Why Doesn't Ear Hustle Talk About People's Crimes?

Summary

Ear Hustle Episode Summary: "Why Doesn't Ear Hustle Talk About People's Crimes?"

Introduction

In the April 25, 2025 episode of Ear Hustle, hosts Nigel Poor, Earlonne Woods, and producer Amy engage in a candid discussion addressing listener concerns about the podcast's approach to covering the crimes of incarcerated individuals. This episode delves into the ethical considerations, storytelling choices, and the emotional complexities of representing those on death row without focusing on their offenses.

Context: Previous Episodes and Listener Feedback

Prior to this episode, Ear Hustle released two significant episodes focusing on individuals being released from death row in San Quentin State Prison and the Central California Women's Facility (CCWF). These episodes sparked a substantial response from listeners, prompting questions about why the podcast chooses not to delve into the specific crimes committed by the featured individuals.

Earlonne [00:17]: "We wanted to get the four of us together, the people who were most involved and kind of both were reporting, interviewing those stories and then crafting the stories to just talk through our experience making it."

Hosts Discussing Their Approach to Not Discussing Crimes

Nigel Poor and Earlonne Woods explain that Ear Hustle primarily focuses on the daily lives and personal experiences of incarcerated individuals rather than the nature of their crimes. This approach aligns with the podcast's mission to highlight "everyday stories of life inside" prison systems.

Nigel [07:32]: "The story was not about what you did to get to death row. It was about what is it like to leave death row. So it didn't seem important to the story."

Earlonne [06:21]: "Our general practice is to not talk about people's crimes. In like, 99% of the stories we do, we don't get into people's crimes."

Rationale Behind Focusing on Daily Life in Prison

The hosts articulate that delving into the crimes could overshadow the human aspect they aim to portray. By not highlighting the offenses, Ear Hustle seeks to present a multifaceted view of incarcerated individuals, emphasizing their humanity and personal struggles over their past actions.

Amy [07:57]: "It's not necessary. What got you to prison is how are you able to live a life inside this place?"

Nigel [10:07]: "We try not to go that route."

Sexism and Death Row Representation

A significant portion of the discussion revolves around the gender disparity on death row, with notably fewer women compared to men. The hosts express concerns about inherent sexism in the justice system and how this influences listener perceptions and reactions.

Nigel [18:23]: "I 100% believe there's some inherent sexism in it. I mean, as Earlonne said, a woman's there and you're curious. I am too."

Amy [19:31]: "It's the prosecutors who are gonna ask for that [death sentence], and they're more liberal in Southern California."

Listener Reactions and Specific Comments

The episode features the hosts reading and responding to listener feedback. Critics expressed discomfort with the perceived lightness and humor in episodes featuring individuals on death row, questioning the lack of emphasis on their crimes.

Listener Comment [35:13]: "It was the first time that the lightness and humor felt disrespectful towards the victims."

Nigel [35:44]: "We thought a lot about the lightheartedness of it, but again, that's where we were."

Addressing Concerns About Victims and Crime Glorification

The hosts clarify that their intention is not to glorify or excuse the crimes committed but to provide a platform for incarcerated individuals to share their lives beyond their offenses. They emphasize the importance of understanding and compassion while acknowledging that some listeners may find this approach challenging.

Earlonne [38:34]: "We are not in the business of judging people... We're not doing a story with you. So we're gonna discriminate against you and not do the story based on this information."

Nigel [29:43]: "We are not glorifying anybody. We're telling stories."

Ethical Considerations and Future Directions

The discussion highlights the ethical dilemmas of balancing storytelling with sensitivity towards victims. The hosts express a desire to include more perspectives, such as victims or prosecutors, in future episodes to enrich the narrative and provide a more comprehensive view of the criminal justice system.

Nigel [43:55]: "I would talk to more victims, for sure. It would depend."

Amy [44:00]: "We're not asking anyone to be sympathetic. It's fine if you're not sympathetic."

Conclusions and Perspectives on Storytelling

Ear Hustle concludes the episode by reaffirming their commitment to telling the nuanced stories of incarcerated individuals while remaining open to feedback and ongoing dialogue about their storytelling choices. They acknowledge the complexity of the issues and the diverse reactions from their audience, emphasizing the importance of continued conversation and reflection.

Earlonne [39:15]: "If people have complicated feelings at the end of our episode, great. That's kind of the point."

Nigel [47:08]: "How can you answer that until you experience what they've experienced?"

Closing Thoughts

The hosts of Ear Hustle demonstrate a thoughtful and introspective approach to addressing listener concerns, balancing the desire to humanize incarcerated individuals with the ethical implications of not discussing their crimes. This episode serves as a platform for the creators to articulate their storytelling philosophy and engage directly with their audience's concerns, fostering a deeper understanding of the complexities involved in narrating life within the prison system.

Transcript

[Earlonne]

Earlonne, Nigel, Amy.

[Nigel]

Hello.

[Earlonne]

Hello.

[Amy]

This is a first.

[Nigel]

This is a first.

[Earlonne]

This is the first. The four of us on Mike.

[Nigel]

Yeah.

[Amy]

First of us, we in here with the heavy hitters.

[Nigel]

I know that's right.

[Unknown]

What are we doing?

[Earlonne]

That's how we're thought of on this team.

[Nigel]

Why are we all together today on Mike?

[Earlonne]

I'm so glad you asked, Nigel. We thought before we released these last two episodes, which were about people getting off death row in San Quentin and then people getting off row at Central California women's facility on the team, we'd had a lot of conversations about how to frame the stories, how to approach particular parts of it. And then after the last episode came out, a lot of those issues were raised by listeners in comments and emails and Instagram. So we wanted just to get the four of us together, the people who were most involved and kind of both were reporting, interviewing those stories and then crafting the stories to just talk through our experience making it, how we made some of the decisions we made. And I also have some of the comments that we receive printed out here. So I thought we could just maybe take a stab at talking about some of them.

[Amy]

Okay, sounds good.

[Earlonne]

And I should say, yeah, I mean, we have amazing listeners, very thoughtful. So we were very grateful for comments. Even the critical ones, I feel like, were generally very civil and thoughtful as we've come to expect from our dear listeners. And I guess maybe before we get in, I should name the issue, which is specifically, like, the people who we talked to in both episodes were convicted of. You know, they all had condemned sentences because they were found guilty of doing some of the worst things somebody could do. And so, you know, it raised questions about how we represented them, how we talked to them, the questions we talked to them about, and whether and how we talked about their crimes.

[Nigel]

Yeah. Yep.

[Earlonne]

So maybe before we get into those questions, I thought it would be useful for us just to talk. Actually, I should say, I think people know Earlonne and Nigel.

[Amy]

If you don't. I'm Earlonne.

[Earlonne]

This is Nigel. Amy people probably know as well, but is our editor and also producer on a lot of the stories. So you're in a lot of the interviews, but also.

[Unknown]

No, not these.

[Earlonne]

But not these. But you're also sort of lead the charge in thinking about the thorny issues. So. And I was the producer. I was at all of these interviews and also involved in sort of the editorial process, how we decided how to deal with all these things. So maybe we just start off. I thought it'd be useful for us just to talk about our experience reporting this story, working on these two stories, because we all had different experiences and started puzzling through a lot of these questions as we did these interviews.

[Nigel]

I could talk for a long time about this, so cut me off. Doing the men's one was felt very heavy. When I think about it, it's in the shade, meaning that it was darker and very emotional. Going back to death row with them definitely gave it a different feel. We didn't do that with the women. We only met them in a studio in quotes space. So after we did the men's one, I really wanted to do one at the women's to see how different it was. We went to ccwf, I think three times. Mostly because we felt like we needed to keep getting more, that we weren't getting what we needed for the episode. So both of them weighed heavily on me. I was surprised by the different tone of the two interviews, probably as surprised as most listeners were. And I wanted to do justice to. To what it means to be on death row. What's the responsibility of talking to people who have committed really serious crimes, but also allowing them to just be who they were in the moment? So those are things I was thinking about.

[Earlonne]

And so Earlonne, you also came into San Quentin for almost all of that reporting, going back to death row, talking to them before. I don't think you were there for the follow up we did with Stephen Void and then you were there on all the cwf.

[Amy]

Yeah, I think you know, me personally, you know, as a person that has spent close to like 30 years in prison, I think I see it from a. I guess you could say a different lens. When I talk to people that's incarcerated, I try not to talk to them from a point of view of judging. So when I walked into it, I was just open just to hear what they had to say, what they takeaways was, what they point of views was. That's pretty much what my thoughts was. Because being in San Quentin and watching the men in there not be chained anymore, I was really curious about how was that look, being around people now that you're no longer restrained, you know what I'm saying? And crazy part is you the same person, you know, how you haven't changed, so what's the difference? So that was just my thought process.

[Earlonne]

Two things I might mention. One thing that just affected the overall tone, I think, was that we went back to. We were able to go back to condemned row at San Quentin with the guys we couldn't do that at Central California Women's Facility. And I think you describe it as being a very shadowed experience. I think so much of that was because we could go back to that place with them. So both they were encountering it again. But also we experienced what is. I mean, physically, it's just like a very dark place and a place you imagine with a lot of heavy history. And we didn't have that experience with the women at all.

[Nigel]

No.

[Amy]

Yeah. It was like going back, going to Purgatory.

[Nigel]

Well, even just going to the housing units at San Quentin and the housing units at ccw. I've been to other ones. They are night and day. All of the housing units at San Quentin are pretty dark, dark, dank places. And the ones at CCWF just aren't. So I can imagine they're much more open. They've got windows. I can imagine from the way they described death row, it probably looked very similar. So I think physically we would have had a different experience, even if emotionally they had some dark times there. I don't want to get ahead of what we're talking about, but from the way they discussed it, I imagine that they would have a different physical reaction to being back there.

[Earlonne]

And I thought maybe we could talk about how the four of us sort of thought about and processed the crimes that these people did. I think might be worth getting to before we get to the listener questions. Before we do that, though, I thought it would be useful for somebody to remind us listeners why our general practice is to not talk about people's crimes. You know, in like, 99% of the stories we do, we don't get into people's crimes.

[Nigel]

We don't. I mean, Earlonne mentioned this, but I do the same thing as I don't want it. I do. Not there to judge people. I'm here. I'm there to listen to them. And in most cases, their crime is not essential to the story. It still wasn't on the Death row episode for many years. I've had the not a rule for myself. I just wasn't curious. I never looked at people's crimes. That's a recent change for me. And I don't always. And I actually prefer to not do it because it isn't salient to the story at hand. That's changed slightly, and we can talk about that. But the story was not about what you did to get to death row. It was about what is it like to leave death row. So it didn't seem important to the story.

[Amy]

And I think, like, the origins of ear hustle is to talk about what, a day in the life of you, you know, in prison. What is our slogan?

[Nigel]

Yeah. Everyday stories of life inside.

[Amy]

Everyday stories told by those who are living it.

[Nigel]

Yeah.

[Amy]

So it's not necessari. What got you to prison is how are you able to live a life inside this place?

[Nigel]

And unfortunately, that may lead people to think we don't care about victims, which isn't the case at all.

[Earlonne]

Yeah.

[Amy]

But sometimes I think early on when we was doing stories that were really. Let's just say the crime might have been vile, foul, whatever you want to say. And a person might not want to listen to the story if you say, well, you know, this person. And I'm just speaking put a baby in the microwave.

[Earlonne]

Right.

[Amy]

And I'm just saying, I'm just speaking extreme. But if a person hear the story and then find that out later, then they may have something to say or they might just pass it by, or they might learn something from it. But if we started off with this person did this, this, that you might turn off, and you might turn off some good information or something that's, you know, very relevant to probably your life.

[Earlonne]

Yeah. It's hard to hear a story about somebody's daily life if you've heard what that they've been convicted of. A parent.

[Unknown]

It could be totally. In some cases, just totally distracting. And that would be the thing that the listener took away from that episode would be some story of a crime that really had nothing to do with whatever story we're trying to tell. I think there's sort of philosophical reasons, like we're talking to people where they are now about who they are now. Often this is a crime that they committed 20 years ago. Not that, you know, the length of time necessarily matters, but practically speaking, also, like, how much of the crime can we tell? It becomes sort of impossible. I mean, do we tell the full story? Do we tell the victim's perspective and also the guy who did its perspective? Do we look into the causes? Do we have much of the backstory? It's both a level of reporting that we're just not set up to do, but also it's. I think it's not the story that we came to tell.

[Nigel]

Right. Yeah.

[Unknown]

It's a policy that we can kind of stick to across the board.

[Amy]

And based on who we talk to, that would be the easiest thing to do, is to talk about people. Crimes.

[Nigel]

Oh, my God.

[Amy]

Yes.

[Nigel]

That's very different.

[Unknown]

Yeah.

[Nigel]

Probably more popular podcast.

[Amy]

Very popular. Because people are into crime podcasts. But we try not to go that route.

[Earlonne]

I know we've actually intentionally, I think many times walked away from a lot of listeners when we've chosen not to align ourselves with the sort of more true crime genre of podcast.

[Unknown]

And there's times when I wish we could. Honestly, we've had episodes, I won't say which ones, where if you knew more of that story, it would in interesting ways change the way you heard the story that we're telling. But we've made the decision even then to walk back from it. That said, we've also done a whole bunch of episodes where we talk a.

[Nigel]

Lot about people's crimes and we're very specific about it. And there's always a reason why. It's very clear at the beginning of the episode why we're gonna be talking about a crime.

[Earlonne]

We did one this season that was maybe our most concentrated attempt at true crime or sort of play with the genre, which was about sort of a guy who's in prison for doing a bunch of bank robberies.

[Amy]

And it was. I look at that as like on the spectrum of crime. That was more of a lighthearted type of situation. I mean, I can say that as a former criminal, I can tell you that is a light hearted fantasy world where they do movies about that type of shit. You know what I'm saying? It's oceans, eight oceans, 12 oceans, you know, shit like that. So that's a fun type of situation.

[Unknown]

Yeah, a lot of the crimes. Sorry, are not fun.

[Nigel]

I know what you're saying.

[Earlonne]

And Nigel, you mentioned that you have traditionally not wanted to know people's crimes. And we've talked that a little bit before. I think our sort of practice now is that the producers on the story will typically look up what people have done in part because it's just we want to know kind of what is publicly available. And so because it's part of how the episode will land with listeners.

[Unknown]

Also, sometimes there are ways that the person's crime. This came up in a much earlier episode before I even started. But there are ways that a person's crime actually does have something to do with the story they're talking about. And we want to. So I think my feeling is that, yeah, as producer or as editor, I want to know, at least for someone we're spending a significant amount of time with, I want to know what they're in for. But I don't. I often. In fact, I don't bring it up with Nigel Orlon unless you guys specifically ask me.

[Nigel]

But before you started Working on the show, we never looked at people's crimes.

[Unknown]

But I'm thinking of what was the episode where.

[Earlonne]

No, actually a listener has a question about that. So we might. We're going to get to that when we get to the listener questions.

[Nigel]

But we never. The producer. Well, no one ever looked up their crime, regardless. Unless it was. And I'm not sure before you came on, if we did a story about a crime. I can't. Oh, maybe the trail. I can't remember the order, but I don't think anyone felt that. Like, that is a different desire now.

[Amy]

And when you do find something out, it may change the story a little bit. It may trigger something. Because I can give you a good example. The big no, no, that's the one.

[Nigel]

That's the one we're talking about.

[Earlonne]

That's a listener asks about that.

[Nigel]

Yeah, that's a very. Yeah, that's a very specific situation. Which made the story better.

[Unknown]

Definitely.

[Earlonne]

Should we just talk about that quickly, since it's come up now? So the big no, no is.

[Nigel]

Yeah. Story we did about falling in love. What happens when you fall in love with a volunteer and what the process is. And we had just about finished this story, and it was Earlonne who said to me, do you know why he's in prison? And finding out why he was in prison, he had killed his wife. Was it wife or girlfriend? His partner, whatever.

[Amy]

He killed his kid. Mom.

[Nigel]

Yeah. And then we went back and we talked to him about that crime. And it felt like it was hard to do that story without bringing it up.

[Earlonne]

And it would have been hard to do this story without bringing it up because the story up until that point had been about a romantic relationship of his. And meanwhile, he has this in his past.

[Nigel]

I was also really trained to never talk about people's crimes because I started volunteering as a teacher there. And that was just part of the ethics of doing that. And I just took that to doing Ear Hustle without thinking about it.

[Earlonne]

That's interesting.

[Nigel]

I didn't realize that.

[Unknown]

Are you nostalgic? I mean, do you miss. How do you feel about sort of the turn we've taken towards having more information rather than less?

[Nigel]

Sometimes I wish we didn't, to be honest, unless there's a story that it matters. But you can't say that unless. I mean, we would know it matters if we didn't do it.

[Unknown]

I know.

[Nigel]

Kind of like a.

[Unknown]

But I'm thinking, like, you're a naturally curious person, and sometimes I will know something and you'll ask me And I'll be like, well, I don't know if I.

[Nigel]

You know, but I tell you.

[Unknown]

Cause you've asked. But I wonder if you kind of rather. I said I was never.

[Nigel]

This is completely honest. I was never curious about the crimes until other people on the team started being curious about the crimes. I don't know if we want to save that for another question, but I.

[Earlonne]

Was going to get there probably next.

[Nigel]

Yeah.

[Earlonne]

Yeah.

[Nigel]

I do think that a lot of it, from my perspective, is just people's curiosity. They want to know and I'm not sure it's always so important. And I do note, and I don't really like admitting this, when we talk about it, we become kind of gossipy. And I can see our body language changes, our voices change. There's a giddiness to the conversation. So there's something very gossipy about wanting.

[Unknown]

It's rubbernecky. It's not a pretty.

[Nigel]

It's not a good part of your soul.

[Unknown]

It's not a good part of our soul. Yes, but we are humans, like ourselves.

[Nigel]

Exactly, exactly. So I get when listeners are curious, but I think we've also done a lot of work on how we feel about it and how we think about it. And sometimes I think people who listen may be reacting out of anger or some other feeling without having really done the work to think about what does it mean to want to know about people's crimes.

[Earlonne]

Yeah. So this might actually be a useful case in point to help examine how we feel about these things. Because it maybe. And we can not go into this now if it doesn't make sense, but at least my experience working on these two episodes was as. So we spent three days over the course of a few weeks with women at ccwf. The first time we talked to Bubbles and Man Language, it was. I mean, they were really fun to talk to. They were very funny, sweet, kind, thoughtful. I certainly left the prison wanting to know what they did, which I don't normally. And I think it kind of speaks to some of this rubbernecky voyeurism. And I mean, I think since then we've been kind of puzzling through, or at least I have been puzzling through. Why in those cases. Why in this particular case, I was. I had this. And it wasn't. I'd love to say it was like high journalistic principles, but I think it was more sort of like true crimey voyeurism. And also definitely like the dissonance between, like the people that they were in our conversation with them and What I would imagine somebody would have to be convicted of to be given a death sentence.

[Amy]

Yes, I know, of course. Anytime you see a woman that's on Condemned role, it's gonna pop in your head like what the fuck you do and why.

[Nigel]

This is where I have it. This is my bone to pick. This is my bone to pick. Yeah, you wanna say more about that.

[Amy]

Before I start looking at it? Before you pick that bone. There's 700 and something men on death row and only 20 something women on death row. So in your mind you like, okay, well, maybe one of they crime partners is on a man on death row, you know what I'm saying? But what did you do to where you received such a sentence? You know, and that's, you know, and of course I don't care who you run into. You can run into the most prolific serial killer and have a regular conversation, you know what I'm saying? Because you are meeting a person that's he just the regular cat. He's not in his element. He's not late at night snatching up people, you know, doing that type of shit. You meeting a person just, you know, over a bowl of breakfast, a bowl of cereal, you know what I'm saying? You just having a conversation so you're not really, you know, into whatever it was they did, you know, But I don't know, it's just when it comes down to the women, it just intrigues me of why are you on death row?

[Unknown]

I think there's, there's so many fewer of them. I'm not sure. That's like a misogynist, like a sexist.

[Nigel]

You know, I 100% believe it's sexism, 100%. But I want to say one thing before that. The other thing is, and I don't know if it's the same with the women, what always keeps me thinking is that I've met people on the Main Line who have done the same crimes as people who are on death row. And so they're not always extreme, of course, saying anyone's life is terrible. But it's not like everyone on death row is a serial killer or a sadist. It depends on death.

[Amy]

I know a gang of people on the Main Line who have worse crimes than people on death row. But it's about what county they were in, what that prosecutor wanted to charge. Was that prosecutor looking for some type of political ambition where they was like, I'm gonna have a death row rate, I'm gonna convict 99% of the people. So, you know, Most of the people that's on Death row are from Southern California or from LA or from Riverside, you know, so. And it may be only a couple of people from Northern California that's on Death row. Because that's not the climate up here.

[Unknown]

Yeah, because it's more judges are more progressive, appear less.

[Amy]

It's not even the judges. It's the prosecutors.

[Unknown]

Oh, okay.

[Amy]

It's the judges. It's just there as referees. But the prosecutors are gonna ask for that. And they're more liberal. I wanna say more liberal. In Northern California, they're not with that. But in Southern Cal, they don't give a fuck.

[Nigel]

I wanna go back. Can I just go back to the sexism part? I do really believe there's some inherent sexism in it. I mean, as Earlonne said, a woman's there and you're curious. I am too. And I can admit it's my own sexism. But where I note it in comments from listeners that they tend to be much harder on women that we do stories on than they are on men. I didn't read a single comment asking or commenting on what the men did to get to Death row. In the story we did, there were quite a few comments. I looked those women up, I saw what they did, blah, blah. How could you do a story about them? There was not a single comment like that about the men. And when we've done stories about women with other cases, they've been really harsh. Like when we did a story about people who abused children, the one person who people really got on was the woman that had been married to somebody.

[Amy]

And she didn't even do anything.

[Nigel]

She was married to the person.

[Earlonne]

She was the one non perpetrator in the episode.

[Nigel]

So I would like all people, and myself included, is to really think about that. When you have these reactions, is there any inherent assumptions you're making or are you harder on women than men? I don't think it's 100%. I hear what you're saying, Amy, but.

[Unknown]

I mean, a couple other factors. The women are really easy to google. I think maybe that's another reason that we got these comments. There's 20 of them and we have their first names. They're out there. But coming back to what you were saying a second ago, Earlonne, we got a bunch of these kinds of emails in response to the Death Row episodes. But I'm surprised that we don't hear more often from listeners about people in other episodes. Because to your point, these are not the only people on Ear Hustle who Have done things that would be really shocking if you knew about it. And.

[Earlonne]

But yeah, I think death row just raises all sorts of images and questions.

[Amy]

The condemned sentence.

[Earlonne]

Yeah, yeah. That must be a lot of it, right, that condemned is the worst sentence you can get. There have been movies about it. There are serial killers on death row.

[Unknown]

But someone, one of the listeners said, why aren't. You know, these are people on death row. Why aren't you saying what their crimes were? And I say, well, where's the line there? You know, you want crimes for death row, but not for a life sentence. I mean, those are some pretty gnarly crimes too often.

[Earlonne]

And it could be the same crime.

[Amy]

And if we're sitting there on condemned row, I don't wanna say you can imagine what their crime was, but you can definitely think that, okay, it had.

[Unknown]

To do with murder.

[Amy]

You know, it's a capital offense.

[Nigel]

Yeah, but I understand, because we had the same issue. The lightness of the episode and their laughing was a conundrum to us. I don't know if we want to.

[Unknown]

You want to say more about that?

[Nigel]

Yeah, I mean, we went back because. Or at least one more time. I don't know if it was two more. I know we were there three times because we were after we left, like, it's really strange. Like, they are laughing so much, they're reminiscing. They made it sound like it was a wonderful time. And we tried in the episode to push them on that. We didn't get much of. They didn't really want to go there. But it's not like we didn't try. It's not like we didn't note it. We all noted it. We literally say it in the episode. We found their reaction.

[Unknown]

This is the women of death row, when you talk to them about sort of what was your timeline?

[Nigel]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Amy]

You know, my takeaway from that is this. And then. And I'm a person that served a lot of time in prison, I look at it like. And I want to make a comparison, but this ain't. This might be the bullshittest comparison ever. But let's say, for instance, your mother passed away. You're going to be sad for a little while, right? And as time go on, your laughter is gonna come back. You know what I'm saying? So when some of these people commit crimes, heinous crimes, wherever, whatever they was going through in their life snapped. I don't. Whatever it was, they're gonna be down for a while. But as the time go on and the Years go on and the decades go on. You know, they gonna find themselves. They gonna be back to smiling, back to laughing, back to just normal, everyday life like everybody else. You know, when people go through stuff with how bad it is, they gonna be down for a minute, but then you be you. You'll bounce back, you know, it's not gonna be. You're gonna be that person forever. You know what I'm saying? You're gonna be stuck in that moment.

[Unknown]

Most crimes were just as I'm talking.

[Amy]

About men and women, you're gonna be the same episode.

[Nigel]

They. There was no joke.

[Amy]

I look at the men situ. So I'm always gonna look at both of these situations as different because they both did different time. The men technically did at the time. It's just like when we was interviewing the people in the shoe, they were kind of stoic. They were kind of like, you know, spaced out because they were isolated. It's a difference. The women were isolated, but they weren't isolated. You know, they were in a community environment. So I can look at it just from that angle of the difference between the two. Yes, they both were sentenced to be condemned, but the men were isolated, isolated, one person in a cell. The women was one person in a cell, but their doors were open all day. They hung out with each other, you know, So I think it's just a little different there. And then again, the violence on death row, like, death row on the men's death row was violent. Like, people were going to the yard and dying. People were going to the yard, getting stabbed, you know, all kind of stuff. So I think it was a different environment, a chaotic environment.

[Nigel]

Totally.

[Earlonne]

Yeah. But that does raise a question that I've been wondering about, and I think some of the listeners questions raise is that are there certain crimes where laughter is never appropriate? I'm not quite sure how to phrase it, you know, but like, yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Unknown]

I think. Can I take an adventure at it? I think the question maybe at the heart of it is, like, if somebody did something really terrible, and we could have lots of debates over what qualifies, but should that crime hang over them every single day of their lives? Like, to the point where.

[Nigel]

Every minute of their day.

[Unknown]

Every minute of their day, to the point where. And I'm not trying to mock this position, but some people might say, no, they should not ever laugh again. You know, they should not have access to, you know, a tv, let alone, like, good times with their friends. Because when we talk to those women, that's what we heard. They Were laughing and having good times with their friends. And listeners, I think, totally, understandably, had reactions to that. Like, that's not okay, but that's what I feel like, is like, that's the reaction we want you to have listening to this. You know, it's complicated. I don't know what the answer to that is.

[Nigel]

Yes, well, I wish people would realize we think about all these things when we're making the episode. I mean, it's like to ask, like, how could you do that? We think about that stuff. None of this is done flippantly or without heavy consideration. And we weren't asking them about their crimes. We were asking them about life on the row and life after the row. I think if we. With a lot of them, if we sat down and we said, we want to talk about your crime and your feelings about it, the conversation would have been different. I mean, I'm sure of that.

[Earlonne]

So one other thing that makes me think is that the fact that there was a lightness to them, whether it was appropriate or not, it felt real in a way that if they were only talking about how horrible it was, what they did, how they think every day they're, you know, just sort of, like, burdened by the severity of what they did, that might have felt a lot more performative or a lot less authentic. I mean, I think. I think you could hear the things that some people might have wanted to hear. And it's not actually a genuine sentiment. And we, more than anything, we probably want these people to be honest in who they are and how they feel. And I think some of that was what we were hearing.

[Amy]

And I'm gonna pull it out of. Out of condemn role. When I was still incarcerated, Nigel used to get the letters to say, why are they laughing? You know what I'm saying? Like, why are they. You know, and it's like, we human, you know what I'm saying? We're gonna laugh. We're gonna cry sometime. We're gonna be who we are, you know, so if people feel that just because you're in prison, you can't laugh, you can't joke. You're not looking at the reality of life. I mean, as I'm gonna just say, as an American, we might not participate in it directly, but we commit atrocities beyond these borders, and we laugh every day. We drop bombs on people and we laugh every day. We not doing it personally, but we're voting in people that's doing it, or this is our government that's doing it, and it's on our Hands, you know, So I don't know. I think. And I'm gonna go back. I know I'm switching, but with the women that's on the roll. I looked at it from this point too, you know, Again, I can't judge nobody. Who am I to judge you? You know, most of the women that we talk to committed crimes against their own family. That's something they gotta deal with for the rest of their life. And they gonna find. They gonna find happiness in a day, but then they also gonna cry when we not looking. They not. They also gonna feel that shit.

[Unknown]

So you're not too concerned that they're, like, not suffering enough?

[Amy]

They suffer. Anybody that commits a crime is. And I'm not even gonna say in that aspect of it. We can go to Karen that did something, that her daughter ended up passing away based on a crash, but it was her decision. That's gonna kill her. The time ain't gonna kill you. It's how you gonna feel inside that's gonna kill you over time, you know, like every night before you go to sleep, what you gonna think about? You know, so.

[Unknown]

But even if there were someone who committed it, just for the sake of argument, did something truly terrible and did never suffered, you know, like, they were just happy all the time, that would still be just the way it is. That would be the reality of this person's life, whether you like it or not. And I think that's the goal of the show, is to show how things are, not how we think they should be.

[Nigel]

Yes. I believe there was a comment about why are you glorifying these people? I don't think any of our stories are meant to glorify anyone. They're giving people. We're telling stories. And, you know, our job is not to glorify anybody. I don't think just giving someone the space to talk is glorifying them. I think that's a misuse of. Of the word glorify and what we are trying to do. I don't want to get into here, but listeners may be very surprised at how some of us actually feel about sentencing. I mean, we have all different feelings on this team about what is appropriate for people to be in prison for and for how long. It doesn't mean we can't tell these kinds of stories and have the feelings that we have about it. Not everyone on this team is a all prisons should go away person. So listeners should know that.

[Earlonne]

Amy, you actually have to go.

[Nigel]

I have to go.

[Earlonne]

Should we continue or do we. Or was that good?

[Amy]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

Why don't you. I think you guys can wrap up without me, but.

[Earlonne]

Okay.

[Amy]

Good talking to you.

[Earlonne]

Okay. Amy, sorry you have to go. That's okay. Thank you. Do you want me just to read some of the comments? Yeah. Yeah. So Amy, unfortunately had to go, which is unfortunate because she really helps us wrestle through all of these questions. But hopefully we'll be doing more of this in the future. But, yeah, I did want to. We've been talking kind of in general about some of the feedback we got. I have some of it in front of me, and I will say, to Nigel's point, with the episode we did on men getting off of death row, we did have one listener say that. I think this is the first episode where I felt that the crime needed to be explained. And I would imagine, oh, but. And then they go on to say, but that being said, it's not what Ear Hustle is about. So I get it. I love how it becomes a human story. I do wonder if they're responding to Steve in the men's death row episode, who, like, the second part of the episode was all about him. We wanted to understand more of the heaviness that he was feeling when he was back on the row. And it's turned out that it was a lot about his victim. So I wonder if they were particularly responding to that or if that's what made them wonder what the crime was about. Which, actually, I think Amy said that you all did wrestle with sort of, should we say more about Steve's crime? But I think eventually you came back to. We came back to. That gets in the way of Steve today. You know, that once people hear his crime, that's all they're gonna be able to think about, and they're not gonna be able to sort of, like, hear him.

[Amy]

I think, you know, of course, what we do probably isn't for everybody. Some people are going to be sensitive towards that. Survivors of crime or crime victims may be sensitive towards certain things. And we've heard from everyone. We've heard from survivors of crime and all that love what we do because it opens up a door, it opens up a conversation. And you got to be able to have a conversation. You got to be able to, especially if you're in the storytelling. We're not here to, you know, make people famous for their crimes. You know, the media does that, and the movies does that. You know, But I think, you know, what we do is we have at least a dialogue about a story or a moment in somebody's life. It's not about what you did to get here, it's how you're able to survive in this type of place. So I think I look at it from that point of view, you know, and me a person that did a lot of time, I used to judge people. I used to judge people like say for instance, if someone was going to sny a sensitive knees yard, you know, I was judging the shit out you. You know, how you gonna live this life and then you gonna punk out and go over there. But then when I got out of prison and the first prison I went back into was a sensitive needs prison, and I sat down and I talked to some of these cats and what dawned on me that I didn't see then was that, oh, oh, these cats wanna go home to their family and loved ones. They don't wanna live by the rules that somebody else is enforcing on them. They wanna be able to dictate and govern their own life and be able to get out. So me over here judging them, thinking they punk the game. In all actuality, they just manned up and was like, I'm done with that shit.

[Earlonne]

And these are people who would've been on a sensitive needs yard because they left a gang.

[Amy]

They left the gang. Some of em may have debriefed, but most of em like left the gang for whatever reason. And I think one of the reasons was I wanna get home to I don't want to be in here for the rest of my life, you know. And you know, when you caught up in that gang life, you're not in control of your life. Somebody else can say, hey man, you gotta go over there and kill your homeboy and that's what you gotta go do, you know, or you know, whatever. But you know, I think, I don't know, I guess what I'm saying is like with a better understanding of people or situations, you tend to know just a little bit more. And I think that's what we try our best to do is like tell these stories where people can connect dots and you know, hear different points of views, different sides of it.

[Earlonne]

So yeah, let me start reading through some of these emails just in case they spur anything we kind of want to talk about more. One person says it was the first time that the lightness and humor felt disrespectful towards the victims. They say you also does such an incredible job of holding the tensions of the past crimes alongside the human beings in process. It felt like the victims had no place in this episode. And I couldn't stop thinking about the pain it might cause their friends and families to listen to this episode.

[Nigel]

Yeah, I mean, that's true for any story we tell, if there's friends or victims even, no matter what the topic is. But I understand. I mean, we thought a lot about the lightheartedness of it, but again, that's where we were. And I think we did try to push them. I mean, I literally said to them something along the lines of, people are gonna hear this and think all this laughing means you're not being accountable. And they had a response to that. We can't tell them what to say. So.

[Amy]

Right. And I think they, you know, they're in. So for one, they got condemned. They're condemned. They're for. You know, until up until the law changed, they were sequestered.

[Nigel]

Right.

[Amy]

And they created their own environment, their own world, you know, with the, let's say, the women, the 23 of them, you know, and that's what that was, a world, you know, and that's how they were able to survive and do whatever they do. You know what I'm saying? And not like the one lady said she was suicidal for a long time, you know, she was able to maintain, and she's still here today based on that. So I think, you know, everybody gonna look at things differently. And I think with them, they were able to adapt.

[Nigel]

Absolutely.

[Earlonne]

Another listener wrote, they're not sure that they feel sympathetic for someone who was on their way to killing their third infant, but tears up at being so glad at having found a community. Honestly, the podcast's refusal to wrestle with this issue makes me wonder if I should listen. These Death Row episodes have been far too cheerful without giving us any exploration of what put these people into that place, except a tiny acknowledgment by way of using it to add to the perpetrator's own, quote, anguish at being in the place where juries said they belonged.

[Nigel]

Hmm. Did they listen to the men's episode? That was not a cheery episode.

[Earlonne]

Yeah. Yeah, I didn't. Yeah. I didn't know what to make of them talking about two Death Row episodes.

[Nigel]

Yeah.

[Amy]

You know, I, I. And again, I look at that like, okay, we're not here. We're not in the business of judging people, you know? Yeah, it's up. A person killed two of their infants and was on the mission to kill the third one or whatever it was. And, you know, I don't know who that person was at that time. You know what I'm saying? The person I met was totally different from that But I don't know. Who knows? Nobody knows. So it's hard for us to, like, okay, oh, we heard what you did. So we can't do a story with you. So we're gonna discriminate against you and not do the story based on this information. I don't think it's like that. I don't think we. That ain't the business we in.

[Nigel]

Also, we're not asking anyone to be sympathetic. It's fine if you're not sympathetic. In fact, it's preferable that people have their own feelings and reactions. But what I want to go back to is, believe me, we think about all of these things. We are not blithely going into an episode like this. It's part of what's happening behind the scenes. And we confronted it maybe in a gentle way in this episode by pushing back on them about why they're laughing. But that was the story and just.

[Amy]

Another one on that point. We're doing stories in prison.

[Earlonne]

That's right.

[Amy]

I don't know what else to say about that. We're doing stories in prison. So some shit may come up that is hard to swallow, you know, but, you know, we do our best to do these stories righteously.

[Nigel]

Yeah. And I really appreciate listeners reaching out their questions. I think it means that they care. So we take these seriously. We think about them. We apply them to the next episode. Though I don't think our directive will change.

[Earlonne]

I do want to underline what I think both of you said, but just if people have complicated feelings at the end of our episode, great. That's kind of the point.

[Nigel]

Yes.

[Amy]

Right.

[Earlonne]

Yeah. And also, one thing that might be worth thinking about is that what happened with a lot of these people is that they listened to the episode, they Googled the people, and then they had some questions about the episode. These folks, because of their sentences, have had true crime stories written about them. That's the thing you find when you Google. So that's another factor here, is that you can quickly look these people up and have a particular interpretation of their lives quickly at your fingertips. And it is also, I mean, I'm not trying to excuse what they actually did or what they were convicted of doing, but there's sort of like. I think the true crime industrial complex is playing into this as well, you know, for sure.

[Amy]

And, you know, I give you a good example about that, too. And this is totally different. But when I got arrested or something happened, we was like, damn, it didn't even happen like that. But that's how the media is playing it out. That's how. So when the news reporter, you hear about a crime in society that happened yesterday, you're not hearing it from the defense side or what happened. You're hearing it from what the police suspect or what they found so far. So whatever they putting together is just one sided. It's just the police side of what transpired.

[Earlonne]

A few more comments or bits of comments I wanted to read out. Yeah. One person's just wrestling it and with sort of hearing the episode and has found themselves thinking a lot and says I want to be kind, understanding and compassionate for a fellow human, but I'm not sure I can. Which, yeah, does sort of raise this question of are there certain crimes that you can't see past or are there certain crimes that people can kind of commit and never move past? And I don't know, I, you know.

[Nigel]

I've got my one name I'm not going to bring up. I think that's a personal question for each one to answer.

[Earlonne]

Yep.

[Nigel]

And it also depends, I think if you've ever been a victim of a violent crime. If you haven't, it's probably pretty hard to answer that question with any kind of certainty.

[Earlonne]

One quick one says most of them are baby killers. Do better ear hustle. Do not glorify these stone cold killers.

[Amy]

Yeah, it's a trip. That person isn't the only one that has that opinion. You know, some women in the prison system have that same opinion towards people that are on Condemned Role that even.

[Nigel]

Came up in the episode.

[Unknown]

Yeah, yeah.

[Nigel]

I mean the quibble I would have with that person is I don't. Not quite sure how he glorified them.

[Earlonne]

Glorifies.

[Nigel]

That's the part that I scratched my head a little bit about because I don't think there was anything that glorified them.

[Earlonne]

Yeah, maybe the question is like, are there. Do listeners think there's certain people that should just not be heard from? You know, and obviously, I mean in a podcast that is about people in prison, we're not gonna make that call. That's not what we're about.

[Nigel]

Yeah, exactly.

[Earlonne]

One question. And actually one listener did mention this. They said, do you ever think about doing stories with prosecutors or victims? And we have done both, but it's definitely not the majority of what we do. But I would point to the Trail and also Shine Some Light as episodes where we Shine Some Light was exclusively the story of a victim and the trail told the story of a victim as part of somebody's story about committing crimes against that person, a crime against that person. But, yeah, it isn't the majority of what we do. And I feel like. And we do wrestle sometimes with. I don't think it's what our responsibility to victims is. That's maybe not quite the right way to phrase it, but sort of how should we think about that in the scope of what we do?

[Nigel]

Yeah, I would talk to more victims, for sure. It would depend. Just like I would love to talk to more correctional officers, people who work in corrections. I would love to hear more sides of it. And the two that you bring up, Bruce, were incredibly powerful episodes. Don't think we don't care about victims. That would be a really wrong assumption because we do. It's just not necessarily the kinds of stories we tell. But I think that they're important voices. And I've reached out when I've had qualms about stories to victims groups to ask their opinion about things that we've done. So it is something that's on my mind quite a bit.

[Amy]

I was just trying to think of what was the victims rights group we was dealing with and who did we talk to?

[Earlonne]

Well, one. Oh, yes. I guess I should mention two other episodes that sort of spring out of restorative justice practices. One is Tell Christy I love her.

[Nigel]

Yep, that's right.

[Earlonne]

Which was talked to the.

[Amy]

The perpetrator and the victim and the.

[Earlonne]

Wife of the victim, who I guess was also a victim.

[Nigel]

Yes.

[Earlonne]

And then also Dirty Water, which was. It was about, you know, somebody who was a sex trafficker and somebody who was sex trafficked. And it wasn't the sex trafficked person, wasn't the victim of the sex trafficker. But it was definitely set up as a way to sort of discuss being on two sides of that crime.

[Nigel]

And that person was a victim and in prison. Right.

[Amy]

And yeah, it was commuted later based on. And pardoned later based on, you know, they realized that this person was trafficked, this person was groomed, this person was all that. And, you know, it was a travesty that, you know, even in that case, the prosecution would not let her bring in her defense, you know what I'm saying? So I don't know who was the more victim there.

[Nigel]

I don't know if I want this in the episode or not, but when we started doing this, I had a fairly long conversation with Mark Klaas. I reached out to him, just Polyclass's father, and he was very kind. And we had an email, you know, a few emails back and forth, because I really wanted to know his opinion on what he would think of a podcast like this, and it was a really good conversation. So it is something that's been on my mind since the beginning of making this podcast.

[Earlonne]

Yeah, it would be interesting. I mean, I know I've just randomly spoken to a few people who were supporting victims who say they don't listen to your hustle. And I imagine a lot of people have been victims of crimes. Don't.

[Amy]

Yeah, but how do you ever educate yourself if you don't listen to the other side? And I think, I mean, it could be hard for some people, but I think in order to find healing, you gotta be able to hear it all. You know what I'm saying? You gotta hear both sides. You gotta hear, you know. Cause you never know what may. What made, you know, snap in your head to where. Oh, okay. You know what I'm saying? And I'm not saying everybody gonna get that, but I know we've heard from a lot of victims that like what we do, you know, it opens doors that otherwise wouldn't be open to them. And I'm not saying that they need to hear in a cell in side of it, but sometime they do. Mm.

[Earlonne]

Well, and that was Christy's experience in that episode, was getting to know Jason, sort of confronting him, not in a confrontational way, but sort of like become face to face with him, was pretty essential into her, to her kind of moving past it and healing, I would say.

[Nigel]

Yeah, yeah. I mean, I've said this. I'll just repeat it. Until I'm in that situation, I have no idea how I would feel. And so I wouldn't judge any victim for how they feel about what we do or what they do or do not want to hear. How can you answer that until you experience what they've experienced?

[Amy]

Right. But at the end, again, you know, if we. If we was to, let's say, for instance, if that was, you know, we talking to victims and we're doing this, then we become a crime show for real.

[Earlonne]

Yeah. I mean, I do think there's no shortage of stories about crimes.

[Amy]

No, definitely. I mean, it's one of the most popular. Popular genres.

[Earlonne]

And there are a lot fewer stories about day to day life in prison.

[Nigel]

Yep.

[Earlonne]

All right, we should wrap it up.

[Nigel]

Okay.

[Earlonne]

Okay, thanks.

[Unknown]

That was great.

[Nigel]

Thanks. Thanks, listeners.

[Earlonne]

We appreciate it. Yeah, thank you, listeners. Seriously, we can't say it very genuinely. Thank you for listening so closely and expressing yourselves clearly and with not that much vitriol.

[Amy]

And check us if we're in the wrong. Yeah, we open for that, you know, that that brings a larger conversation and make us look at things differently, you know?

[Earlonne]

All right. Thank you all.