I love this podcast. I love Jim and Francey. Missing the Best Case Worst Case format though. It feels like it’s been forever since they have actually brought a guest on and discussed their best case/worst case. And it seems like Francey is missing a lot. Really do love this show! Hope it continues.

I used to love this podcast but I started to notice MAGA/ republican undertones in FH. I agree with other reviewers. It’s one sided especially with Israeli coverage. No longer listening this podcast.

Now that it's apparent they don't side with Palestinians who are absolutely being killed off in a genocide, I can't listen to this anymore. Also I understand condemning Mangione, but to completely miss the point of why people support him is nuts. Way too ignorant for my taste.

A quick google search would have fact checked FH and her conservative rhetoric. I had to turn it off and unfollow.

Updating my review. Excellent podcast. Nice to hear from actual law enforcement professionals. However, Jim and the way he talks to his cohost, and I’ve heard him do the same thing to Lisa Z. who used to be a cohost on RCP with Jim, is triggering. I’m listening to your back catalogue and Jim you interrupt way too much. You are very much admired for your experience and knowledge, however, you come across extremely arrogant. As if your way of doing things is the only way. You talk down to anyone you feel is beneath you, which is a lot of people. Additionally, all the yelling that you do. I understand having your voice become elevated when you’re discussing something you’re passionate about, I too in my early 20s had an issue with that and what I learned and was told repeatedly, when you get to the point where you are yelling about something, you lose the message. You have to consider the delivery. People raised by a yelling parent for example, are not going to want to listen to your podcast, doesn’t matter you are yelling about injustice, the volume takes over the subject matter. The further I go in the podcast list, it gets worse. Francie just said something and said this is something Jim will probably like, clearly in a sweet, teasing manner, and Jim bit her head off to stop telling him what he doesn’t and doesn’t like. Jim, if you want to help educate and spread awareness by doing podcasts, maybe consider your delivery. I find you arrogant, rude and triggering. Sadly that is overshadowing your knowledge and expertise. And you two, majority of the time, sound like a married couple who hate each other forced to do a podcast together. Even your guests have made comments about it. Talk about awkward.

I listened to this podcast for years and gave it 4 stars the whole time I listened. I quit watching media in 2016 after Trump was elected, so I didn’t realize what Francey had been doing publicly. I used to love her banter with Jim, but I recently saw the amount of footage of Francey being a Fox News guest on many occasions. As a result, she supported insane Republican propaganda and arguments to help the [expletive] Trump take control again. I didn’t have a problem with Republicans prior to 2016, but I sure do now. I’m disgusted by anyone who would allow that disgusting man to lead our childrens’ futures. I won’t be listening to this podcast as a result. Jim Clemente has a good heart and I wish I could keep supporting him, but I will no longer support Francey because of her appearances on Fox News and her other public statements. I am really, really sad that the U.S. has come to this.

Used to love the podcast for the original take on their guests personal experiences with their best and worst cases. Then it turned it only having guests who were promoting their own books or podcasts. Now, they haven’t done a best or worst case in over a year. It’s just joined the list of true crime podcasts doing op-ed’s and analysis of current headlines.

I’m a Patreon member and there’s discussion on there because while they reference the members during the podcast, we haven’t received a video since June. Members have reached out in a variety of ways without a response. Maybe leaving a low rated review will help.

I have been listening for a number of years and I’m always impressed with every episode. I love the banter and the respect Jim and Francey show one another regardless of their political views and beliefs. Keep up the great work!

Your tone deafness on this crime is amazing. He wasn’t like the night stalker. This guy got rich off denying people coverage who then died. They too have kids who will grow up without a parent. The American people are fed up. And neither of you address it. No one condones a murder but ask yourself why the feel this way. The same media who want to make Daniel Penny a hero. He couldn’t restrain this guy without killing him? You’re asking the wrong question and sound like Elites. Oh, and let’s blame women too.

I love this podcast. I love Jim Clemente. On the other hand Francie…… she’s such a hypocrite. She’s clearly a very staunch republican and clear as day MAGA… yet in episode (The CEO Assassin) is talking about how gross it is that people are mocking his death. She has NEVER publicly said a negative word about DJT or any republicans for the nasty, hateful, criminal things they have done or said. She actually does the opposite, makes excuses and argues why they said or did that said thing. It’s so insane. I often take breaks from this podcast because of her. It’s astonishing the ridiculous things that come out of her mouth all while attacking everyone else.

Interesting takes on the criminal Justice system from different points of view. I didn’t always agree with them but it was nice to see behind the curtain in investigations and the courtroom. Bailing because their effort to humanize and support a healthcare CEO who deliberately maximized human suffering in the name of an ocean of money leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Good to know that they value the CEO more because he killed thousands with paperwork instead of a bullet.

Jim sounds irritable and obnoxious. Francey rocks.

Did you people even read the Frank's memo? Or the pca? Trash reporting. Calling the judge a he when it's a female judge and saying the girls were supposed to be picked up by Kelsey when it was Libby's dad picking them up. What an absolute joke of a podcast.

Child sexual abuse is revolting, however a host needs to keep his ire in check and just report on the facts; tell the story. Throttle back dude. The angry voice detracts from the podcast.

I think I’ve listened to 98% of all episodes, but in the past couple months to a year the quality of the content / insights has gone completely down hill. I understand Jim may have needed to take a step back due to personal issues, but then going in so hard on insights and conclusions based on obviously minimal research is just hard to listen to. I have listened to Jim on other podcasts for years, and his takes lately are in complete contradiction to what he has said in the past, especially noted in coverage of the Richard Allen trial. I’m not sure what’s going on, but it does seem to stem from a lack of research, preparation before episodes. I would be completely fine with that, but just be upfront, and not so passionate when all your foundation is misinformed. Either more thorough research is need upfront, or the dialogue needs to leave more room for not being fully informed. I would much rather hear that they don’t know the full case, but here are some insights and arguments from both sides, then argumentative discourse belittling others opinions when you don’t even have all the facts. I love this show and BOTH of the hosts, I just think a tone reset is needed.

What is up with them having Alan Dershowitz on to discuss the Keith Raniere appeal? Four episodes devoted to Raniere appeal? As a sexual assault victim from another cult I am utterly disgusted. I used to be a fan. But something is fishy that they would give this much attention to this.

The Delphi coverage has been incredibly disappointing. Heard Jim call the defendant an Offender & treating the defendant as guilty before conviction. If you’re going to report on a case, check out the YouTubers following this case live, like Andrea Burkhart. I hope the BCWC team will do better research before they continue to cover this case. You can think he’s guilty, but the idea that it’s “a solid case,” per Jim, is just not connected to anything actually happening in that trial.

I used to love this podcast but they seem to be skipping on their research. Recently they went off on a LEO involved in the Delphi case for closing a lead on the person that is now on trial as the defendant. I realize that information on Delphi is hard to get but every other podcast, that actually have people in the court, have stated the LEO marked it for further investigation but somehow a dispatcher marked it as closed. And many other misinformation they have passed on makes me question everything they have ever covered

Love this podcast. So insightful and interesting BUT Francy is so annoying and straight up rude to the guests. I wish it was only Jim!!!

I like the show a lot but it kind of seems like the hosts don’t like each other, and are trying to outdo each other / interruptions, etc. I do appreciate the legal perspectives.

I listen every two weeks because when there is a part two I don’t have the patience to wait. It’s not you it’s me. 😊

Unfortunately sextortion is still a growing problem. An update episode may be a great idea.

I used to listen and stopped after Frances played down the Jan 6 insurgency, supported Kavanaugh in eight episodes and now they are giving Dershowitz air time? Used to be victim-friendly, incredibly disappointed.

Best podcast on any platform. Informative, respectful, and analytical, no fluff or dramatizations. Must listen!

I have always enjoyed the cases discussed on this show, especially the sometimes completely opposite view points the two hosts bring to light. The two hosts on this podcast are extremely experienced, individually unique, and no doubt empathetically execute with determination to inform the public… all while supporting justice and the voices of the victims. I am disappointed as of late though, as I have heard one of the hosts refer to the former president, Donald J Trump, as “THE” president on this podcast. As insinuating “the current”, as in “the active”, and as in “the sitting President of the United States” today. I can longer ignore that these references were likely a slip of the mouth, but rather a blatant and conscious opportunity to inflict personal bias to the audience. The first reference I recall was part 1 of the former presidents attempted assassination episodes. He was referenced as being “THE” next president of the United States. This comment was not only unnecessarily needed to explain the events of that case but it was plain confusing. My first thought was “Wait, what… did something happen in the last 24hrs that I missed? Is Donald J Trump the only remaining candidate running for presidency?” Although this temporarily distracted me from the episode at hand, I decided that maybe the intention of the host to use that reference was merely to explain the severity of the events through the victims potential social status instead. And that brings us to the episode today, August 23, 2024. That same host began comparing the episode at hand to a different and past case, trial, and conviction, of that same former president, Donald J Trump. I can only conclude that the host intentionally saw an opportunity to insinuate that the investigation and evidence presented from that case was either misleading or purposely narrowed in scope. I always loved this show because the discussions never used to instill this level of bias. But the bias, as of late, that is spoken and published on this podcast, is amplifying the most controversial upset that currently divides the people of the United States. I ask that this contentious bias be reconsidered from further publication of this podcast. Neither the integrity of the Best Case Worse Case podcast or the host should be defined by these recent drifts.

I have a good deal of respect for Jim and his experiences, both as an adult professional and for what he experienced and survived as a child. To have him giving a platform to Dershowitz to have him defend an abusive, narcissistic cult leader is deeply upsetting and feels like a betrayal of much of what he’s stood for. In the first episode on Nxivm, I found Franceys deeply uneducated victim-blaming to be really upsetting, as well. There’s a wealth of research into the psychology of cults, and the shaming she displays actually makes it harder for people to leave cults and coercive relationships precisely because culture at large blames them for being “foolish” enough to be in then in the first place - whereas the reality is that it has far more to do with the vulnerability of that person at that moment in time than with their intelligence or good judgment. Which is to say, we could all be victim to a coercive situation. Blaming the victims is so backwards that it makes me despair to have a former prosecutor voicing the attitude. A person who should be informed on trauma is instead espousing the viewpoint of the abuser. Yikes. I used to listen to this show quite often. Now I can’t listen. I’m so disappointed at the loss of what was a pretty good show, with unique viewpoints.

I used to be a die hard fan, but now find myself listening less and less. The hosts are constantly interrupting each other and worse, the guests, and even WORSE, add redundant and irrelevant to their comments so that they wind up using up more air time than their guests. In today’s episode, they interrupted the poor guest so many times that he begged them to let him explain for one minute without interrupting him. I have a headache.

I always love the show. I haven’t listened to this episode yet, as I’m not sure I can listen to that lowlife, but I am sure you will need a Silkwood scrubbing after any dealings with him whatsoever.

I appreciate the analysis from the point of view from an FBI Profiler and a Prosecutor but…. Francie doesn’t let Jim speak.

I love hearing about the cases and Jim’s thoughts on it. Jim comes across as knowledgeable and thoughtful. But I literally roll my eyes and dread what Francey is going to say when she starts talking. She interrupts, is condescending to the guests, and I sick of hearing about her thoughts on the death penalty. It is clear to me that I don’t agree with her politics which is fine but I cannot understand why she has to constantly interject it into what she is saying. I don’t understand why she is even on this podcast would be much better without her.

Could be a great podcast. Unfortunately the experts are offset by the untrained opinion and things said by Francey that do not make sense. Get rid of her and just keep it people who have done the job.

I am just listening to your medical podcast and hearing your experience with getting your blood drawn. I have had a few surgeries over the years and one time I had a nurse that couldn’t get a pic line in. She tried 3 times and then called the anesthesiologist to do it. He told me that if I got any body else that was having problems getting a line started or getting blood I have every RIGHT to ask for a different person. I give them 2 tries and then ask for someone new.

I have been following Jim for years now and I’m so grateful for all I have learned from him! He is helping right wrongs by educating us on what is going on within the justice system in our country and beyond. I love his passion, quick wit, wisdom, intelligence, and we can’t forget about the famous “Jim rants” when he gets especially fired up. Not to be missed people!!!

But “forward” is still spelled with an R!

I’ve been a fan of Jim for a few years , but just recently discovered this podcast, so far it’s great, I have a question for Jim though. In the episode about Laken Riley you were quick to point out rules women should follow to not be attacked and murdered such as stay in groups, don’t jog at night, jog while holding a tactical pen, and do not wear headphones/earbuds etc… you say these things as you say to protect women and I believe you. In the Tyre Nichols case , while also discussing George Floyd you never mention that you shouldn’t resist arrest , you don’t give that advice. If fact you give advice to the police about their approach when on traffic stops etc… My question is that in our current culture it is perhaps considered racist to tell black men to not resist arrest, why isn’t it considered misogynist to tell women how to behave for their safety. Thank you.

Changing my review from years ago. I like Jim and appreciate his knowledge and expertise. Francey though is really rubbing me the wrong way now and I unsubscribe a year ago and only listened again recently. Her constant interruptions and basic inability to let Jim complete a sentence is obnoxious. Also her politics are extremely obvious and irritating. I like the cases and the approach. But in my opinion Francey needs to rein it in and let others talk. It isn’t her solo podcast and the political spin is polarizing.

Thank you, Francey, for the Foul Fani episode. Hard-hitting, courageous and the most comprehensive legal analysis I’ve heard on the case. Love the direction you are going with the Preston Lord case. It’s also so much better because Jim is more chill and has stopped with the Francey-jibes (that was such a turn-off); now we hear Jim-the-wise and insightful expert… which is the Jim I value. Love the show!

Thank you so much Francey, for laying out the mess in Atlanta. You made it understandable for people that don’t follow closely. Love this podcast at all times!

Have y’all read the Memorandum in Support of the Frank’s Motion? I recommend reading the section entitled “8 Things to Know”, and then flipping to the end of the document and working your way backwards. Let’s not forget there were separate LEO’s in both Delphi and Rushville who INDEPENDENTLY determined that the same Odinist suspects named in the Frank’s memo, all of whom were members (some full and some probate) of the violent Vinlanders Social Club (VSC). The state’s own discovery proves Rick Allen was NOT involved in any way. If you truly don’t have time to read through the 136 pages, may I suggest reading pages 15-19.

If you don’t think the elected DAs of a district are political, then you are delusional. And hint Jim - your political views are on the wrong side of the fence if you want to see this get resolved. Voting republican on your ballot will ensure a much more likely outcome that DAs aren’t soft on crime. Wish you would have said the obvious truth in this episode.

Jim is amazing as always. Thoughtful, insightful, brilliant and brings lots of excellent analytics and opinions to each case. He also has the best quality of voice for podcasts. Francey, however, is so annoying. This is why I had to knock off 2 stars. The worst part is her grating, jarring, irritating voice. I can’t stand listening to her. She has no business being on podcasts or anywhere in spoken media. If crows could talk, her voice is what they would sound like. Squawky and rude. Aside from her horrible voice, she adds no value to the show. She brings up and harps on petty irrelevant points that no one care about and really distracts from the great job Jim is doing. Jim, please find a new co-host. Francey is insufferable and needs her mouth taped shut.

Love the show when it flows smoothly with the guest taking about the case and getting into all the details and nuances of what they did. The podcast can be informative and entertaining when it is allowed to be. The constant interruptions by Francie become very irritating and detract from the listener’s experience. It comes off as rude and inconsiderate to the guest and stops the flow of the story in the middle of it. Jim has a very dry sense of humor and can be a bit monotone. This leads to his “jokes” at, or about, Francie to hit more like personal digs and insults. I’m sure the respect each other but it often times fails to be clear. Overall, I enjoy the content.

I love the passion of both Jim and Francie. Their passion is contagious, you can hear it in their voices. The only thing I don’t like is when FH interrupts Jim, that he never gets a word in to finish his thought or process. I listen to hear both JC and FH speak passionately, because they both do. They are very passionate about their topics. Sometime if FH would let Jim finish she would find they are more on the same page then she realizes. Keep up the amazing topics I learn something new every time.

So infuriating; both of you need to practice active listening to the other. This last one you both yelled over each other. How is this helpful to support your view? Loudest yeller wins?

Two things: first, bringing on guests and devoting shows to promote the hosts’ paid projects is annoying. I don’t want your audio book or to watch your tv show, I just want to listen to the stories this podcast supposedly is based on, the best and worst cases told by members of law enforcement. Second, the interruption of one’s’ own guests is so rampant, why did you invite your guest if you won’t let him or her speak more than a sentence at a time without stopping him or her? It’s all getting to be very tiresome.

It’s not cute that you are constantly undermining Francie. It’s really annoying. You mentioned interrupting about 10 times. Getting very old. Francie, you are gracious. I would want to punch Jim and his higher than though personality right in the face.

What, no mention of gun control legislation? Cowardly of you. Shame on you both.

Jim I love your passion for all of the victms. You take the words right out of my mouth as I hear the stories. This is my newest most listened to podcast so thank you for presenting the cases with a heart!

I absolutely love this podcast ! It’s informative , insightful has amazing host the beautiful and talented Francey, and her co-star the handsome and multifarious Jim! These two together create an immeasurable amount of knowledge. I absolutely enjoy each and every guest brought on the show . #BestCaseWorstCase ❤️ Rachel Snider