Love this series, but where are episodes 4-6?? They go much more in-depth than other podcasts on this subject, sharing new and fascinating information in an engaging way.

Very interesting. I knew this story and it confirmed most of what I believed. Here’s my question….are they sure that Rachel didn’t kill Julie? She seems like it would be more of a thrill for her than just forcing another’s hand. IMO.

Came here from Date with Dateline, which I just discovered and have been binging for a couple weeks- but I had to pause that to now binge this pod! Really impressed so far.

Far below any journalistic standards

This week I saw another true crime story about this senseless crime and everytime I see it, it makes me angry and sad that two people decided to murder for financial gain instead of getting well paying jobs to make a living. My heart goes out the the parents of the two victims every time I see this awful story. After listening to this podcast, it explained a lot and I always wanted to know how Dan got Sam’s PIN number to begin with and the one interview explained it all. Sometimes you can just be too nice to people and being too nice got Sam and Julie killed! Thank you for this excellent podcast and keep up the good work because I’ll be listening.

A little difficult at times but over all great listen, highly recommend!!

Good listen, but you need to learn to not continuously talk over your interviewee .

I love the podcast and the format. Storytelling, interviews, clips, etc. But…are episodes 4-6 missing? Or are the episodes mis-numbered?

I hate to bash this podcast but I want to save other people from wasting their time. This was such a frustrating podcast to listen to. It was so all over the place, never once explaining what happened in any sort of sequential fashion, that I didn’t really understand what happened or who people were until I pieced things together myself after wasting HOURS listening to the podcast. It was basically just hour upon hour of the host talking with various people about various aspects of the case without ever explaining to listeners what they were talking about. It was like overhearing people gossiping in an airport over a tabloid magazine. There didn’t seem to be any attempt at organizing the information, or editing it into something coherent. Maybe if a listener was already aware of the facts of the case, and they were just really into it, they might enjoy listening to the rambling speculations and opinions in the podcast. It was also annoyingly repetitive. The host expressed the same opinions and emphasized the same points over and over again, while at the same time skipping over other subjects with no explanation for listeners. She clearly thought that Rachel Buffet helped plan the murders, which sounds very likely, and basically just spent hours saying this over and over. The podcast also took a really weird tangent spending several episodes roasting the LA DAs office. One whole episode was just Daniel Wosniak’s attorney saying over and over that, in Rachel Buffet’s trial, the DA presented an argument that was contradictory to the arguments he had previously used about her involvement when he was prosecuting Daniel Wosniak. It sounds like the DAs office was pretty shady and corrupt, but that’s a whole other subject just inserted into the middle of this crime podcast. Finally, the host spent a lot of time talking with an older man that Rachel Buffet was sleeping with after the murders, and he was such a disgusting human that it was painful listening to him. He’s the definition of “cringey”. On the plus side, I think the host had a pleasant radio voice, which is important when you’re listening to them for hours. Also, generally the audio quality was decent, with a few exceptions.

I think it’s great and super interesting and I enjoy her banter with the X.

The 2 year boyfriend episodes are just so dumb. He seems like he’s really enjoying the attention. Also the idea that Christians are ok with doing whatever they want and can ask for forgiveness is laughable. Stick to the case.

So let me say that I had never heard of this story before. Well, I started this pod for the true crime story; I kept listening to psychoanalyze the host. Wow. The host spends hours telling the same stories over and over again. Did you know that Rachel told the police that Dan has a small penis? You will hear it no less than 20 times. According to the host, Daniel was a puppet completely controlled by his femme fatale, Rachel. It comes off as very misogynistic. Rachel is most definitely involved, but Dan committed the crime. And this pod treats Daniel as if he is innocent. The host is obsessed with Rachel to a point that comes off as very, very strange. She seems to have a personal hatred for her. I’ve never listened to an “investigative journalist” who was this biased. She doesn’t attempt to cover the story. I kept listening because of how bizarrely fascinating it was that an entire series was dedicated to the host’s hatred of one of the suspects. Wow. Just wow.

I had to stop listening because guess what, I heard Rachel Buffett thinks she’s an actress because the news says so. I heard it 20 times an episode.

Great job. Love long form. Great interview style. Love it.

This podcast was great, it was interesting hearing more about this case, since it was briefly covered elsewhere. A few episodes are missing though, which caused me to stop listening for a while. Eventually I gave up and downloaded the rest of the episodes.

Linda does a real great job of keeping the details straight for listeners. But episode 17 was boring and long. We relived everything again. In episode 18 after we hear yet entire confession phone call, Lind drags it out again with a detective that gives us no new perspective. I’ve heard this story before. This podcast started out really good. Got old at about episode 16. Ughhh

The topic of this podcast is very interesting. However, I found myself shocked so many times by the unprofessionalism of the host. She is biased in almost every comment she makes and does not hide her personal feelings. Some of the interviews in the podcasts made me feel like I was listening to two friends gossip about the case. This podcast could have been great if she just reported the facts. I do not recommend this podcast.

This story is very interesting but the host is very biased and openly has strong feelings about what happened. Though that is probably what did happen, unbiased journalism is so much stronger.

Overall a great podcast. I found out about this story through Dateline and this is more of a deep dive into who was in and around Rachel’s life. Good to get some perspective. The stories of her upbringing are very eye opening. Dan and Rachel seem like terrible actors. I can’t stand listening to their phone call when Dan tells Rachel that he’s turning himself in. Seems to fake. Can’t like either one of them.

Actually a great podcast once you get through it. I found it to be a little tough at first with the missing episodes but soon realized it doesn’t matter much. And contrary to my initial opinion once I heard the full phone calls between Dan and Rachel I do not think she knew the full extent of what happened. I think Dan is not given enough credit for being the sociopath he is. They both are (he and Rachel) but he lied and did what he did to impress her because he was such an empty soul. He was confused sexually IMO and a closeted homosexual who hated himself and all he was.

Good podcast. I personally felt a summary of the case was needed earlier on. I was unfamiliar with this case prior to listening. Had to stop around episode 2 or 3 and watch some videos in order to feel like I was able to follow along. Host has a great voice for podcasts and asks interesting questions.

Where are episodes 4, 5, and 6?!?!??

I love this podcast so far but can’t go on because of the missing episodes. Hopefully it gets resolved soon!

Anyone know what happened to #’s 4, 5, 6?

Missing episodes 4,5,6 ..... But I'm loving this podcast! Great info! Awesome reporting!!! Thanks for filling in the gaps!!!

Anyone else missing episode 4, 5, and 6? So strange but those are the only three missing. Great podcast otherwise

Great binge podcast with true investigative journalism and so much meat w in depth interviews w the key players, analysis of evidence and excellent analytical approach . Night and day above those podcasts that simply reiterate facts from articles and transcripts

Lived every minute! Fabulous host and great interviews. Truth always prevails. Narcissistic people always think they have everyone fooled. Not so much.

Not a bad story; but I cannot stand the hosts voice and how she talks ab things. Hard to listen to from that stand point.

The host is very biased and leads the people she’s interviewing with her opinions.... then they agree with her. Most of the podcast is her interviewing friends of the central two people. Some of the friends weren’t even friends for a long time and tell her a lot of hear say. Pass on this one.

Held my interest but she seemed very biased and made a lot of accusations without much substance to back them up. Host passed away so doubtful there will be another season.

The host loves to hear herself talk. I, unfortunately, do not.

this is a great story- fascinating and dark- told by the most self-righteous, smug, self-interested people. the details? fascinating. the banter? endless and often pointless. a solid b- c+ effort

This is a very extensive inside look on a double murder and how lawyers exclude evidence to fit their narrative to win the case. I wish there could be more but for those if you looking for more, I just learned that the host, Linda Sawyer, died unexpectedly do to surgical complications in early February 2019. She was only 57. Thank you for your exceptional journalism!!! RIP

Man does a bad thing. Tells a woman about it. People try to act like she helped him do it by trying to coerce people into backing each other’s statements to make it look like she’s guilty when it’s most likely he just killed those two people and then told her.

Host talks over the guests, ruining what could have been an interesting podcast.

Starts off great but grows incredibly frustrating with the interviews of random people... these people would have 1 or 2 pieces of interesting info but interview would drag on... she kept trying to make witnesses back up what other witnesses said. Very repetitive!!

This was phenomenal! Please do more!

Make. More. Podcasts. This is one of the best I’ve ever listened to. Absolutely love every minute of it.

The first episode as great! Then it went downhill. Appeared to be lengthy interviews with any person that may paint Rachel as a possibly accomplice. The interviews had no real questions it was just long gossip sessions with the “journalist”. Sad because this case couldn’t been done better.

This woman has some sort of obsession with Rachel and the longer I listened the more irritating it became. She uses the same anecdote about Rachel on Dr. Phil with multiple people in different episodes/interviews. It adds nothing to the interviews but she just NEEDS to talk about it again. She’s not a good interviewer. She asks redundant questions and then lets people go on and on about things that aren’t important, aren’t interesting or aren’t anything new because we heard about it four interviews ago. Don’t bother with this one. After 11 episodes I’m tired enough of this terrible podcast that I’m deleting it.

Lots of repetition and the Christianity digs were asinine.

Extremely repetitive! Host always talks about all the evidence she has found, most of it seems more like it’s gossip or opinion. Most of the people involved with the show just seem pretty fond of themselves.

Completely hooked... this is real investigative reporting... at it’s best! Can’t wait for season 2!

The episode with Rachel’s ex boyfriend was embarrassing, inappropriate , and a deal breaker for me. All the laughing and giggling. I’m done.

One every single episode (I’ve listened to 11 so far), the host just repeats the exact same information over and over again with different guests. I’ve heard the same dozen stories at least a dozen times. It’s truly bad storytelling for a professional journalist. She really seems to revel in the gossip of it all—often sharing tidbits with people who didn’t know and almost gushing at the chance to tell them about a dead woman’s consummation of her relationship. It’s very disturbing. She also demonizes and belittles Christians and homeschoolers with sweeping stereotypes. She gives the classic “socialization” argument and says, “when you’re homeschooled, you just don’t have the experience of being amongst your peers.“ Seems like maybe the “investigative journalist” would avoid such stereotypes and maybe spend some time with homeschool families who don’t have a psychopath or two in the family. There are plenty of awkward, anti-social murderers in traditional schools. I get that it’s unique that Rachel was homeschooled. But I sense there is a definite outdated stereotype running throughout the podcast. Do yourself a favor and pick one of the better true crime podcasts out there.

I wouldn’t call this journalism by any means. The interviewer is highly subjective, biased and often gossipy. It is a fascinating and tragic case and this podcast does do a good job of getting inside info on the people involved.

I loved every episode! I don’t know where the negative comments came from, but I saw nothing wrong with Linda’s behavior! Very professional!

Episodes 4-6 are missing?? I don’t want to jump ahead...

Not my favorite true crime podcast