Murder in Illinois

Where to even start. Just search the reviews on Apple Podcasts and Reddit. This podcast glorifies a child killer who is obviously guilty. It's sick and immortal.

This author spends so much time talking about "police tunnel vision" when in reality it seemed to me that she had journalistic tunnel vision! This entire podcast is so biased in favor of Chris Vaughn it is disgusting!

I had never heard of the Vaughn case and was expecting, actually wanting, to hear evidence of Chris Vaughn's innocence. Instead the author proved to me that he is guilty and is exactly where he should be - in prison for life! The only injustice was the way the author allowed Chris Vaughn's parent's to trash Kimberly's parents for an entire episode. Terrible! The Vaughn's opinion of Kimberly's family is completely irrelevant to the case. The author downplays ALL of the evidence against Chris and provides way too much significance into theories provided by experts PAID for by Chris's defense team. This happens over and over again throughout the podcast! She seems to blame everyone - the investigators, the judge, the DA , jurors, prison guards, and most pathetic of all, the victim Kimberly and her family!

This "documentary" reveals the opinion of the narrator "journalist." She is biased against the murdered mother and her family, and in favor of Chris Vaughn. The "documentary" (for anyone daring to call in that) feels like someone trying to become famous by faking a different belief. Like news sources, documentaries are supposed to be fact-based reliant on documented evidence, hence the genre "DOCUMENTary." Phil McGraw took up the cause on his show and interviews Vaughn's family and some unknown man who claims Vaughn is innocent without a shred of real evidence. It's all speculative. With a case as old and unfamiliar as this one, Dr. Phil show needs material.

So many questionable bias facts. Incredible how after 14 years this sociopath has an epiphany that happens to fit theories openly presented publicly. The family of a victim/s is once again dragged through the mud and victimized by complete amateurs.

The so called crime scene expert is a hack that was never law enforcement and works for a backwards town in Kentucky. Is it coincidence how her reconstruction fit the podcasts theory.

The reporter, who is a small town nobody who currently works for a gossip publication called the Patch.

The new attorney who claims a dozen exonerations, where? By the way who has been nicknamed "Joliet Jed" for a reason. Read the appeal!

The author is only concerned with one thing . . . Getting her name in the big media outlets. The court of law is where the real evidence lies. Guilty as charged.