
Speaker 4 (39:48):
I'm still following up those families.
Speaker 3 (39:49):
I'm still looking into those when I wrap up season three,
I got a list of things I want to do
with those, So you know, I don't even know if
the end that I.
Speaker 4 (39:56):
Told to those is actually the end of those stories yet.
Speaker 3 (39:59):
So that's all always the hardest one to write, because
you know, you want to give audiences the best conclusion
possible and they're going to have their opinions on that,
but we just got to do the best we can.
Speaker 1 (40:11):
It's hard because you don't go again, the point being
we're not We're normal people who just like look at
things and go, well, I kind of have an opinion
about that, but at the end, But at the end
of the day, I think if we come in with
the end of the story in mind, we never did
a real investigation. Absolutely, so it is a real risk
I think on our part because we spent so much
time and we're like, oh no, there's no end to
(40:32):
point whether how do you tell the story?
Speaker 4 (40:34):
Is it?
Speaker 5 (40:35):
You know?
Speaker 1 (40:35):
And I you know, you go to someone and they're like, well,
there's no end, and I'm like, good point, excellent, excellent work.
We got to keep working. And so Wise Crack is out. Yes,
what can listeners expect from this season? Why should they
tune in? And what's next for you? Well, we've just
(40:56):
launched I guess I'm not sure when this is coming out,
but at the beginning of What led the Wey in September,
so we'll be running through October with new episodes. Very exciting,
I think the again, I think if you're I kind
of see this for fans like a true crime one
oh two. It's not a one oh one because it's
much more of a character exploration and again we're asking
(41:16):
the question why, if why is something that you find
yourself asking a lot. This is the story for you.
If you've ever been bellied before as a child and
then had that person come back in your life, this
is a story for you. I think that if you
like stand up comedy, obviously this is a story for you.
Ed's hilarious. But I also think that there's two families
(41:39):
involved in this story that live right next door to
each other, had very similar lives, and their children were
very similar and then went in complete opposite directions. So
I hope that you know, I think we can all
look back in our childhood and think of the family
that we were all friends with, and now you're like,
where are they, what are they doing? Or what happened
(41:59):
if something this thing dramatic had happened. So I think
that those if you're interested in any of those three things,
I think this would be something that people might enjoy.
And I hope that they'll listen what's next. I just
told you I'm taking a nap, and then an app
is so hard in the car. That's where I'm goness
And yeah, I don't you know this is a close
(42:21):
ended story. You mean, we know who the killer is,
and we did an exploration and obviously of all the
people involved in the case. But I have a feeling
based on all the reactions of what we've seen at
Crime Con, particularly as performance last night, I don't think
that this is the end, because it's amazing how everybody
wants to share their own personal stories of trauma. So
(42:44):
you know, season two, it's probably with amongst the listeners
is the reality for us, and so I'd certainly encourage
people to reach out and share their opinions and thoughts,
and also if you need an event, if you need
to talk about stuff, we're here for you too, well.
Speaker 2 (42:58):
Culpable yes out.
Speaker 4 (43:01):
What can they expect this season, Yeah, a little bit
of everything.
Speaker 1 (43:07):
You know.
Speaker 3 (43:07):
For one, I think you can if you enjoyed season
one of colpol Christiandiaki, I do think there's some parallels
to that.
Speaker 4 (43:13):
I think there's some shades of that in this story.
So I think fans of that season will certainly enjoy
digging into this with me. It's kind of like a
meshing of.
Speaker 3 (43:28):
Time frames as far as like you're going to hear
reporting from ninety eight and you're gonna hear reporting from
two thousand or twenty twenty four to twenty twenty five,
you're gonna hear recordings from nineteen ninety eight, and you're
gonna hear recordings from twenty four and twenty twenty five.
And so it's been a real challenge to work that
because you know, the cases I worked before, Christian and
(43:50):
Britney's were nowhere near as old as this. When I
started following Danny's case, it was a twenty five year
old cold case. We're coming up on in October twenty seven,
it'll be twenty seven years. So it's been it's been
an interesting one, in a challenging one because you learn
that with time. You know, obviously the case changes hands
several times, people pass away, people move on people. One
(44:13):
thing I've really learned in this season, this will come
up throughout it is like how it challenging to think,
like how well can you trust people's memory that much longer,
especially when you can hear what they said in nineteen
ninety eight versus what they're saying now, And it'll really
kind of make you think.
Speaker 4 (44:30):
And I think you'll be on your toes to the end.
Speaker 3 (44:32):
I think you'll again, like I've always wanted to lean
into that, I don't I want it to feel like
there's a lot of possibilities there because genuinely there are,
and I think you're going to feel that with this
case as far as not knowing, you know, was was
he killed or or did someone murder him as as
a homicide or did some other accident happen? How did
(44:53):
he end up in that field? You know, did somebody
put him there or or is that where the crime happened.
And then as far or as who's responsible, I think
you're going to have all sorts of thoughts on who
may have played a role in this in some way
or who may have more information.
Speaker 4 (45:08):
So I think you'll be on your toes at the end.
I know I have been.
Speaker 3 (45:11):
It's actively releasing right now, and like I said, I'm
still digging into it and I'm still working on the
story as it's unfolding in kind of real time. So
you know, if you're into that, then then you'll enjoy
this too, because it's about is about as a live investigative,
you know, in real time as you can be with
this type of with this type of work we do
so cool and.
Speaker 2 (45:32):
Then well, I applaud you both for the work that
you do, diving deep into stories, looking into culpability, looking
deeper than what's on the surface. So congratulations to your
success and I can't wait to see and hear what's next.
Speaker 4 (45:45):
Thank you, Thanks Jamie,
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Ruthie's Table 4
For more than 30 years The River Cafe in London, has been the home-from-home of artists, architects, designers, actors, collectors, writers, activists, and politicians. Michael Caine, Glenn Close, JJ Abrams, Steve McQueen, Victoria and David Beckham, and Lily Allen, are just some of the people who love to call The River Cafe home. On River Cafe Table 4, Rogers sits down with her customers—who have become friends—to talk about food memories. Table 4 explores how food impacts every aspect of our lives. “Foods is politics, food is cultural, food is how you express love, food is about your heritage, it defines who you and who you want to be,” says Rogers. Each week, Rogers invites her guest to reminisce about family suppers and first dates, what they cook, how they eat when performing, the restaurants they choose, and what food they seek when they need comfort. And to punctuate each episode of Table 4, guests such as Ralph Fiennes, Emily Blunt, and Alfonso Cuarón, read their favourite recipe from one of the best-selling River Cafe cookbooks. Table 4 itself, is situated near The River Cafe’s open kitchen, close to the bright pink wood-fired oven and next to the glossy yellow pass, where Ruthie oversees the restaurant. You are invited to take a seat at this intimate table and join the conversation. For more information, recipes, and ingredients, go to https://shoptherivercafe.co.uk/ Web: https://rivercafe.co.uk/ Instagram: www.instagram.com/therivercafelondon/ Facebook: https://en-gb.facebook.com/therivercafelondon/ For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iheartradio app, apple podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.