Terrible “insight.” predictable cases, molasses delivery
☆
☆
☆
☆
☆
“In short: boring and mind-numbingly condescending. These two very-late-to-the-true-crime-podcast psychologists use their constantly overhyped credentials (!!!!!!!) to act like every other podcaster out there isn’t worth your time (I’m sorry but shows like “Murder Squad” are infinitely better — obtaining a Ph.D.in psychology, during which you specialized in other matters, does not mean you know more about tracking and catching criminals than Paul Holes).
Not only are the hosts arrogant, spending way too much time eating, making lots of noise, and drinking wine or whatever, (oh and my spouse and I are Ph.D.s in different fields so we aren’t intimidated by the constant references to “doctor?” “Yes doctor!”) they cover the same old stories with less insight. You two honestly believed the absurd owl story in the Peterson case, which was propagated by Peterson’s friend a lawyer, NOT an owl expert, without bothering to ask ONE expert how many fatalities are caused by owls, after flying inside a house (which is necessary for the damage caused), who then escaped, leaving behind TWO MICROSCOPIC feathers?! You do know that He ray Lee has his own credibility issues, right? For one he knows nothing about owl attacks. Yet you blamed it all on “racism” because the editor, with whom Peterson was conducting an affair, edited to make NC people look racist — not that he wasn’t believable.
I am very pleased that you are not lawyers or criminal investigators. And you forgot to mention that Michael Peterson was sleeping with the documentary’s editor?! Seriously?!! And folks that is the least of their issues. They also focus on wealthy white parents when discussing missing children (no concern for others — cause only wealthy white parents get media attention. Barf!) .
You have heard these cases a million times before on many far better podcasts. They add nothing as they do zero research except reading from the latest version of the DSM. No I’m not kidding. The entire gimmick of this show is that these two are unimpressive psychologists (which means Ph.D.s not M.D.s) This is the second review I have attempted to leave for this podcast, so I stayed subscribed for a longer amount of time to see if they won’t scrub it. Sigh.”
LydianalaMode via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
10/10/19
More reviews of L.A. Not So Confidential
☆
☆
☆
☆
☆
“So I actually stumbled onto this podcast because of Pretty Scary. Ever since that happened I have been in love with this podcast and the wonderful hosts! I would recommend this podcast to anyone who loves to think, have there mind challenged, or even just loves to hear the insight of some truly...”Read full review »
WhatTommy22 via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
08/01/19
☆
☆
☆
☆
☆
“Check out the article called “The Golden Suicides” from Vanity Fair— I think you guys would really dig it.”
rustyarfs via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
01/29/20
☆
☆
☆
☆
☆
“I have to admit I have somewhat of a fascination with true crime but my fascination isn't about the act as much as the psychology that leads to the crimes. What makes people tick? This podcast really delves into just that.”Read full review »
walking into Walls via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
11/21/19
Do you host a podcast?
Track your ranks and reviews from Spotify, Apple Podcasts and more.
Listen now
Links
Genres
Artwork or description wrong?
Request an update »
Updates may take a few minutes.
Do you host a podcast?
Track your ranks and reviews from Spotify, Apple Podcasts and more.
