Under Cover of Knight

I was really compelled by this early on and the format. It opens with the host saying she won’t be in the podcast and that it will be told by the ones who experienced it but that’s not really the case. There’s a lot of discussions from the researches and host. It’s all about their opinions on the info they are receiving. That’s cool but not what you think this is gonna be. It was pretty clear it was a suicide and a bunch of small town gossip. Which a compelling podcast does not make.

This starts off interesting but as more and more information comes to light, it becomes apparent some of the narrators can’t let go of what seemed at first blush to be a gripping tale of a woman on the run from something. Let it go.

Instead of just accepting what was clearly explained by the men who actually knew this woman, the narrators seemed like they were bending over backwards to prove what rural, small town people created in their minds as the “real story”. Also, the narrators do not understand what depression is—making their own conclusion that she couldn’t have been depressed bc of a note she wrote to herself 8 months before she died. (not close enough to the time she died to factor as her state of mind) They did a good job at interviewing everyone. It’s their conclusions that made the end of the podcast sound like a bad joke—“British woman walks into a bar….” And the locals all have a turn with the punchline.

A sensational hypothetical is used to hook the listener on episode one, while the showrunners know full well that it came from an unreliable source and is untrue. As soon as they read the documents in Sue Knight's personal file, the ethical thing to do would have been to cancel the project. Instead, we're presented with this lazy and shameless attempt to make "something out of nothing," and I hope that they are not given a future opportunity to waste people's time.