![Creator Commentary: Denise Williams [+ AMA]](https://img5.xaiju.com/storage/2/ok/kr/d38796-019e82cf-7090-7953-a9a3-6df9466f9f8a.jpg)
Creator Commentary: Denise Williams [+ AMA]
Added 2024-11-25 04:18:14 +0000 UTCAnother Commentary to tie you over!
Ask Me Anything:
I thought as an additional make up for the delay I'd hold an AMA in the comments. If you want to ask a question about anything and everything (doesn't have to be about the channel or crime), post up below and I will get back to you in due course. I'll keep answering questions until the next video is released :)
Comments
Same. The only other was the stepdad of Laken Riley last year <3
Claire
2025-08-07 03:52:22 +0000 UTCI’ve watched a lot of true crime content and Mike’s mom’s speech is one of the only things that’s ever made me cry. So so devastating
Olivia T
2025-06-18 19:02:11 +0000 UTCYou mentioned the weird section of footage that was lost and covered up by a still image. I suspect this wasn’t a technical glitch but rather a way to exclude some info from the jury to avoid bias. Who knows, maybe the defense was adamant that something in that corner was somehow not admissible.
2bit
2025-04-25 00:22:20 +0000 UTCThanks Pam!
Matt Orchard
2024-12-16 09:48:24 +0000 UTCFound you by accident. You’re so witty. I’m really enjoying your documentaries.
Pam
2024-12-16 03:02:11 +0000 UTCI haven't thought much about it, but I think if I were to do it I'd definitely wait to see if he pleads not guilty and if the trial in such an event would be broadcast. Need to see how it plays out basically.
Matt Orchard
2024-12-12 05:18:04 +0000 UTCHey Matt, your next video will be on the United Health CEO slaying, right? I can’t think of a better topic for a YouTube channel devoted to crime and society. I’d love to hear your perspective, as someone from outside the U.S. healthcare system looking in. I know it’s a relatively recent event for your channel to cover, but I feel like there’s already so much material (and demand for it to be covered in more in-depth).
Matthew B.
2024-12-11 19:26:58 +0000 UTCI loved your digression about pronunciation! (And don't ask me how that one is said! It's a coin flip how I'll unconsciously say it.) I think some of it has to do with learning our vocabulary from reading. Awry sounded like aw-ree in my head and it took me years to figure out. Lol. I'll say "says" instead of "sez" fairly regularly. It feels like that is because of how it is written. English is so fickle with it's pronunciation of vowels.
James Higgins
2024-12-11 09:25:00 +0000 UTCI'm not at all educated in the details of the Letby case. Simply the fact that it was taken as a given she was guilty aprox a year ago, and as of aprox 6 months ago it's being highly questioned seems like it must have some seriously fascinating questions baked in.
Matt Orchard
2024-12-06 14:05:07 +0000 UTCMadeleine McCann definitely counts as a UK case and I'd be curious to hear your take on it. For me I still feel like it was Brueckner but I admit that the McCanns have acted oddly at times. James Bulgar's story is awfully tragic I agree. The Letby case is very interesting, I think there's still a lot more to come from it so could be worth visiting when (if?) the dust settles. It almost feels a bit like the Holtzclaw case where there's a question of institutional cover ups although I do think she is guilty.
TendieL
2024-12-05 11:43:46 +0000 UTCMadeleine McCann will surely happen at some point. Maybe even this coming year. I guess technically you could argue it's a Portugal case but surely it counts right? Some people have asked for James Bulgar, though I'm honestly not sure I can handle it. Although I'm not actively following or planning it, the Lucy Letby case looks like it could really be something.
Matt Orchard
2024-12-04 01:55:24 +0000 UTCHey Matt, no question, just wanted to say my wife and I thoroughly enjoy your content. Easily one of the best channels on youtube. Really looking forward to your Jonbenet Ramsey commentary when it comes!
Devon
2024-12-04 01:41:30 +0000 UTCHi Matt, thanks for another entertaining commentary and no worries on the delay to the next case - when the quality of the content is as high as yours I will always happily wait for the next one! My Question (as a Brit) is: have you considered covering any cases that occurred in the UK? And if not are there any UK-based cases that you find particularly interesting?
TendieL
2024-12-03 17:41:01 +0000 UTCA one-off collaboration with a 3D graphics artist would be pretty epic. Lemmino-style. No need for stock material. :)
Daniel Paulsson
2024-12-02 12:12:01 +0000 UTCNot really - in another answer below, I mentioned Scott Watson was a maybe. I'd love to do more kiwi cases, but the problem is we don't get reams of associated video and so forth like we do with US cases. Even just still imagery is way more limited. Bain was tough to put together for the same reason, but the news reports and the Black Hands mini series made it doable.
Matt Orchard
2024-12-02 06:43:11 +0000 UTCWhenever the video is done, that's the perfect time to release it. Looking forward to this case though, you make it sound so interesting.
Reiken Kayzer
2024-12-02 02:44:56 +0000 UTCDo you have any NZ cases in the pipeline?
Daniel Paulsson
2024-12-02 00:08:41 +0000 UTCI don't know that they fell apart as such, it could just be other things going on in their lives. But no, I don't have inside knowledge about the specifics of what's going on behind the scenes or why they're making certain production decisions etc.
Matt Orchard
2024-12-01 05:03:00 +0000 UTCDoesn’t really pertain to your channel directly, but I was wondering if you had any behind-the-scenes understanding of what caused JCS to fall apart, given your relationship with the channel. It seems odd how they sort of fizzled out despite their massive success, and in their last upload they seemed to be using an AI voice instead of Kizzume.
David Garner
2024-12-01 04:44:56 +0000 UTCWhen I say John, I mean John Alone. I recommend checking out DocGs blog on it to get further insight into how that could work with all the main evidence. Preferably just shell out the 5 bucks for his e-book, because that's nicely organized and concise. I don't necessarily agree with every inch of his takes and theories, but the rough frame work he's come up with seems about right to me, IF it is John and not an intruder who got in much earlier in the day and hid in the basement: https://solvingjonbenet.blogspot.com/
Matt Orchard
2024-11-30 05:57:25 +0000 UTCYeah, my own feeling is that (likely) John killed her, and somehow convinced Patsy to go along with it. Does that make sense psychologically? Probably not--but the evidence makes more sense if the two of them are working together. And especially their behavior afterwards; I just struggle to believe they'd take the actions they'd take if they were actually innocent victims. I didn't realize the CBS experiment was as shaky as you say. But I'm not surprised that dubious results turn into certified truth over time in an internet equivalent to the game of telephone. Appreciate the response!
Jonathan Gill
2024-11-29 21:42:04 +0000 UTCOhhhhhhh, there’s so much evidence in the JBR case. No one thing really stands out. There were supposed scat issues with Burke - a former nanny alleged he smeared poop on JBs belongings if I’m recalling correctly. It’s confirmed he hit her with a golf club once - family says it was an accident. There’s some language in the note that people think is remarkably reminiscent of one of Patsy’s favorite books - good write up on that here: https://www.reddit.com/r/JonBenetRamsey/comments/g658yp/profoundly_patsy/ Speaking of the note, the linking pattern comparisons shown in the video is probably the one thing people find most compelling in it. With that knowledge, I now think it would have been worth putting some sort of rebuttal to handwriting analysis in the intruder section. I certainly think the similarities are interesting, but it does need to be stressed that it's not hard science. People who have different handwriting but use a similar font style can often link words in the same way a lot of the time. My personal stance on the case is the same as when that video came out. I think it’s totally bizarre and extremely confusing. When I boil things down to the strongest, most undeniable pieces of evidence though, I think the conclusion to be drawn is that it MUST be EITHER…John or an Intruder. The one thing that really leads me to make that call is the skull fracture. I’m in the camp that says that had to have been inflicted by an adult male. One of the things that makes me most confident in that is actually the CBS experiment that purports to refute that claim. So they have an 8 year old swing a mag flashlight at a pig skull with a wig on it as hard as he can. Already I don’t like the test because A) their whole thing was Burke struck her in a moment of anger as she was running away with a piece of pineapple, not that he did it with full lethal intent while she was static, and B) The boy may be 8, but he looks much less…well, sickly. No offense to 8 year old Burke. Anyway, in spite of that slant to the experiment, the boy DOESN’T manage to create a similar fracture. He creates the same shaped gash. Jim Celemente makes a big deal of that - great, it shows the mag light is a good murder weapon candidate, I’m fine with that part. But Celemente doesn’t remove the wig and give us a full look at the skull which seems just crazy seeing as it should be the whole point. You can screen grab what he does show and zoom in though, and I think you’ll see it’s quite apparent the skull has NOT been nearly split in two with that massive fault line type fracture we see in JBRs skull. That fracture was just too massive to have been any type of accident. Grown man swinging with all he’s got. Intruder or John. That’s my take. I don’t know precisely how it all worked and why everything came to be like it was, but…Intruder or John. On NZ: I’m just not a great tourist guide because I’m not a big outdoors adventure type guy which I think is largely what NZ is best for…so use that as some sort of tip I suppose. If you’re going to spend time in a “Big 3”city I would recommend Wellington - our capital, as well as our cultural hub. Christchurch is too boring and Auckland is sort of a poor man's Sydney. It’s fine, but being NZs biggest city isn’t saying much, you might as well go to a big country’s biggest city for an urban tourist experience.
Matt Orchard
2024-11-29 02:56:44 +0000 UTCMight be a poorly timed AMA question, as I can tell the creator commentary series is getting close to the JonBenet Ramsey video, but eh I'll ask anyways: What would you say is the most significant evidence you had to leave out of the JonBenet video? Have your thoughts on the plausibility of each theory changed since you made the video? It's a baffling case, as nothing quite satisfactorily adds up, though I for one feel pretty certain a family member, or members, are to blame. The family's actions after her death are suspicious enough in a way I can't square with how an innocent family would act. Oh non-Youtube related question: What would you say is the best place in New Zealand to visit that a tourist wouldn't think of?
Jonathan Gill
2024-11-28 19:32:42 +0000 UTCScott Watson is one I've gotten requests for multiple times because it's a very interesting New Zealand case, but I've so far not looked at it because I don't think it has the prerequisite footage and visuals. I've recently come to think it may be potentially doable after all, but still a bit of a challenge for the reason stated. It's not a top priority but it could happen, maybe even this coming year. Something being overdone isn't really a big draw back. Yeah some people will complain about seeing it before, but honestly, famous cases also tend to get clicks . "I already know this one!" is a dumb complaint anyway, it's not as if the sole purpose of videos is to tell you a thing happened. People know WW2 happened, yet the movies just seem to keep coming!
Matt Orchard
2024-11-28 06:31:56 +0000 UTCAs for the AMA, are there any cases you've been requested to do a lot but have decided not to, either because they're "overdone", or for any other reason?
Eyeless Iris
2024-11-28 05:09:12 +0000 UTCby all means please take all the time you need! yours is by far my favorite true crime channel because of the quality of your output, whereas many others treat it as content farm fodder. it's preferable to wait longer for a better result than pumping out low-quality content fast to "please the algorithm".
Eyeless Iris
2024-11-28 05:06:44 +0000 UTCYeah I could definitely look at the Avery case at some point. From the little I've seen about it, it does LOOK like one of those ones where a slanted documentary has warped public perception of how gray the case really is - i.e. you need to pretty aggressively omit,nit-pick, and exaggerate to make it look gray at all. That's just a preliminary, face value assessment though, I'm really not that familiar with the details of it.
Matt Orchard
2024-11-28 03:32:42 +0000 UTCi know you’ve mentioned doing the steven avery case, not really a good Q&A question more of a comment, but i REALLY would love to see that. the docuseries was infuriating to me. i understand where the defense is coming from, but i could not get to reasonable doubt about the blood evidence if i were a juror. i felt they were asking too much by proposing an orchestrated murder and planting of evidence by the police just to put avery back in prison. from my memory of watching it, i felt that they wanted me to believe the police were a bunch of buffoons who could also carry out such a plot without anyone blowing the whistle. you’re more thorough than i’ve ever been in seeking out evidence there–though i found it particularly difficult to find more information on the blood evidence–so i’d really love to hear your take on it.
zoë solomon
2024-11-27 13:06:56 +0000 UTCI promise to come up with better questions next time!
Alan Holding
2024-11-27 06:35:40 +0000 UTCDon't deal with fuzz pedals, sorry. Farts are essentially microscopic particles of poo I've been told, so yes they are in a sense ghosts of food we ate.
Matt Orchard
2024-11-27 00:14:09 +0000 UTCThis episode is my absolute favorite “join my Patreon” treatment and is what made me join. I always laugh when hear it and amazing video as always!!
Kevin Fox
2024-11-26 19:29:14 +0000 UTCThanks for the commentary and the updates! I have no issues with videos taking a while longer to make, because quality ones are rewatchable (I've seen the memory wars one several times, somewhat ironically). I don't have any particular questions for now, except daft ones like "top three favourite fuzz pedals?" and "are farts the ghosts of the food we ate?"
Alan Holding
2024-11-26 18:21:08 +0000 UTCYour ramble about how to pronounce “says” is me with my Midwestern accent pronouncing “ten”. To me, “tin” and “ten” are homophones, and it blows my mind that people can tell the difference.
Marie
2024-11-26 06:29:37 +0000 UTCThanks! Hmmm, an addendum type video for this one - it's not a bad idea! There's actually a crazy...like *crazy* angle that I wrestled back and forth with including in the proper video but ultimately decided it would just be going too too far into unadulterated conjecture. To anyone reading this who is well versed in the case and is thinking, "Oh, you're not going to look at the third option?" - na, na, we'll be talking about that in some depth...I'm talking cray. zee. Makes what you're thinking about look tame by comparison. Anyhoo - that totally crazy, yet in spite of myself, I think very interesting angle, would obviously be fun to walk you all through. The good news is I mentioned a bonus interview with an author. That will contain extensive discussion of what I'm alluding to here. Could it be worth an additional extra where I explain in my own words why I don't actually dismiss this nutty concept? Maybe. Also, from how much I'm sort of hyping this nondescript thing, it might sound disappointing that the video itself isn't actually going there. But trust me, I think once you're filled in on it, and once you see how crazy the video does actually get, you will totally understand. Some things should stay in the "deeper reading" section, and are just too much to expect a general viewing audience to take in in a single sitting.
Matt Orchard
2024-11-26 03:18:32 +0000 UTCYup, in chronological order I think it's just two away!
Matt Orchard
2024-11-26 03:02:49 +0000 UTCOn both counts it's JonBenet! Funny because Netflix literally JUST dropped a series which I will be checking out. I don't have high hopes though. It's Joe Berlinger, who's a good film maker, but as far as I'm concerned has the wrong editorial take every single time. I also think he's shown himself to be a fundamentally immoral person. Same guy who made the decision to open Paradise Lost with graphic imagery of Michael, Christopher and Stevie's dead bodies without permission from the parents who invited him into their living rooms during the peak of their unimaginable grief...Sorry, I got distracted. Anyway - from the sounds of it, that's going to be an intruder angle. It could be an intruder! I just wish someone would do a honest to god from the ground up docu-series on that case, making the very best case for each main angle. So basically my video concept, except way bigger and with a full production budget with original interviews, access to material not readily in the public domain, and all that good stuff I'm not the beneficiary of. Every time a well financed doco is made on that case, it's always someone with an agenda from some direction...or it's just way too surface level like ID or whatever. The thing that's fascinating about the JonBenet case is that there is so much evidence that does seem to point in contradictory directions. With what we know right now, which may well be all we ever know at this point, it's just not suited to taking sides on. But these production companies just cannot seem to help themselves.
Matt Orchard
2024-11-26 02:51:06 +0000 UTCDon't worry me!
Matt Orchard
2024-11-26 02:37:26 +0000 UTCThanks! Yeah JCS just wound up being the basis for how I got started (origin story in Denis Leary and Anthony Palma commentaries) but over time it's been more the storytelling and (where applicable) wider case analysis that I've developed more of a passion for. Raw footage breakdowns are always a nice thing to be able to fall back on, but they're not really vital components anymore. JCS would still be the main influence as far as YT creators go. When I'm surfing YT I'm actually never watching content similar to mine these days. I didn't even watch much true crime on YT before JCS, except a little That Chapter here and there. I think the other main influences on my channel are actually movies and TV shows - including but certainly not limited to documentaries. Storytelling is a big aspect of things, so I'm influenced by storytellers I've experience over the years.
Matt Orchard
2024-11-26 02:37:08 +0000 UTCIn terms of finding cases, I keep a google doc that just has a list of anything that catches my eye, or that people recommended. Often the subject for the next vid has been naturally decided before wrapping the one I'm working on (Sarah Boone is probably next after this) other times I might just have to go through that doc and basically go with the first one that looks like it has enough material to build a video around (interrogation, court footage, 911 calls, news interviews, existing docos for small clips and visual aid, that sort of stuff) Research and writing takes up about 80% of production time, and that's because there is actually no real step by step method to getting your head around a big case - it's about as daunting as it sounds. Basically I'll just watch/listen/read everything I can find about the case (except other YT vids in the same genre as mine) without a crystal clear idea of what I'm looking for, because often you don't know it til you see it. As I'm doing that I'll take notes, and have questions, and over time the things I find myself pondering the most inform where the project will be going. I usually start writing the script after about roughly two weeks of background research and then I keep researching while slowly writing my way through the script. Obviously it's not always THAT overwhelming. With a case like Denise Williams for instance, you don't need that much time to understand the case at all. But it's still the same basic process on a lower scale.
Matt Orchard
2024-11-26 02:28:19 +0000 UTCI'm not enough of a True Crime junkie to know about the Matt Peterson case, so I'll be going into your video blind. I think it's always better to make sure the quality is there, rather than rush something for the sake of a deadline (though I get it; Christmas videos seem to be a bit of a tradition for the channel). Would it make sense to have an informal Patreon video afterwards to discuss the researching/scripting process? I could imagine that being an enjoyable peak behind the curtains, like where you have to make decisions when the script can "spiral" in a number of different directions, or parts about the evidence that were hard to present for whatever reason. Just an idea; I even found your discussion of the process in this update to be quite interesting. (And again I know nothing about the actual case here). The original Denise Williams video is a fun one; one of the earlier ones I must have watched. It's got the "soap opera" drama to it, and it ends on some very powerful testimonies from the friend/murderer and especially the mother. Likewise, through these commentaries I get a better sense of the creative choices involved in these, how as a viewer I'll take for granted that there's an intrinsic "angle" to the case where things are presented in a certain order as part of a certain narrative. But that couldn't be further from the truth for how these videos come together. That's just a long way for me to get to the point you made that the opening narrative, where Denise is presented as an innocent, endangered victim, works really well. Interrogation footage videos can be a bit dry (yes I'm talking about JCS), but those narrative choices and the pacing decisions in the video make it a rather engaging one.
Jonathan Gill
2024-11-25 23:36:50 +0000 UTCReally looking forward to a Jon Benet-cimmentary. Any plans on making it?
Björn Mosten
2024-11-25 21:48:51 +0000 UTChi Matt! got a question. if you were given the opportunity (and had any desire) to produce a big blowout pie-in-the-sky Netflix docuseries on any one case, covering all the angles, which case do you think deserves it to the most? alternatively, do you have any personal 'white whale' unsolved cases that you can just never wrap your head around? for me, it has to be Jason Jolkowski's disappearance. love the vids, and looking forward to the 20th! i've opted to check your version of it before the Netflix version :)
bittermixin
2024-11-25 18:43:00 +0000 UTCLooking forward to the Michael Peterson case, it sounds exciting and I know nothing about Peterson. Always appreciate your content and style.
Big B
2024-11-25 18:11:27 +0000 UTCI hope you get it out before the post Christmas ad buy reduction!
Brian
2024-11-25 17:58:11 +0000 UTCNo worries about the delay Matt. I always associate your end of the year videos with the holiday season. And like you said, a vague Christmas theme covers the Michael Peterson case. I'm curious about your influences. Obviously, you started emulating the look and feel of JCS. But that was never what drew me to your channel. It was videos on cases like JonBenét Ramsey or Scott Peterson that were always my favorite. Videos where the draw isn't interrogation footage, but a fascinating chain of events that can tell an incredible story. Beyond JCS, are there other YouTube channels, podcasters, authors or anyone whom you took influence from with how you structure your videos?
Evan Monroe
2024-11-25 17:40:38 +0000 UTCWhat is the research process like for you? Do you kind of start to save stuff as new, interesting cases pop up? How do you pick a place to start with something as daunting as Michael Peterson in terms of the amount of content and just Stuff to sort through?
audrey renee
2024-11-25 14:00:18 +0000 UTCThat makes a lot of sense! Whatever you’re doing, it’s definitely working 😊
Clare
2024-11-25 12:13:49 +0000 UTCAlmost fully solo - I work with a graphic design guy (Alex) for thumbnails, and he'll also sometimes do other imagery touch ups too. Sometimes I'll reach out to a case researcher and solicit their feedback on the factual accuracy of scripts and other insights. It's not so much that I want to keep it solo, but there isn't much in my process I can outsource - or that would even be more efficient if out sourced!
Matt Orchard
2024-11-25 10:27:58 +0000 UTCLove your videos Matt. Do you currently work fully independently on your projects? If yes, do you think there'll be a point where you end up hiring people, or are you trying to keep it solo?
Clare
2024-11-25 10:07:44 +0000 UTCOh god this is embarrassing. Speaking of memory, I have already watched that video before and I still somehow forgot.
Ash Khaimhera
2024-11-25 09:15:23 +0000 UTCThere was that craze about using teeth or bite marks as solid evidence with disastrous results as well.
Ash Khaimhera
2024-11-25 09:08:02 +0000 UTCThe Memory Wars is exactly this! It's on the main channel, and is a bit of a "cult favorite" among core fans of the channel. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnAwAhC7JLU
Matt Orchard
2024-11-25 09:04:20 +0000 UTCThis is really involved and might be difficult to explain in just one video but do you have any interest in false or implanted memories, like the advent of the Satanic panic for instance?
Ash Khaimhera
2024-11-25 08:59:21 +0000 UTCFixed now if you want to hear what I was saying in that last part lol.
Matt Orchard
2024-11-25 06:52:52 +0000 UTCOh shit! I mixed it wrong! I'll look into replacing it now, thanks for the catch!
Matt Orchard
2024-11-25 05:35:45 +0000 UTCSome of your commentary at the end of the victim statements is hard to hear, but otherwise it's great to hear your thoughts on another case!
eqyalrynaway
2024-11-25 05:25:28 +0000 UTCThat's such a good point! It's like finding someone's fingerprints all over a murder scene sounds really bad, but if the suspect is the victim's significant other and the murder scene was their bedroom, that's not exactly odd.
sunny crays
2024-11-25 05:24:23 +0000 UTCIt's a great doco series so my stance is you can either spoil some of the twists and turns in the doco by watching my vid first, or spoil them in my vid by watching the doco first. Pros and cons to either, and in any event my vid will have a lot of stuff the doco doesn't, and the doco will give you way more of an inside look at Peterosn and his fmaily than my vid will. They won't actually ruin one another by any stretch of the imagination.
Matt Orchard
2024-11-25 05:23:09 +0000 UTCWhat a great question. I was thinking of saying something like body language or behavioral analysis (which is sort of funny because I make no bones about engaging with it, especially the latter) but I think there is actually a decent percentage of TC followers who know to take it with a grain of salt. Instead I'll give a broad answer of "sciency sounding stuff." You'll often hear people dismiss or pump up a case because of the presence or lack of "forensic evidence" - which is such a broad description as to almost be meaningless. But basically DNA, Ballistics, blood spatter, "physical" evidence, you name it. These things can be super compelling, or they can be super weak, it just depends case by case what you've specifically got. But I think there's a widespread conception that if lab coats are involved it *must* be serious, and if lab coats aren't involved it *must* be weak sauce. In a similar vein, one of my pet peeves is how often a case will be criticized for being "purely circumstantial", implying circumstantial is synonymous with weak. But it's actually nothing more or less than a category of evidence. Just like the things mentioned above it can be weak, but it can also be absolutely devastating. Scott Peterson is a great example of that. Some people criticize that case as having no physical evidence: 1) Who cares?, 2) It actually does involve some physical evidence, 3) Physical evidence is in fact a sub category of circumstantial evidence!!!
Matt Orchard
2024-11-25 05:19:53 +0000 UTCNext to the polygraph, what tactic or type of "evidence" do you think the general public has way too much confidence in?
sunny crays
2024-11-25 04:39:53 +0000 UTCYeah, I kinda had that feeling. But I do agree with you. And not just JCS, but a lot of other true crime channels have covered Amato’s case too tbf. But yeah, hope you get to it one day! And I’m looking forward to the Michael Peterson case! I know nothing about it, but iirc you mentioned a documentary on the case in a previous commentary video, and you seemed kinda conflicted if we should watch it before watching your video lol. So now I’m kinda conflicted too haha.
Joe Shea
2024-11-25 04:39:10 +0000 UTCPotentially - It's sort of low priority because JCS covered it well and I don't know if there's a whole lot more to it than what's seen there - could be. It's not as if JCS covering a case is a deal breaker. Obviously I did Russell Williams, and there will likely be a Casey Anthony vid one day. But it would probably be a "rainy day" option rather than a big priority.
Matt Orchard
2024-11-25 04:32:50 +0000 UTCAny chance you might cover the Grant Amato case? I know it’s got some similarities to the Joel Guy Jr. and Chandler Halderson cases (I’ve nicknamed this three “We Three NEETs” lol), but Amato’s case has its own uniquely bizarre elements that I’d love to hear your perspective on.
Joe Shea
2024-11-25 04:24:19 +0000 UTC
