Questions and Answers to Close Out 2025

Summary

---

Murder Sheet – "Questions and Answers to Close Out 2025"

Date: December 29, 2025
Hosts: Áine Cain (journalist) & Kevin Greenlee (attorney)

---

Episode Overview

In their annual year-end tradition, Áine and Kevin answer listener questions covering the podcast's evolution, their most meaningful episodes, approaches to sourcing, reflections on true crime media, as well as new insights on notorious cases like Delphi and Temujin Kensu. The tone is relaxed, candid, and peppered with the hosts’ typical wit and self-deprecation, offering frank responses on their work, the state of true crime, and their personal growth.

“We want to thank you to everyone who submitted a question… It’s been quite a year for us. And it’s like, I feel like we’ve all gone through a journey together.”—Anya Cain (03:09)

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

Reflections on Favorite Episodes and Community (06:50 – 13:52)

• Most Proud Episodes
  • Áine: Highlights the "first person Delphi episodes"—interviewing people directly involved in the case after years of effort.
    "We interviewed people who were actually on the case [...]. The fact that they trusted us to sit down and just share their experiences meant the world to me." (07:38)
  • Kevin: The Temujin Kensu series, especially the early scripted episodes, stands out for making an evidence-based case for guilt against the prevailing innocence narrative. He notes professional and audience trust in taking a controversial stance.
    "I'm proud of them because I looked hard and I couldn't find anyone out there saying Temujin Kinzu was guilty [...]." (08:29)
• Community Appreciation
  • Both hosts express deep gratitude for listeners' thoughtful engagement, accountability, and respectful corrections.
    "We wanted to cultivate a smart audience of people who care about True Crime and are sincere about that. [...] It’s about respectful conversations, respectful dialogue, and being open minded and being factual and having, caring about victims, caring about victims’ families." —Áine (10:51)

---

Cultivating and Protecting Sources (18:07 – 26:10)

• Sourcing Methods
  • Initial entry via objective, responsible reporting that attracts sources to them.
  • Building trust so sources, including those who prefer anonymity, feel safe reaching out.
• Anonymous Sources
  • The podcast always verifies such sources' identities and positions, even if shielded from the public.
  • Hosts describe the pebble-in-a-pond effect: start with community members, move closer to case insiders.
• Source Protection
  • Vigilance is key, including recognizing tactics like "canary traps":
    “If I mention this piece of information, this source tells me I have to make sure that a lot of people know it, otherwise they’d be able to trace it back to that one source.” —Kevin (23:16)
  • Áine emphasizes she would “rather lose a thousand scoops than burn a source.” (26:10)
• Notable Moment
  • A humorous anecdote recounts law enforcement’s attempts to suss out their sources, contributing to stress and complex navigating.

---

On Being Introverts with a Platform (27:57 – 30:33)

• Both discuss shyness and how podcasting offers a way to connect without direct social anxiety triggers.
• Kevin jokes: “A podcast is a wonderful way to talk to people because basically, intellectually, I understand that right now I’m talking to a whole bunch of people, but it feels like I’m just talking to Anya.” (28:49)
• Áine notes the surreal aspect of having listeners quote back random off-the-cuff comments.

---

The Toxicity & Ethics in True Crime Culture (30:33 – 33:38)

• Hosts express frustration with carelessness and callousness among some creators and consumers in the true crime space.
• Áine: “It’s like—we all have the capacity to do great harm, even if we’re trying to be responsible drivers... it feels like a lot of people just don’t care. And that makes me feel lonely in the space sometimes.” (30:33)
• Advocacy for voting with clicks and money as the best way to discourage unethical content.

---

Delphi Deep Dive & Law Section

Delphi Questions (39:50 – 77:37):

• Handling Sensitive Information
  • Ŧrustration expressed at the defense’s behavior, leaking of crime scene photos, and subsequent lack of consequences.
  • Áine is openly critical of Kathy Allen for knowingly lying to the public as a form of advocacy for her husband, distinguishing between sympathy for denial and actively misleading (53:52 – 61:20).
• Attorneys’ Behavior
  • Kevin details how complaints can be filed against Indiana lawyers and what becomes public (45:47 – 51:08).
  • Discussion of specific lawyers feuding within the case landscape and the professional consequences (or lack thereof).
• Richard Allen Interview Hypothetical
  • Both hosts doubt meaningful answers would come, but would focus on topics like the roots of violent fantasies and confession recantation (41:50 – 45:47).
• Media & Public Engagement
  • The possibility of a Delphi documentary or dramatization is discussed, noting the case’s grimness and industry preference for “fun” or “sexy” murder stories (72:10 – 75:32).

---

Impact of Covering the Delphi Case (77:37 – 83:59)

• Profound personal and professional transformation for both hosts as a result of deep immersion.
  • Kevin: “I saw some things I didn’t want to see... I saw some behaviors from people at different parts of this process that were disillusioning and caused me to lose a lot of face in certain things.” (77:37)
  • Áine: Open about depression, therapy, and the critical shift away from performative neutrality.
    “We owe you our audience accuracy. We owe you fairness, we owe you vetted information. We do not owe anybody performative, nonsensical, both sidesism. We just don’t. That’s not, that’s not journalism.” (81:23)
  • Both resolve: accuracy, fairness, and facts above all else, while calling out circus-like behavior when necessary.

---

Helping Spread the Book’s Reach (83:59 – End)

• Hosts encourage listeners to share the book, post reviews, and recommend it widely, for both awareness and as a “warning flare” for true crime culture’s pitfalls.

---

Notable Quotes & Timestamps

• On Community & Audience
  “We wanted to cultivate a smart audience of people who care about True Crime and are sincere about that...It’s about respectful conversations, respectful dialogue, and being open minded...” —Áine (10:51)
• On Challenging the Prevailing Narrative
  “I looked hard and I couldn’t find anyone out there saying Temujin Kinzu was guilty... I was aware that I was going up against the prevailing view.” —Kevin (08:29)
• On Anonymous Source Verification
  “When we say anonymous sources, these are sources that are anonymous to the public... we know who they are and we have verified...” —Kevin (20:14)
• On True Crime Ethics
  “It’s just a kind of like a space that unfortunately attracts a lot of callousness from certain segments of the audience and from certain segments of the creators...” —Áine (32:20)
• On Protecting Sources
  “You can always report something later, but you can never take back reporting something... I would rather lose a thousand scoops than burn a source.” —Áine (26:10)
• On Working as Introverts
  “A podcast is a wonderful way to talk to people because... it feels like I’m just talking to Anya on the other side of the desk.” —Kevin (28:49)
• On Performative Neutrality
  “We do not owe anybody performative, nonsensical, both sidesism. We just don’t. That’s not, that’s not journalism.” —Áine (81:23)

---

Memorable/Lighthearted Moments

• Kevin’s drink experiment: mixing Coke and grape juice—“...not as good as you might think.” (05:23)
• Beret-wearing as a Patreon perk (17:32 – 17:57)
• Recurring inside jokes about shooting bullseyes and debating which of the hosts would make a worse police officer (35:13 – 37:28)
• Áine’s comparison of reporting to a barfight: “you grab whatever you can to use as a weapon” (20:31)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• Show Introduction & Giving Thanks — 02:34 – 03:24
• Most Proud Episodes — 06:57 – 13:52
• Audience & Community Ethics — 10:51 – 13:52
• Handling/Protecting Sources — 18:07 – 26:10
• Delphi Questions & Law Section — 39:50 – 77:37
• Impact of Delphi Case on Hosts — 77:37 – 83:59
• Book Support & Closing Reflections — 83:59 – end

---

Summary

This episode provides a rich, honest behind-the-scenes look as Áine and Kevin process a transformative year for themselves and the true crime genre. Their insights extend from the nuts and bolts of reporting and podcasting to incisive commentaries on the responsibilities and dangers inherent in true crime storytelling—especially when handling internet-driven spectacle and controversy. Listeners are treated to a blend of humor, candor, and gravitas that has become the trademark of "The Murder Sheet."

---

Transcript

[A]

It's cold. The holidays are coming up and it's time to refresh your wardrobe effortlessly with our wonderful sponsor, Quince.

[B]

Quince makes uplifting your style easy and affordable. We're talking luxury goods for less. Mongolian cashmere sweaters to Italian wool coats. Just in time to deck the halls for the holidays.

[A]

Quince keeps prices down on these premium fashion staples by cutting out the middleman. We're talking prices 50% less than those of their competitors.

[B]

My quince sweaters are quickly becoming my go to garments. As the temperatures fall. I really enjoy putting on my Australian merino wool cable crew neck sweater and my navy Mongolian cashmere crew neck sweater. They are so soft and do an incredible job keeping me comfortable in these temperatures.

[A]

Kevin is too modest to say, but he also looks very cute in them. Whether you're treating yourself for the holidays or looking for terrific gifts for your loved ones, Quinn's is the place to go for coats, sweaters, silk shir and dresses and much more. We're confident you'll love Quince as much as we do. And with prices 50% less than other brands, they make it easy to stay stylish without squeezing your wallet.

[B]

Get your wardrobe sorted out and your gift list handled with quints. Don't wait. Go to quints.commsheet for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. Now available in Canada too. That's Q U I N C E. Free shipping and 365 day returns. Quints.commsheet despite wintry conditions and heavy traffic.

[A]

The holidays have to go on. That's why Mercedes Benz SUVs come equipped with the latest safety technology to keep your festive plans on track.

[B]

Discover the incredible offers for yourself at.

[A]

The Mercedes Benz Holiday Love Celebration. I'm Anya Cain, and today we're going to be answering some of your questions.

[B]

So do we need a content warning? Because we're gonna be talking probably about murder, maybe sexual violence, knowing you, murder of children. Probably gonna be some profanity perhaps. So all those are your trigger warnings, your content warnings, if you will.

[A]

Yes. So that was an inelegant way of doing it. But thank you, Kevin, for.

[B]

Well, I'm setting the blundering in. I'm setting the tone because this is a more casual episode. We were all sitting back relaxing from the holidays in front of our. Maybe not a literal fireplace, but our spiritual fireplace, just enjoying one another's company.

[A]

Okay? And today, last year we did questions and answers to close out 2024. This year, we're doing the same for 2025. The questions we got some via email, some many via Patreon, and some via our Facebook group, the Murder Sheet Discussion group, which is helmed by the capable Elle, our moderator. She's wonderful. And we want to thank you to everyone who submitted a question. We want to thank you to all our patrons for their wonderful support. We really appreciate them and it's been fun getting to know a lot of them. And we want to thank everyone for just sticking with us. It's been a year. It's been quite a year for us. It's been a lot of good things, a lot of challenging things, and it's like, I feel like we've all gone through a journey together. And we just want to say we appreciate you for sticking with us for that journey.

[B]

So that's our big picture overview.

[A]

Yes. Thank you. Thank you for summing that up for everyone, Kevin.

[B]

That's what I'm here for here.

[A]

I want to show you guys something. So what are you drinking right now, Kevin? You're drinking something.

[B]

I am drinking something. What I did was, for some reason, I got the idea, wouldn't it be interesting to combine Coca Cola with grape juice? So I've done that and I'm looking at it. Not drinking it yet, but I'm sure I will.

[A]

You know, I didn't really realize it when I married you, but you're basically an eight year old boy when it comes to food. You know, there's. I'm drinking here in Barry's Irish breakfast Tea. Very responsible, very adult. He's over there doing like test tubes and like science with. With. With Welch's grape juice and Coca Cola. And it frankly sounds disgusting to me, and I'm concerned, but we're going to go ahead anyway because this is the time we have to record. My name is Anya Cain. I'm a journalist.

[B]

And I'm Kevin Greenlee. I'm an attorney.

[A]

And this is the Murder Sheet.

[B]

We're a true crime podcast focused on original reporting, interviews, and deep dives into murder cases. We're the Murder Sheet.

[A]

And this is Questions and Answers to close out 2020.

[B]

And I'd like to start by saying that the coke and the grape juice is not as good as you might think.

[A]

Oh, I'm shocked.

[B]

I just had some of tastes not as good as you'd think.

[A]

Why do you do this?

[B]

Well, people are probably wondering, and I'm getting answers to people. This is an answer episode, in case you wondered about what that would taste like. I mean, it's not Awful.

[A]

I'm going to tell. I think I may have said this on the show before, but when we went to Kevin's physician and he asked about Kevin's diet, what Kevin responded with prompted this learned man, this man who's been through years of medical training, medical school, who's dedicated his life to healing the sick. He bust out laughing like for, like, like uncontrollably for a moment or so. It was, it was deeply embarrassing. You know that how it feels to be a wife standing in an examination room where your middle aged husband is explaining his diet. And rightfully, the the doctor wasn't being a jerk. It was the correct response.

[B]

It's a miracle I'm alive.

[A]

Yep. Anyways, so I divided these questions. You know, I like to, I guess create divisions. I like. I broke them up into different sections based on kind of topic. So the first topic that came up was just the show in general, the murder sheet, what you're listening to right.

[B]

Now, True Crime podcast, hosted by an attorney and a journalist.

[A]

Yeah. Who are married.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

So the answer is that increasingly sniping at each other and the cheat sheets. So the first question we got was from a patron and that was which episode from this year are you most proud of? Great question.

[B]

I have an answer. Do you? Do you have an answer?

[A]

I have an answer that's not really answering their question, but it's kind of a block of episodes that I'm most proud of.

[B]

So we're getting off on a good start. Can't narrow it down by not answering the question. The very first question, why don't you start and then I'll do mine.

[A]

The first person Delphi episodes I'm most proud of because those result, those were the result of a culmination of years and years and years of effort and work on the Delphi case.

[B]

Those were the episodes where we interviewed a lot of people directly connected.

[A]

We interviewed people who were actually on the case, who prosecuted the case, who investigated the case. And to me that was so meaningful to get to connect with those people. Those men and women worked incredibly hard on the Delphi murders case. And the fact that they trusted us to sit down and just share their experiences meant the world to me. So I think there's a number of them. I can't narrow it down. I'm not going to pick a favorite, but those were, those were ones that I felt very proud of.

[B]

Okay, I'm going to answer as well. And my answer is going to. I'll explain my answer because I, I most proudest of this for several reasons, and that is the Temujin Kinzu episodes, especially the first ones.

[A]

The first one, yeah.

[B]

The early episodes were scripted, which we hadn't done any scripted work for a while, and the bulk of them was done by me. And I'm proud of them. First of all, I think they do a good job of laying out the considerable evidence against that man and explaining why he is guilty, is charged of the crime he was convicted of. But I'm also proud of them because I looked. I looked hard and I couldn't find anyone out there saying Temujin Kinzu was guilty. Everybody was buying his lines and repeating his claims and saying, this guy is innocent. It's wrongful conviction, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. So I was aware that I was going up against the prevailing view. And I mentioned to Anya, I'd really like to do this. And she didn't make me go through the case point by point and justify it. She just trusted me to go ahead and start working on it. And I really appreciated that trust.

[A]

Aw. Well, I love you and you're very, very smart, so I always trust you.

[B]

And then I also appreciated you, the audience, for being willing to listen and consider another point of view. I remember seeing comments after the first episode came out where people were surprised. People were a little bit skeptical about what we were saying. Somebody was saying, oh, they must be nervous because they're the only ones in True Crime taking this position. But people were saying, you know, I'm skeptical. I want to hear what they have to say, because whether I ultimately agree with them or not, they have reasons for the things they say. And so I really appreciated that trust. And I noticed that a lot of people earlier on who said, I'm a little bit skeptical, really, they said that early on. And then later they came and said, no, I think he's guilty. So I appreciate that we have an audience that is willing to engage with things and consider things and not just parrot things.

[A]

I love our audience, too. And I was so. I am proud of the audience we've kind of gathered. I feel like we have a great community. I know everyone's listening, they're rolling their eyes, they're saying, anya, you're just sucking up to us. But I really do sincerely mean that. I feel like when we started this, we wanted to cultivate a smart audience of people who care about True Crime and are sincere about that. And I feel like we have succeeded because that's what I see every day. And it's not about everyone being in agreement on Every case, on every opinion. It's about respectful conversations, respectful dialogue and being open minded and being factual and having, caring about victims, caring about victims, families. And I feel like our audience very much reflects that and I love that. And I love that our audience also, like, you know, if we make a mistake, they'll come, they'll be like, hey, yo, fix this. Like, that's the kind of audience I want where it's like, we're held accountable as creators. The community, it's, it's holding itself accountable and we're just kind of creating a positive space within true crime. I love that. And I always, whenever I talk to people, like, they'll be like, oh, tell me about your audience. I feel like I sound like an insane new parent with like 800 photos of their kid in their wallet where I'm just like, they're so amazing. They're really smart. And it's true, you guys are. I mean, I'm just, I'm always gobsmacked when we hear that we like have people who are just so thoughtful and just really considering things and we hear from them in our inbox and our Facebook group on Patreon and it's just a delight. So we love you guys and we appreciate you for being so awesome. It's really an honor. And my favorite is when people are like, hey, like, you know, you use this or you pronounce this wrong or you got this wrong. And like, everyone's just so nice and respectful about it, but they're also like, they're not going to let us off the hook if we lose our minds and go totally insane. And, and I love that because it's like, you shouldn't, you know, and we're capable of making mistakes and we're capable of growing and doing better, and that's what we want to do. We never want it to be a situation where you can't feel like you can't reach out to us and be like, hey, this made me kind of uncomfortable. Tell us and we'll, we'll try to fix it or we'll tell you where we're coming from. Either way, you deserve transparency and you deserve the best when it comes to getting your information from people. You deserve, you know, factual, accountable, all of that. So sorry for going on a ramble, but I was so proud of you for just doing the Temujin stuff because at first I was like, I don't know, Kevin. Everyone kind of says something else. And I was not really familiar with the case and I was kind of Going into it, sort of thinking I would read the case, the. The court transcripts, and come to the opposite conclusion of you. And I was like, that'll be fun. You know, I'll be, oh, well, I'm kind of more for the. For the innocence narrative. Oh, I'm more for the guilt narrative. That's not what happened when I actually read it, but I was just proud of you for staking out, like, you're. You're somebody who, like, I don't know, you stand on business. You don't. You don't go with the crowd. If you think everyone is wrong, you're willing to say that. And that's something I very much admire about you.

[B]

And I, again, I appreciate you supporting me in that because we just. We just finished up our book, the Delphi book, and that is a surprisingly controversial case, even though the guilt of Richard Allen is pretty glaringly obvious. And we got a lot of grief from Richard Allen truthers in that case. And so to go from that and saying, well, Anya, now I want to do a case where all of our friends disagree with us too.

[A]

And, you know, people often ask us, like, oh, is this a lot of drama? No, I don't care. Like, people I like disagree with me about politics, People I like disagree with me about just everyday life TV shows, like, whatever. Like, I don't care. Like, not everything has to devolve into some kind of, you know, colossal existential fight in every case. And that's, I guess, the end. I. We. We also recognize that there's stuff that we brought out in the Temujin Kenzu case that was just not really widely discussed before, and it can be difficult. It's. It's. I don't. I don't sit around being like, oh, well, this person didn't say this. It didn't cite this. I don't care. Like, you know, like, a lot of people covered it a long time ago. I don't expect everyone to go back and drop everything and say, oh, well, now we agree with murder sheet. No, I mean, people got their own thing going on, so, like, there's no drama, there's no bad blood as far as I'm concerned. So I guess that's something to note. And I think that's a good thing to model in true crime. If you're like me, you're so into true crime that you kind of get extra careful about stuff, making sure you're not followed. For instance, staying situationally aware, and of course, checking the locks on your doors and windows before Bed. Better safe than sorry, right? Because we all know bad stuff can and unfortunately does happen.

[B]

Well, our sponsor, Simplisafe can help with your peace of mind. We've trusted Simplisafe's home security system for years. Traditional home security systems just don't cut it. They only go off after someone's breaking in. They are purely reactive.

[A]

Simplisafe is proactive. Their AI powered cameras detect threats while they're still outside. That's when live monitoring agents jump in. They can address the intruder directly, tell them they're on camera and that the police are coming. They can even set off alarms and sirens and lights.

[B]

We love Simplisafe. We used it when we were renters. We used it when we bought our home. It is so easy to set up and allows you so much flexibility. It's reliable. We've gotten threats over our reporting before, so we take this stuff very seriously. And with Simplisafe, we feel we're in great hands.

[A]

So protect your home with SimpliSafe and get 50. And get 50% off any new system. For a limited time, just go to simplisafe.com msheet that's simplisafe.com msheet there's no safe like SimpliSafe. Save over $200 when you book weekly stays with VRBO this winter. If you need to work, why not work from a chalet? If you haven't seen your college besties since, well, college you need a week to fully catch up in a snowy cabin. And if you have to stay in a remote place with your in laws, you should save over $200 a week. That's the least we can do. So you might as well start digging out the long johns because saving over $200 on a week long snowcation rental is in the cards book [e-mail] you know, so.

[B]

Next question, next question. This is from an anonymous listener.

[A]

It's a patreon. It's a patron.

[B]

Well, no, this is. I'm gonna read another question.

[A]

Oh, okay.

[B]

This is from an anonymous listener. Will Anya pledge to wear more hats in 2026?

[A]

I think that anonymous listener might be one. Kev.

[B]

Sure.

[A]

I. I've started wearing my beret on some of our Patreon lives. Maybe I'll wear them, maybe you'll wear it outside. So I'd be willing to do that for you.

[B]

I bet if, if you say I'm gonna wear the the beret on Patreon, our Patreon numbers would sur.

[A]

Yeah, they're just Gonna be sore.

[B]

That's what people have been waiting on.

[A]

Yeah, guys, if that doesn't happen, I'll be really insulted.

[B]

You wanna take the next question?

[A]

This is one from a patron and a listener that's not named Kevin Greenlee. I'm interested in how you cultivate and protect sources. You obviously had extremely valuable sources related to the Delphi murders. How does that happen? Do you have to throw out a wide net and hone in, or do you have to start with a good contact and spread out? Both. Give us a peek under the hood about the process, please. I love this question because I love to talk shop about sources.

[B]

One, one way to get sources, which. This sounds really simple, but don't be an idiot, is to do good work on a case, because these cases mean the world to the people who are involved in them. And so if you go into that territory and you cover the case responsibly, people within that case will notice, and then they will do the hard part of reaching out to you. And if they don't reach out to you, in some cases, you can say, hey, we've covered this case. Here's an example of how we've done it. Would you consider talking to us?

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Oftentimes we will cover a case and we will start getting emails from people involved in the case who want to talk and share their experiences. That happened to some extent in Delphi, certainly happened with the Tim Jenkinsu case.

[A]

Sometimes this is a situation where a case has been so poorly covered or so the coverage, I should say, maybe not is not poor, but one sided, that once you start to hit a, you know, strike a vein of gold, people will come out of the woodwork to be like, oh, finally someone actually cares about my opinion. And that's been wonderful. I mean, we've seen that in a number of cases. But the other thing, I think this person's also interested in, like, you know, anonymous sources, which is something we relied on in Delphi and like, within journalism, anonymous sources are not. Are not a neutral thing that can be controversial. Because when you're doing something on the record and somebody's coming and speaking to you on the record, they're putting their name out there and they're taking that risk. So you have to be really careful with anonymous sources.

[B]

And let me just jump in just for a second to clarify, when we say anonymous sources, these are sources that are anonymous to the public. Whenever we use a source, we know who it is and we have verified their position or whatever.

[A]

Yes, that's very important to Note, sometimes people do get confused about that, but we know who they are, but we don't for whatever reason, because they are not authorized to speak publicly because they would severe, you know, face repercussions as far as having harm done to them or losing a job or having their life implode. We keep them anonymous if we, if we deem that an editorially sound decision. So how do we get those? Because those are, those are hard. Those are hard to get. And you don't get them overnight. What I found is the most effective way is you start reporting on something and you report on it as responsibly as possible and people ultimately do come to you. And one example of that though, I think with a case like Delphi, you have to be so creative, especially in the beginning, we were honestly relying on a lot of community members associated with, you know, it was like you start from the outside and you work your way in. I think is an important thing because you, you almost have to, I mean, in, in, in Delphi, law enforcement was not leaking. You know, they didn't, they basically, you know, the vibe was basically they didn't want anything to do with anybody who was doing anything. Right. And, and that was understandable. And I certainly understand that a lot more now, knowing what I know about the case. But you have to. So there'll be situations where, you know, it's not like law enforcement's going to pick up the phone and be like, hey guys, we're doing a river search. That was people in the community who knew us and knew we were looking into it being like, okay, there's state police officers in the river. You know, I think they're looking for something. And then we were able to go through that and piece it together and confirm that it's Delphi related. So you have to be, I always say, like, reporting is kind of like a bar fight. You know, you grab whatever you can to use as a weapon. That's kind of a dark example. But like, you have to kind of cast a wide net. I think that was one part of your question. You cast a wide net and you hope that ultimately that leads you somewhere, but you have to be so careful. I would just say that you're not reporting something that's non factual. You have to corroborate you, you have to ask people for documentation, you have to ask people for pictures, you have to ask people for whatever in order to verify that you're doing, you know, accurate reporting. But I mean, it was stressful at times. I mean, I, I Think we've talked about this on the show a bit, but we had, you know, sources with. With certain instances where then law enforcement would be pretty annoyed to a certain extent. I wouldn't say they would. Like. Like, I think they understood ultimately what we were trying to do, but I think at one point they tried to figure out who some of our sources were. Do you remember that?

[B]

I do. I do. And that in terms of protecting sources, that's more than just not mentioning the source's name. You have to be careful. If I mention this piece of information, this source tells me I have to make sure that a lot of people know it, otherwise they'd be able to trace it back to that one source. For instance, if somebody anonymously reported that in her home, in a private room, Anya has a throne made out of cereal boxes, you'd say, well, the only person who could possibly know that would be Kevin. He must be the source who betrayed Anya. If you report something like, oh, Anya, car was seen in a parking lot and it was crammed full of cereal boxes, you think, well, a whole lot of people passing by could have seen that. And we can report that without betraying one particular source. Does that make sense?

[A]

It makes sense. We had a canary trap set on us. That's. That's the term for, you know, you give different pieces, slightly, subtly different pieces of information to different people and see what leaks out. And so when we became aware of that, we had to be exceptionally careful about how we went about things and how we went about reporting things, because we could end up exposing and, you know, a source. And I just remember at that point, I like, the thing that when I, like, look back on that, when it was, like, when that was happening, first of all, that was incredibly stressful. But we had to be, you know, you have to basically be walking a tightrope the whole time. But I just always think of, like, one of those scenes in, like, Scooby Doo when they're, like, running between the doors, and it's like the. We're chasing the source and the police are chasing us, or, like, just, like. It was just, like, chaos. But we managed to get through it. No sources were blown. And it was. It was. I mean, again, like, I don't. I don't really fault the police for. For doing that either, because I think they were just, like. At that point, we were more of an unknown quantity, and they probably were just like, what the hell is happening? And then I think over time, they realized that we were not looking to blow up the case. And we were not looking to report things irresponsibly. We were looking to inform the public. But also we understood that some things were, you know, that some things could be damaging to the case. So we were reasonable. But I think in the beginning, they were a little bit more like, who are these people? What do they want? Yeah, so it was. It's. It's about caution. And it's always, like, you always can report something later, but you can never take back reporting something. So you have to report things that you're very confident in, that you verified, and that you're sure going to keep your sources protected. And I would rather lose a thousand scoops than burn a source. That's where I come down.

[B]

Not anonymous sources. But Anya also is very clever about getting sources in general. I remember recently there was that break announced in the yogurt shop killings. And at one point, the detective who was at the press conference, like, listed a long string of names of people to thank. And Anya wrote down all of those names and reached out to every single one of them. And we got some great interviews out of that.

[A]

You got to listen to people and you got to. You got to. What are they saying? Who helped them in their opinion? And, you know, I think. I think a lot of people are pretty open, though, to. To helping journalists because they. They want the truth to get out there. And that's certainly what we found in this. In the cities of Delphi and Peru in Indiana, where people were willing to come and engage with us more. So in Peru, they're a little. They were a little more open there. I think Delphi definitely was dealing with more of the collective trauma of the murders. But I. Ultimately, people were willing to come forward and say, okay, we're going to help you out with this. And here's. Here's what we know. And you just have to respect that and you just have to, like, your sources are the most precious thing you have. And I just take that really seriously. And I take the trust that they put in us very seriously. And it keeps me up at night sometimes, the idea that we could, you know, I don't know. I never want anyone to have problems because of talking to us anyways. So here's another question from a patron. It. This is a pretty difficult question, actually. Which Patreon member named Bob Rowe is your favorite? What do you think, Kevin? For me, like, I think I'd have to say Bob Row, what do you think?

[B]

We only have one Patreon member named Bob Rowe, to the best of my ability.

[A]

That's the joke. Um, somebody asked you guys talk about being shy. What's it like? Been building up a large audience despite that. So, yeah, I think you're definitely way more introverted than I am. Is that fair to say?

[B]

That's fair to say.

[A]

I. I'm, like, a fake extrovert, I think. I think when people meet me, I'm talking at them a lot, and they're probably like, what? Why won't this chick shut up? But I think I just do that because I'm anxious and I'm like, don't want anyone to feel uncomfortable. So I talk too much.

[B]

No, you don't talk enough. You're a delightful young woman.

[A]

Thank you. I. I think it's. It's been really gratifying. I feel like we've. It's like, I. I love. I love getting to meet a lot of different people. I guess, ultimately, I am introverted.

[B]

I tend to be very quiet in social situations. But a podcast is a wonderful way to talk to people because basically, intellectually, I understand that right now I'm talking to a whole bunch of people, but it feels like I'm just talking to Anya on the other side of the desk.

[A]

So you like having a captive audience, but they can't talk back to us? Is that what you're saying?

[B]

No, I'm saying I'm not. I'm not aware of talking to other people. I feel like I'm just talking to you sometimes.

[A]

It's funny because then, like, we'll say weird stuff, and then we won't remember saying that because we say a lot of weird stuff throughout the day to each other, privately and publicly, presumably. And people you know will be like, aha. Remember when you said that? And we're like, what? Or, like, people will take a quote. And I, I remember we said something when we. We. We were on with our friends the Viper Pit the other day, and I said something, quote, sucks shit. And I was like, man, what the hell was I talking? I was like, did I just start a war with another podcast? Turns out I was talking about the FBI story, a ridiculous movie with Jimmy Stewart. But for a minute, I was like, oh, God, what did I say?

[B]

What have I done?

[A]

What have I done? And then one of our Facebook group members says, does it get boring being constantly awesome while so many people suck? That sounds like a question that we asked ourselves just to suck up to ourselves. No, that's a very sweet question, first of all, so thank you. And I, I, I, I don't want to toot our own horns. I don't, I, I don't really consider us, like, awesome. Like, I think we try our best to be decent in the true crime space, but we don't. We're not always going to get it right. Like, so I, I don't want you to ever be like, well, they just can do no wrong.

[B]

I can live with that.

[A]

No, don't think that, that, that, that dampens your critical thinking skills. I think for me, like, it does get. It has been lonely sometimes in true crime because I think a lot of people do suck. And again, like, I don't, I'm not, I'm not saying that we're awesome. It's just more of like, we try not to suck. And there's like, less of that in this space than you would want. There's a lot of people who don't really care. I liken it to when you have any sort of platform, but especially in true crime, when we're talking about people getting murdered or getting harmed or having trauma done to them, all the creators, we're all operating like a big truck or car or vehicle. And you have a lot of careless drivers out there. Now this sounds like we're getting into the Great Gatsby territory. But no, I mean, it's true. You have a lot of very careless drivers. People are just driving up on the sidewalk. People are driving drunk. People are. People are like, racing each other in the streets. And like, we all have the capacity to do great harm, even if we're trying to be responsible drivers. So we just have to be very careful and aware of our situations. But it feels like a lot of people just don't care. And that makes me feel lonely in the space sometimes. And there's. So there are some wonderful people out there, don't get me wrong, some people who are great. It's just that as a whole, it can be kind of a space where it's like, do we not realize, like, the amount of harm we could cause by, by, through this carelessness or that we are causing through this carelessness? And it just, it can be kind of depressing sometimes. What do you mean?

[B]

And sometimes there could be people, you think, oh, this person doesn't suck. And then it turns out they do. And that, that can be upsetting. And I'm not going to name any names there, but it, it can be. Yeah, it can be a frustrating space to be in. And we work really hard to be caring and compassionate to the victims and to do justice by them and their families.

[A]

There's also different degrees of suck. I will say that, like, in fairness, like, there's people. When I started, I was like, oh, these guys are terrible. You know, like, I mean, and then you, you look and you see so much worse behavior and you're like, okay, maybe I was kind of hard on them. You know, like, like it, like you, you almost like there's a. There's shades of gray in between. It's not all. There's nuances and there's people who maybe you also don't like personality wise, but they're not really doing any harm. So, like, there's no, no problem there. You know, it's just that, like, I just, I feel like it's just a kind of like a space that unfortunately attracts a lot of callousness from certain segments of the audience and from certain segments of the creators. And that's something where I don't think it has to be that way. But as long as those creators are getting income from their audience, then it's not going to change. That's why I always encourage people like, don't listen to this stuff. The biggest thing you can do is vote with your dollars. And any click is an endorsement. Even if it's a click, that's like a hate watch. It just. You can't determine what's a hate watch and what's not a hate watch when you're looking at the numbers. So I, I tell people to ignore this stuff. I think that's the, that's the best thing you can do. So in terms of the next section.

[B]

So that completes the portion.

[A]

Show questions.

[B]

The show questions.

[A]

There's just one single solitary question in the next section.

[B]

Would you say, are you a show pony or a workhorse?

[A]

Oh, my gosh, I will never forget that.

[B]

What am I referring. Yeah.

[A]

When we were interviewing Carroll County Sheriff Tony Liggett on a number of occasions, he said he was not a show pony. He was a workhorse. So then, then at that time, then there was a glass animal song called Show Pony that would always come on our serious radio. And every time I was like, the song reminds me of Tony Liggett. He's a wonderful guy and I think Carroll county is very lucky to have him as a sheriff. Very smart and compassionate. But yeah, I. There was that. And he kept saying the show pony workhorse thing. And then Tobe Blesenby, who was previously the sheriff of Carroll county, another great guy. He kept saying, we'd ask him, like, how did you feel about this? And he'd be like, the word that comes to mind is. And then, like, whatever the word was. So I feel like I, I feel like I started adopting people's speech patterns after that because we were in such a weird. We weren't, we weren't interacting with everyone, anyone else. Throughout that, that month of January 2025, it was all Delphi people. That was it.

[B]

In, like, an alternate universe. Can you imagine yourself working for that sheriff's department?

[A]

I think I would be terrible in law enforcement. I would not be someone you'd want in law enforcement. So I don't, I don't see myself working in law enforcement because I think I'm not, I do not have the personality to be, like, just a helpful person and trying to.

[B]

You're very helpful person.

[A]

No, I think I would suck at it. I think I would lose patience with people. And, and I think that's probably the number one quality you want to have, patience also being able to shoot a gun properly, which I don't know how to do, and I think I would be very bad at. Yeah.

[B]

The one time we went out shooting, and I may have mentioned this on the show before, I'll probably mention it many times again. First time I held a gun, I did a much better job shooting than you.

[A]

You know what? You got one bullseye hit.

[B]

Let me ask you a question. How many bullseye hits did you get? Whatever.

[A]

You're so cool.

[B]

Zero.

[A]

Well, I will say the friend we went out with, I thought this was the funniest thing. We went to the friend that we went out with.

[B]

He's an experienced shooter, a veteran retired lawman.

[A]

And we asked him, you know, because we're very competitive, I guess, or at least I am. I said, okay, we're all in a firefight, and you get injured, you get shot, and you have to give the gun to me or Kevin. You have one bullet, and you have one bullet. What do you do? And he indicated that he would, he would shoot himself. He would shoot himself. So I don't think he had confidence in either of us. But, yeah, no, I've, I've shot guns. I, I shot guns at Colonial Williamsburg. It was actually like, I hit a target with a fouling rifle.

[B]

There's a video of this. There was a video of this on YouTube.

[A]

Didn't hear. I, I don't look good in that video, so don't be advertising that.

[B]

And you look great.

[A]

And then I, I, I, I didn't do very well with a musket. But then the, my other, only other gun experience, which is pretty Funny is I embedded with my, the ROTC at my college and they, you know, so I went to like a actual military fort and they were doing practices and for some reason somebody let me shoot like a, like I guess an M16, which was obviously, I'm not going to say no, but it was really scary. And then I was like, why are they letting me do this? I ended up shooting the ground. I was not very good. So yeah, somebody in the military looked at me and said, ah, yes, give her an M16 rifle. That looks, that's a good idea and that's gonna end well.

[B]

But yeah. So maybe, maybe you shouldn't be a police officer.

[A]

No, I don't think so. I mean, I don't think either of us would be good police officers, in fairness.

[B]

Well, let me ask you a question. Did one of us get a bullseye?

[A]

Oh my God. There's more to it than that, Kevin. It's not a, it's not a shooting competition, okay? Like there's more to it. I was proud of you for getting the bullseye. That was cool. I, I, I, I tipped the hat to you. But I don't think either of us are cut out for that line of work. There's a lot of lines of work that I'm not cut out for. And that's, I think, one of them. So it with the law. This is the law section. There's one question, one question. There's one solitary question, then after this.

[B]

I can go relax and you can handle the rest of it.

[A]

Yeah, that makes sense. Sense. So this is from one of our Patreon patrons. This is what they asked. Kevin has talked about how tenuous premeditation can be in some cases. Do you think that strangulation, because it can take a significant amount of time, makes a murder premeditated?

[B]

You know, not necessarily because the, the act is whatever sudden burst of passion inspires you to commit and act. Maybe you're in the grip of that passion for however long it takes you to successfully strangle someone.

[A]

Yeah. And that being said though, I think it's important that we raise awareness of non fatal strangulation can be very much a predictor of later homicide. So what I'm talking about is domestic abuse situations where a partner strangles another partner and doesn't kill them there. That can be a predictor of homicide. Down the road we spoke with Megan, who, whose mother, Leslie Hope Houston was murdered and there was strangulation in her relationship and that's something that she's been big on raising awareness of that was an episode we did that was great. She did a great job on it. But I think that's something. As a society, we could probably take strangulation even more seriously and, and be raising awareness. Like, if that, if someone does that to you, like, you're in serious, serious danger, even down the road. But, yeah, but as far as the law, I think that that's, that's different. So we got some questions on Delphi.

[B]

So that concludes.

[A]

Yeah, that's the law.

[B]

The law portion of the proceedings.

[A]

Slam our law books shut on that one.

[B]

And we're going to drive back to Delphi, Indiana.

[A]

We're very used to doing that. First question, who's your favorite first person guest? I can't choose.

[B]

I love them all.

[A]

Some of these people listen to the show. We're not going to be like, oh, it's. No, I'm just kidding. I love them all. They're wonderful. They're wonderful people. And we just appreciate them for trusting us. Yeah. For trusting us and talking to us.

[B]

I love them all equally.

[A]

I don't have a favorite child. Facebook. One of the Facebook users says, do you know if anyone tried to find video footage of Dick Allen buying beer near the Peru area on the day of the murders?

[B]

I would presume they probably made some efforts in that regard. But I would also presume that, keep in mind, by the time they got that part of Richard Allen's story, Richard Allen, of course, said to Dr. Walla on the morning of the murders, I, I was in the Peru area. I bought a six pack of beer. By the time they got that piece of information, I believe it was about what, five years after the murders.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And I would be very, very surprised if many businesses keep their video footage of activity in the store for five years.

[A]

Yeah. And, and the thing is, everyone was canvassing Delphi after the murders. Everyone was canvassing, you know, this, this one city and the surrounding businesses. But if he purchased this in Peru, then. Yeah, yeah, then it's just a different. Yeah, it's, it's difficult when we're talking about years later, for sure. And that's one area where, like, had had the Richard Allen tip gone through properly early on in this case, those would have definitely been avenues that you would expect to see law enforcement very much go down. But five years later, it becomes trickier.

[B]

What's next?

[A]

If you could interview Richard Allen and only ask three questions, what would they be?

[B]

Well, first of all, I think I would go into the interview being well aware that is not a situation where I would expect him to tell the truth or give me very meaningful answers based on everything we, we know about him. He's not an articulate man. He doesn't have a lot of self knowledge, he's not very smart and he's willing to lie to serve his own ends. So I wouldn't necessarily expect the interview to be fruitful. No. With that said, I think I might be inclined to, to focus maybe on the religious issue because while he was incarcerated, awaiting trial, he seemed to get very moved and emotionally wrapped up in the idea of religion and of finding redemption in the next life. That seemed to be really emotionally significant to him. I would ask him, do you think not taking responsibility for these murders means you don't get into heaven? Do you think God will forgive you for what you did if you don't take responsibility on Earth? Maybe. Why do you think your family refuses to listen to you when you confess?

[A]

Good questions. My three would be, one's a little bit more specific and two are pretty broad because again, I agree with Kevin. I don't. This is not an introspective man who I think is even capable of understanding himself. I think Richard Allen floated through life letting other people take care of him and didn't really take much responsibility for his own actions. That's not to say, you know, a lot of people struggle with depression. A lot of people struggle with pretty intense anxiety. I'm one of those people and I'm sympathetic for anyone who deals with those struggles. But for me, I think that he is someone who just never took responsibility for what he owns. And you know, there's a difference between struggling and doing that, you know, so I, I wouldn't necessarily expect honesty. I think a lot of his stuff would be self serving. Even if it was somewhat honest. I think he would twist it to make himself not sound as bad because he cares deeply about how others feel about him. So my three questions would be one, when did you start fantasizing about raping or killing and, or killing women and girls? I would want to know when, when. When's the genesis of that power fantasy? You know, is that something that started really early on, early adulthood? I don't know. I'd be curious. Then I would ask, can you just talk me through the whole sequence of the murders? What happened? Just take us through. And again, that's a pretty broad question, but I'd like more detail mainly to know what those girls went through. And then the last one would be, I almost wrote down why did you do this? But there's no answer to that. There's no. There's nothing. I mean, doesn't matter. He can say whatever. He can say, okay, because it was sunny that day, you know, or. Or because whatever, I wanted to rape somebody. It did. Like, it's all meaningless. But my third one, I would ask, why did you take back your confessions? What went into that decision? Was it primarily his family, or was it a situation where he was being pressured in other ways? I'll leave it at that. That would be my question.

[B]

Here's a question from Facebook. Did Baldwin and or others, or do you think Baldwin and or others filed a complaint against Judge Goll? Let me say something about the way the complaint process works. In essence, anyone on the earth can file a complaint against an Indiana lawyer for whatever reason. There's a process for that. You do it. The vast majority of them get dismissed. In some cases, the disciplinary committee says, oh, we want a response from the lawyer. And even the vast majority of those get dismissed. The ones that don't get dismissed are the ones that become public, because then there'll be some sort of a report or a finding issued by the commission. So the only way we as members of the general public can learn about complaints being filed are if they're found to be valid. If a complaint is filed against a lawyer and it is not found to be valid, that is not made known to the public unless the lawyer who has the complaint filed against him chooses to make it known or unless the person who has filed the complaint chooses to make it known. So because of that, we don't know. We have no way of knowing if Baldwin or someone else filed a complaint against Judge Goal.

[A]

My guess is, yes, he did.

[B]

All we can say with certainty is if such a complaint was filed, it was found to be invalid.

[A]

Yeah, my guess. My personal guess is he did. But we. We have no way of confirming that.

[B]

And that's just a guess.

[A]

And that's just a guess. It's not based on any knowledge. So I.

[B]

To me, it would be surprising to me if he did file a complaint against her. But a few weeks ago, I would have said it would have been surprising if he filed a complaint against McClelland.

[A]

This man is on a petty rampage as far as I'm concerned, and has been for months. So, I mean, you know, Nicholas McLeland is the great enemy in Andrew Baldwin's eyes, and so he wants to take him down. But, I mean, Judge Gall, Judge Frank Gaul was another enemy. And this is a defense team that was pitching negative stories on Gull before any outward signs of trouble were even existent in this case. So I think he has it out for both of them. And it would not surprise me in the least, and it would not surprise me in the least if it was immediately laughed out of the disciplinary commission.

[B]

So what's next?

[A]

This is a question that was kind of similar, but I'll. I'll read it anyway. Quote, thank you both for being the voices of reason. I feel like y' all truly man the walls and protected this case and the families against the unethical triad trying to change the narrative. Well, first of all, thank you so much. That's very kind of you. Quote, My question is, why has Baldwin, etc not been disciplined for their outlandish behavior? Didn't Judge Gull say she was notifying the disciplinary commission concerning the leak of the crime scene photos after she declined to find them in contempt or something? On that, I guess I just need Baldwin, especially to be officially reprimanded for all of his lies and half lies, end quote. First of all, thank you so much. Very kind question. And I totally understand where you're coming from, because there's a situation where if people do really horrible things and no one is held accountable, it feels almost like the trust in the system as a whole goes down because it's like, seriously, this is just allowed and no one's going to do anything. And for me, I've been dealing with that in the sense that the fact that Nicholas McClelland, the prosecutor in the Delphi case, who did an excellent job and really just is, I think, did a heroic effort in terms of finding justice for Abby and Libby. And then Kevin Greenlee, my husband, who was in the case for five minutes simply to get documents released. The fact that they're the only two attorneys who had complaints filed on them, there's something really appalling about that. And I don't know. I do vaguely recall. I don't remember what the wording was, but I think I do vaguely recall Gull saying something like that around that contempt issue. Do you remember that, Kevin?

[B]

I do, vaguely.

[A]

Vaguely. I don't know if she followed through or she didn't follow through because again, we'll never know. Baldwin, presumably, would have to publicize that. But I. I don't know. I think I. I think that even if Judge Go, I think Judge Gull reacted with caution to the contempt stuff. And I think personally, there was enough there. But at the same time, I understand where she came down of saying, like, okay, well, it's not quite a Smoking gun. But that doesn't mean that there wasn't, you know, violations as far as a disciplinary commission is concerned. So, I mean, I don't know. I think. I think a lot of what they did was just inherently disgusting and unethical. And I think because of photos entrusted to them getting out to the Internet, you know, somebody died. So, I mean, I think I. It. It boggles my mind that nothing has come of that, but I imagine that some. It's possible, like, people just haven't filed anything on them. I think it's very possible that it's just a situation where people are like.

[B]

Let'S just move on, or it's possible for alguinos, maybe some member of the public has filed something on him. I don't know.

[A]

Well, as you learned, anybody can file.

[B]

On any lawyer, do it. Just when a person files, they can't say, oh, I think this lawyer should be disciplined, because I think he did bad stuff. You know, you have to explain, well, here's what was done. It was in violation of this rule. But, yeah, so I don't know.

[A]

I mean, he basically. I mean, Baldwin. Baldwin's complained on McLean was basically that I think he did bad stuff. I mean, he threw around a couple of rules here and there, but we got very far afield of that very quickly.

[B]

And I'll note the end result of that was it was dismissed.

[A]

Precisely. So, like, I think, you know, I'm going. I'm going to say this. I'm going to say this. The. You. You talk about this sometimes, Kevin, like, you cultivate the audience that you deserve, and that's through your actions. So if we were constantly platforming people who were saying nutty stuff and fighting with us or whatever, then that would encourage that behavior because we'd be giving it attention. Instead, we strive to, you know, pay attention to people who deserve it, who are nice and smart. Right, right. And with the defense, they cultivated an audience of lunatics, of overly online people who think that screaming endlessly and harassing people online will make them look anything but totally unhinged. So that is who they teamed up with. So it does not surprise me that a number of people on that side ended up filing frivolous complaints on Kevin and that Baldwin's complaint on McLellan was so frivolous and ridiculous. I just don't think the prosecution side is that unprofessional where they're, you know, like, people are going out and doing stuff like that. I just don't think that. And I think for us, you know, we, like, we strive, we bent over backwards on this show and in our book to try to give the benefit of the doubt and to try to get both sides. And because we were seen as, like, a threat, I guess we were not ultimately taken up on that by the defense. But, like, these are people who are going so far as to try to silence independent journalists. It's not even about silencing people on the prosecution side. It's about silencing people who are, like, essentially in the middle and willing to hear your side, but are just not sucking up to you. And I think that's incredibly telling and, you know, disturbing because it's like, if the goal is to silence people, like, how can you act like you're at all caring about the truth or the process or anything like that?

[B]

Here's a question from Facebook. Were you too harsh on Kathy Allen?

[A]

Me? Okay, so I got a lot of criticism, and I understand where people are coming from. Yeah, Like, I totally understand that. You know, I. I feel like when we did our report on the transcript of Kathy Allen's 2022 interview with police, I was just reading it. I was just, like, I was irritated. I was irritated reading it. So I think sometimes when I get irritated, I'm not as good at connecting my thoughts together in a way that's coherent for people. So I will try to kind of explain why I have lost sympathy for Kathy Allen as a whole here. And it actually has less to do with the 2022 interview so much as it has to do with things that she's done in 2025. So when we're looking at the 2022 interview, we are seeing a woman who is fully acknowledging that her husband is somebody who has a drinking problem, that her husband has a lot of stress, that her husband was incredibly stressed out in 2017. In particular, that her husband is a very isolated man, that her husband has a lot of struggles, that her husband was there on the trails that day, that her husband wears the clothes the bridge guy wears, and that her husband often parks when they go to the trails in the same place where we know the killer parked. So what I see in 2022 is a woman who had all of the pieces to put her husband there in the place of bridge guy and chose not to do that. She may have chosen not to do that through just straight up denial. Like, she couldn't go there mentally or just not having. I don't know the. The know how to put that together. Whatever. Either way, I can have sympathetic. I. I can have a Lot of sympathy for someone in that situation. Denial is a very forceful thing. When you've built your life around somebody else that you love, it's very difficult to accept that they're capable of doing something horrible, even if you have all the pieces right there. You know, she's talking about him being, quote, unquote, sassy when drunk. She's talking about him and being different when he's drunk. It sounds to me, reading between the lines of that interview, that he has a history of being verbally abusive when drunk, when he becomes a different person somewhat, and that he was under a lot of stress and strain in 2017. So all of that, all of that is something where I can sympathize with Kathy Allen. What I don't sympathize with is then when she goes out, which she has done in a project in 2025, and essentially whitewashed who Richard Allen is, she goes out and she talks about how he is this, you know, just wonderful little husband and father who's just never done anything wrong. She's effectively trying to whitewash him for the public so that the public believes, oh, well, his wife says he's a great guy. So, you know, this must be wrongful conviction.

[B]

So basically, and correct me if what I'm saying is wrong or misunderstanding what you're saying. You're saying that the 2022 interview shows that the Kathy Allen of 2025 was knowingly lying.

[A]

Yes, she was knowingly lying. And she does so in order to, you know, lie and influence the narrative to the public. And that's not right. You don't have the right to do that. I think that anyone who goes through something like this is deserving of some sympathy, but you're not deserving of your own reality where suddenly you go back and erase all that you know about your husband. And again, like, I, I, I just, it's like there's a point where this stand by your man stuff is just laughable. I understand that it can take a while to get to the point where you say, okay, I think he did do this and accept reality. Or maybe some people never get to that point. I understand that. But there's a difference between what they're doing quietly and what she's doing, which is this public advocacy that is based on outright lies she does not deserve. I mean, that's. When you get out there and lie, my sympathy runs, runs dry, I guess, is, it's, it's like, I'm done. You know, like, you don't, you don't have the right to do that. And my sympathy can be better expended upon the families who lost people and the community that lost its innocence because of her husband's horrific actions. She's not to blame for her husband's actions. She's not to blame. Nor I think, are her, are his depression or anxiety. You know, a lot of people struggle with that. But he has this thing, I think, where he refuses to take any responsibility for his actions in general. I think that was a pattern throughout his life based on some of the things she said. And frankly, she enables him. So I think we're seeing yet another toxic pattern that they're used to doing, that they've been doing for years, unfold in public. And at some point, I'm just at a point as a person where I'm saying, I don't really, I, that this is ridiculous. You know, I don't, I don't have sympathy for that. You don't get to lie. And just based on what she was saying in 2022, he was not an ideal husband and father. It sounds like he was using her to, I don't know, be his, like to, to regulate his emotions at all times. Now, people, people do that. That doesn't mean anyone's a murderer, but, I mean, it sounds like he was largely somebody who was, I don't know, doing some kind of emotional vampirism where his needs came first at all times. I didn't get the sense from that interview that, you know, her needs were really being. I mean, when she talks about the time he was struggling, it's because she was upset because one of her relatives died. You know, she may have needed that support at that time, but, you know, it becomes all about him. So, yeah, I don't, I have sympathy for the Kathy Allen of 2022 to a certain extent, even though I think she absolutely should have known at that point. But it's really the Kathy Allen and her decisions in 2025 that I really give a side eye to, I suppose, because it's, it's, it's just perpetuating a lie. And why do that? You know, and you could say, well, maybe the, the whatever the project was, maybe that gave her a bad edit. Yeah, but I mean, she never said that. So I don't, I don't think, you know, if that's the case, then speak up, I guess. But yeah, I think, I think at some point also, like, I'm willing to sound harsh. I'm willing to sound harsh because at some point, like, does it benefit somebody to keep on driving around in circles. Does it benefit somebody to be stuck in this one sided relationship with a person who betrayed them so fundamentally, like, is that kind to just say, oh, good for you. Keep doing that? I, I think, I think the caring thing for people in Kathy Allen's life to do is to tell her, you are wasting the rest of your life on this man and it is not worth your time and you should move on. I think that is a kind thing because she can, she can have some meaning and enjoyment in the rest of her days and she can, you know, she can separate herself from a man who hunted down and brutally murdered two little girls. And I think that would be probably better for her. But I mean, I think for the rest of us, we don't need to like play pretend that, you know, she gets to lie.

[B]

Well said. Next question. Can you tell us more about this YouTuber, a friend of appellate attorney Kara Wienicke who filed a report on Kevin. And before you answer this, there's an interesting thing about Carol Weinecke that I'm not sure many people know. She doesn't believe we landed on the moon.

[A]

What.

[B]

With that said, proceed.

[A]

Yeah, I mean, it's just so funny the caliber of people that this case attracts on that side. On the conspiracy side.

[B]

Yes. This woman believes Richard Allen is innocent. She also believes we didn't land on.

[A]

The moon and we'll leave it to you to figure out which one is more ridiculous. So, yeah, like, and also I should say she's not. Meta conspiracy theory that she doesn't like. I think it's all of it talking about Ms. Winickey. Yeah. This, this YouTuber she's friends with. And we say friends with because, I mean, she, this YouTuber essentially like tried to lie to our publisher in order to get our book for Carol Whinecke, which is like a weird thing to do when you're claiming to be a journalist. Right. Like, I don't, I don't go around and try to like get free books for my friends using my press credentials. It's actually like something that's pretty frowned upon, I think. So I think when I think about this person, and to be clear, we're not naming her because, like, I think she's desperate for attention and I, you know, like damnatio memori. Right. I think this does introduce a kind of an interesting discussion. And this is a phenomenon that is not just specific to this YouTuber. I think it's actually something we see a lot in the Delphi case and something we're going to see a lot more going forward in true crime and frankly, in any conspiratorial community. And it's these two specific phenomena. One is when a person doesn't have the ability or skill to do any real work. When I say real work, I mean like breaking news or getting really high quality interviews or founding a platform that's pretty big, I think they sink into the mire. Certain people, instead of trying to do better and saying, okay, how can I up my game and do better? It's more about sinking into the mire and trying to drag others down with them. There can be some jealousy going on there, and there's often what you see is there's a leaning into drama and outrage and kind of ganging up on people or trying to incite hatred against people and. And that can lead to an audience that can lead to usually a smaller audience because usually most people find that stuff pretty boring and weird. At the end of the day, it's very inside baseball. Like, would you rather watch something that's about a murder case, or would you rather watch something where it's like one person complaining about creators who've covered the murder case? More people care about the murder case. There's going to be a couple of diehards who care about the other thing that's, you know, unless it's directly impacting the murder case.

[B]

Right, right.

[A]

But again, in this case, the Delphi case is over. And then the second phenomenon, this is something like, I find fascinating, Kevin, and I'd be curious if you've. You. You were into the JFK conspiracy theories for a while, right? I mean, that was like, you know. Yes, sir. You know, and I, I'm gonna, I'm gonna tell you what I've seen. And I want to tell you to tell me, like, is this something that you see often in other situations? Because I'm genuinely curious. What I see is, like, I see people who might have some kind of professional credibility, and they consider themselves very smart and intelligent and frankly, maybe a bit contrarian. They're the ones who, like, seem very easily sucked into conspiracies. And note, I'm saying they consider themselves smart. Okay? Like, that's the. Consider themselves is kind of a key part of that. What I see is that they'll post something kind of like, you know, or they'll kind of get into it a little bit. They'll post something about a case or they're kind of like, flirt with it a bit. And what you see is the cons, the die Hard conspiracy theorists flatter them. And they flatter them through their own self perception. You know, these are people. Well, they'll be told, you're so smart, you're seeing what others can't. You're going to save the day in this case. And the people who. Gonna get sucked into this, they feel, I, I think most of them feel like they didn't get their due in their career, whatever their career was, whether that was law, whether that was journalism, whether that was, you know, what have you, law enforcement. They didn't get their due. But now suddenly these people are acting like they're the greatest thing since sliced bread. And by jumping wholeheartedly into a conspiracy theory, they give themselves a ego boost. Not really a career boost because this is pretty small, small potatoes. But they feel like suddenly like they're a big shot and they're a big wig and there's just all of a sudden they go from being. Feeling very alone to being surrounded by admirers who tell them that they're a crusading voice for justice and they're going to help expose all the evil people. You know, their ego is essentially starved. And then they're suddenly hit with this feast of validation, engagement. They get a sense of purpose. They get people who are looking up to them, they get admiration, they get community. And I think that is a. It's like a balm on their souls and they feel like they want to keep going with that. And I, I think, I understand that to some extent. It's, it's, it's embarrassing to watch because you can just see what's happening. And this is also how people get into cults. But it's, it's understandable if you're dealing with someone who's very lonely or feels like frustrated that they didn't get what they felt they deserved. So, like, I think it's a human thing, but it's unfortunate to watch people fall down that spiral staircase because I think it's very hard to get back up at the end of the day. Like, personally, if I were a few years from retirement and I felt like I hadn't gotten the career I deserved and all my freelance gigs were drying up and I wasn't, you know, I never did anything that I felt was really like, you know, the caliber of what I felt I could do, and I felt I wasn't really a journalist anymore, even though that's been a core part of my identity for a long time, I. I think I would feel pretty sad. I think I would feel pretty sad. I'D like to think I wouldn't spend the remaining time on my, on this planet on some sort of weird, futile quest to harm people who've gotten stuff that I very clearly want, you know, I, I, but when I look at this behavior and I look at the, like, the lying and the scraping and the attempts to get in with a failed team of defense attorneys and punish their enemies on their behalf on some level, you know, I, I feel sorry for this person because I feel like people who are happy with their career and people who have high self esteem, they don't behave like this. They're, they're too busy trying to do cool things themselves. They're not sitting around trying to like so suddenly like kneecap what they perceive as their competition, you know, even though the race is frankly over. So I, I think when you have people who are doing this, when you, people, you know, one thing that, you know, I think is notable with this individual who filed a complaint against Kevin, which, you know, I think is essentially lawfare in order to sabotage the competition again. The competition ended a while ago, but this person doesn't seem to realize that when you look at that, there's a lot of gatekeeping, there's a lot of, like, I'm the real journalist, they're not journalists. And like, I think when you, when people are so loud about that without having anything to really back that up except a couple of like ancient dusty press clips from latter, from latter years, I think that's just coming from a place of insecurity. I think it's coming from a place of pettiness. And it's, it's sad because it's understandable to feel some of those feelings. They're human feelings. But it's a good idea when you feel that way to let it fuel you instead. Instead of just looking at someone who you deem more successful than you or is getting success that you want, don't be mad at them. Figure out what you can do in order to get to that point, because we all are capable of doing great things and it's usually ourselves holding us back. And, you know, if you're unhappy with where you are in your career, you can always do things differently to try to reinvigorate that. And I think that's a good way of dealing with those feelings instead of becoming an embarrassing conspiracy theorist on social media. Just because you have a couple people patting you on the head and telling them that you're their favorite, that doesn't mean that's a good thing for you. And it doesn't mean it's going to improve your life or your career. My question, though is, does that happen in other cases?

[B]

Not like it happens in this case. I can't think off the top of my head of something similar happening in the JFK case. Certainly there's a phenomenon of people who have qualifications in one area and feel smart in one area who then imagine that applies in other areas as well, and it doesn't. If you're smart in one area, that just means you're smart in one area. It means you're good at one thing. It doesn't mean you're good at everything. There are certain things I'm smart about you would be a fool to. Like let me work on your car, for instance. Yeah, it'd be ridiculous. So just when you get information from people, even if there's like a degree after their name, a PhD, if it doesn't apply to the subject they are discussing, you know, you don't have to give much credence to it.

[A]

It's actually logical fallacy. The argument from authority, where you're saying, hi, guys, I'm an authority. So what I say is right. And, and, you know, and especially with something like journalism. Journalism is essentially like the one career, which is. I love what I love about it. But like, you are a student, you know, you are coming in and learning things, and you're learning alongside your audience, and you're trying to build up that expertise and you're trying to build up that knowledge, but oftentimes you have to remain curious and, and, and the party's over the moment you start thinking you know more about anything than anyone else, because odds are you don't. And if you think that you're going to be closed off to different avenues. And I think, you know, when I see people come in and be like, trying so hard to, like, I guess, seem like an expert, when the work doesn't back that up, it's just like, you know, it's like, okay, have fun with that.

[B]

Have you been approached to create a documentary or docu series based on your book of the Delphi murders, something akin to the Murdaugh murders series, I think. I guess there's no reason not to say this, but a while back, a production company did take out an option on our book. And I don't really fully understand the process myself, but what I do understand is that getting a documentary done is very, very complicated. And it depends on a lot of different factors that none of us understand. And that when someone options your book that is the first step in a journey that might be very long and arduous. It also might be the only step and nothing may come of it. So what I've done is I kind of put it out of my head. I can't control it. I have no influence on it. I don't understand the documentary production market. So that's all I know.

[A]

That's exactly right. Yeah. I don't. I think. I think Delphi is one of those cases also that, like, it's the most important thing to a lot of us who covered it for a long time. But, you know, it's. It's a. It can be a difficult sell in the sense that it's an incredibly depressing and awful case. And so, like, as far as, like, what we've been told within, you know, within books and within other forms of media, is that sometimes there's more of a preference for cases that don't have that level of heaviness on it, you know, where it's like more like spouses murdering each other and it's a murder mystery. And, like, I think all murders are horrible and should not be treated with any sort of facetiousness.

[B]

But there's a certain type of murders that some people in the industry call fun murders.

[A]

Yeah. Or sexy murders, you know, and, like.

[B]

It'S a really attractive person who's rich who's killed by another really attractive person.

[A]

And I find that gross. I don't like that way of thinking.

[B]

But it's all human lives.

[A]

It's all human lives. But I think with Deli, there's no guarantee of anything, you know, and a lot of people actually haven't heard of the case. I think that's been something we've found as we've gone to different events. At times they'll be like, oh, is this like a story you guys made up? It's like, no, it happened. And they're like, whoa, this is crazy. So, like, you know, I mean, I don't think there's any guarantee of anything happening, but it would be cool if it did. I guess if you guys want to see something, let us know in an email or social media, because then we can, you know, be like, well, there's.

[B]

Interest, but I'm not even sure if that would have any impact.

[A]

It probably wouldn't, but it can't hurt. So the next question.

[B]

I'll let you handle those emails.

[A]

Well, I don't. I mean, it doesn't matter. But as far as the Murdoch murder series, I think that's like, A fictionalization of Mandy Matney's podcast, I think, and. Or not a fictionalization. It's like a dramatization where they're taking something that really happened and having, like, actors play what happened. For me, I don't see that. I think that would be very difficult to do with our book because it's so depressing and there's so many people. They might, like, combine a bunch of the detectives, right?

[B]

Or a composite character.

[A]

Composite character of a Steve. Steve Mullen, Tony Liggett and Jerry Holman. All. All one guy. All the prosecutors are one person. I don't know. I mean, it would be cool, but I, I, I, I don't know if there's any interest in that, but I think it's a good book, and I think it's a good story. I think it just would depend on if there's any interest. So here's a question from Facebook. Thank you for your tireless dedication to Abby and Libby. Your boots on the ground reporting has been respectful, thorough, and at times, nothing short of miraculous. Aw. Well, thank you. I still don't know how you kept going. Please continue to keep Kiana, Kiara Kirelli, and Kiani's fight for justice in focus. This isn't really a question, just a note to say that your continued coverage means so much to those still seeking answers for Galen Rose. First of all, thank you for the lovely question. These four beautiful girls. Were the four girls lost in Flora, Indiana, which was a horrible arson case that happened right before the Delphi murders. So you had a community reeling from the loss of six little girls. And unfortunately, these four little sisters have not. Their case has not been solved yet. Arson is a very difficult kind of case to deal with because by nature, fire and water, when the firefighters respond, wash away evidence. So, yeah, that is a case we are interested in covering. I'd want to figure out how to do it in a sensitive and thoughtful way that contributes to the conversation and does not possibly damage any ongoing investigation. So if there are people in the community who are well advised of this case and might be able to speak with us about where we can kind of get started in a way that doesn't damage anything, I think that would be something we'd be very interested in hearing about. Is that right, Kevin?

[B]

That is right.

[A]

Those four little girls deserve justice. And it breaks my heart. And I'm one of four sisters. So this case has always stuck out to me because it's like I recognize their family in my family, and it's deeply sad. So my heart goes out to them and all their loved ones. So, yeah, definitely open to this.

[B]

The Delphi case clearly affected you deeply. How has it changed how you approach your work going forward? Either in the cases you choose, how you tell them, or in any other way? Yeah, I think it really has affected us to an incredible extent. On a personal level, I saw some things I didn't want to see, and I'm including things like literally, like the crime scene photos. But also I saw some behaviors from people at different parts of this process that were disillusioning and caused me to lose a lot of face in certain things. So it was very troubling. I think one thing that I will always remember going forward is that all of these cases we cover or discuss, and this sounds like an overly simplistic thing to say, but it is true. These are real people. They are living and breathing and feeling people, and you need to keep that in the forefront of your mind at all times.

[A]

Well said. I think it's a great question. This is something I've actually thought a lot about. There's a before and after Delphi. For me, personally, as a journalist and as a human being, what you said about losing faith in humanity definitely happened. And what I tried to do to counteract that is focus on the bright sides. I've seen a lot of wonderful things from humanity over this case, but some days it can be easier to look at the darkness than the light. As far as how I cover cases on the podcast, I think Delphi represented a Rubicon crossing because I think for so long, we put so much effort into trying to be as down the middle as possible. And I feel like at a certain point, all we did was normalize behavior that was not normal. And I'm talking specifically about the defense team in this case. If you want to listen to. If for some reason you're some poor SAP who suddenly got sucked into this and you have no idea what we're talking about, and you want to listen to a frog being boiled alive in water. Go start from the beginning of our Delphi coverage. Go start from the beginning of Richard Allen being arrested, actually, and listen to that and tell me that we didn't try our best to give this defense team every reason, every benefit of the doubt in the world.

[B]

Yeah, Our coverage, we did profile episodes of, like, Andy Baldwin, which were very positive.

[A]

Yeah. And so, like, that's. It's shifted the way I think about anything, but it's. It's shifted the way I. My willingness to try to. Here's the thing. We owe you our audience accuracy. We owe you fairness, we owe you vetted information. Um, we do not owe anybody performative, nonsensical, both sidesism. We just don't. That's not, that's not journalism. And at a certain point when you're reporting on something and acting like it's normal and it's not, you're actually doing everyone a disservice. So that's something I'm not willing to do. I'm not willing to do performative neutrality. That doesn't mean that we have the right to go out in any case and just say, oh, these guys suck and these guys are right. We should, we should, we should be curious. We should look at both sides. We should try to contextualize, we should try to get everybody on the record. All of that is true. But at the same time, when you're looking at one side and you see a bunch of people doing their jobs and being respectful and you see the other side and it's a literal full blown circus in the frickin parking lot and they're juggling and there's this fire and there's people jumping through hoops, then it's a circus. Just say it's a circus. Don't say, oh, they were doing some interesting techniques with the trained ponies and people flying from the ceiling. It's like, no, there's a, those are acrobats, those are trained animals. It's a circus. Call it a circus. Like, let's stop pretending like. So I think that shifted the way I think about that. I went from being very much like we have to kind of like ride the middle and then to being like, you know, as long as we're being accurate and fair, I think letting people know when something is stupid is a benefit to them. And you can disagree with us and that's fine. But I personally, when I'm listening to people, I would rather them be real about something and be truthful as far as they see things. Because even if I disagree with them, I know where they're coming from. And I could potentially do my own research and come to my own conclusions, but I'm at least aware of where they're coming from. And I just felt like for so long in Delphi we were just trying so hard and at a certain point it's like, what are we doing? Like they're leaking freaking crime scene photos. Like things are, that things have devolved to that point. So yeah, that's, it's changed me. And I, I think I, I Personally kind of fell into a depression, I guess, over this case. I didn't really realize it at the time, but you could probably hear it on the show where I started going to therapy again. Like, ah, yes, okay. Like, okay. I think her mood's improved. It's something that. Just thinking about what they went through, and I have a more visual memory than Kevin, so I remember more about the crime scene than he does. And that is hard to sit with sometimes for me because I have a hard time with what they went through before the end. And thinking about that really still bothers me a lot. And it's like, then seeing how much of a circus it became, it's like adding insult to injury and what their families were put through totally needlessly. Any sort of process of justice is going to be difficult for a family. But we don't need to add to it by all this online abuse and seeing people descend into that and seeing people who should know better descend into that. People, like I mentioned before, who are kind of sucked into these conspiracy communities because they have no friends and they want friends. It makes me very angry. I think I've become a more angry person over this, which is. I don't like that about myself, but I think it's what happened.

[B]

One last question. Is there anything that people at home can do to help sell the book?

[A]

Yes. And first of all, thank you. I think a lot of people we've connected with over this book, it, it, it's been really healing in a way because first of all, you guys are lovely. And thanks to everyone who came to our book events. There'll probably be a couple more in 2026 here and there, but it won't be the same, you know, level of frequency, but, you know, keep, keep an eye out. We remember we have a website, it's called murdersheetpodcast.com and then if you go to slash events, then you're gonna see what our events are. But the thing about this case is I feel like it was a collective experience for a lot of us. People who followed it along on the show, people who were just in the community, people who are in Indiana, people around the world who just followed the case. And I think the book for me was really cathartic to kind of be able to share that with people and have people be like this resonated with me or I understand it better now. We've had a lot of people come up to us and say, like, I was totally in the conspiracy camp and now I'm not. And so that's been really, really, really meaningful. And so if you want to help spread the word, I think it's a, I think it's a book that is dismantling the nonsense and it's. If things you can do, I guess, post about it on your own social media. Even if you don't have a huge following, you're just letting your friends know that this is a book that was meaningful to you. If you can text your friends who are big readers about it. If you know any fancy book talkers on Booktok, tell them about it. You know, spread the word to people who have large platforms. Spread the word to your friends and family. Post about it. Give a, Give us a positive review if you liked it. I mean, if you didn't like it, then, then don't review it at all. But if you did like it. No, I'm just kidding. Be honest. Like, don't just, you know, don't just jazz us up or whatever. You can, you can just. What it, what did it mean to you? If you review it on, on Goodreads or Amazon, that, that helps us. If you, if you can just kind of mention it to people in your life or, or kind of talk about, you know, the case, that all helps us a lot. And I think, I think what we've seen is it's also helped the public understanding it. The book has done well so far. We've been really thrilled with it. We've been thrilled with the whole experience. But I think just helping it reach more people, to let them know what happened here, I think is important because the. This isn't just about Delphi. For me, this book represented a warning flare for the rest of true crime. This can happen in any case. We're in our little rowboat and we're shooting up the flare. And I think that's what people have to know, that this stuff can become very toxic very quickly and hurt real people. And so I'm hopeful that by coming out with this and by having people talk about it and by raising awareness, we can work on ways to make true crime a better place.

[B]

Well said. So that wraps up part one of Questions and Answers. We're going to do a part two where we cover other cases and personal. That might get a little spicy. Maybe some more hack questions between the sheets. Push the button. Thanks so much for listening to the Murder Sheet. If you have a tip concerning one of the cases we cover, please email [e-mail] if you have actionable information about an unsolved crime, please report it to the appropriate authorities.

[A]

If you're interested in joining our Patreon, that's available at www.patreon.com. if you want to tip us a bit of money for records requests, you can do so at www.buymeacoffee.com murdersheet we very much appreciate any support.

[B]

Special thanks to Kevin Tyler Greenlee, who composed the music for the Murder Sheet and who you can find on the [e-mail] if you're looking to talk with.

[A]

Other listeners about a case we've covered, you can join the Murder Sheet Discussion Group on Facebook. We mostly focus our time on research and reporting, so we're not on social media much. We do try to check our email account, but we ask for patience as we often receive a lot of messages. Thanks again for listening.