Wickedly Judged

What if the system meant to protect us is the one that fails us the most? Wickedly Judged is a true crime podcast exposing wrongful convictions, broken justice, and the people whose lives are forever changed by the system. Hosted by Rebecca, the show dives deep into real cases and the human stories behind them — the families, the loved ones, and the empty seats that are never forgotten. Inspired by her husband’s wrongful conviction, Rebecca brings truth, heart, and fearless advocacy to every episode. This is more than a podcast — it’s a mission, a voice for the unheard, and a fight for justice reform.

Wickedly Judged is a society podcast hosted by Unknown Host, with 60 episodes on record and a Required Pod Score of 80.

Unknown Host hosts Wickedly Judged, a society show with 60 episodes published.

Our AI reads these to draft pitches. Use them as grounding for a pitch that cites a real guest and a specific topic.

• 

  Episode #58

  The Judge's Oath Podcast Guest interview

  Sep 24, 20261h 30m

  Hey! I'd love to hear your thoughts, send me a voice note. Rebecca Watkins, founder of Wickedly Judged and president of the Wickedly Judged Justice Activation Project, joins Cheryl Kelmar on The Judge’s Oath Podcast to share the personal fight that sparked her advocacy. Rebecca discusses her husband’s conviction—which she maintains is wrongful—and the years spent reviewing records, seeking answers, and fighting to have his case heard. She explains how that experience grew into a podcast and an organization supporting other families facing similar struggles. Together, Rebecca and Cheryl discuss: • Their questions about the Tyler Robinson case and media coverage surrounding the killing of Charlie Kirk. • The influence of social media on public opinion and fair trials. • Plea-deal pressure, costly legal representation, and barriers to appeals. • Access to case files, missing records, and concerns about withheld evidence. • Judicial accountability and independent review of innocence claims. • Better resources for public defenders, prison education, and rehabilitation. Rebecca also shares how faith sustains her, her plans for advocacy education, and her book project, Wickedly Judged: Buried Evidence. Learn more, get involved, or support the work: https://www.wickedlyjudged.com Original interview: The Judge’s Oath Podcast, Episode 006, hosted by Cheryl Kelmar and published by PodCast by Kelmar Publishing LLC. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zm3Aat-WLTQ This episode includes personal experiences, opinions, and disputed allegations expressed by the speakers.

  ListenShow Notes
• 

  Episode #57

  Heather Wlasiuk: The Woman Behind the Fight for Pete

  Sep 17, 202615 min

  Hey! I'd love to hear your thoughts, send me a voice note. Heather Wlasiuk: The Woman Behind the Fight for Pete In this special episode of Wickedly Judged , we sit down with Heather Wlasiuk for a conversation focused on her perspective, her advocacy, and what it means to stand beside someone while fighting a conviction that has already spanned more than two decades. Throughout our coverage of the Peter Wlasiuk case , we have examined a complicated legal history: three trials, two overturned convictions, disputed evidence, questions surrounding Patricia Wlasiuk's diary, and a third conviction that continues to keep Pete incarcerated. But court opinions and evidence only tell part of the story. Behind every wrongful-conviction claim are families and loved ones who live with the consequences of the criminal justice system every single day. In this interview, the focus turns to Heather . We hear from the woman who continues to advocate for Pete, stand beside him, and push for people to look beyond the conviction and examine the questions surrounding his case. Heather shares her perspective on the fight for Pete, what she has experienced while advocating for him, and why she refuses to allow his case to simply be forgotten. This conversation also highlights something that can easily get lost when discussing trials, appeals, evidence, and court decisions: the human cost of incarceration extends far beyond the person sitting in the prison cell. Families serve this time too. They make the phone calls. They research the case. They attend visits. They advocate. They answer questions. They face criticism. And sometimes, they spend years trying to convince someone—anyone—to take another look. Pete's case has already been through three trials and two reversals . For Heather, however, those numbers represent something much more personal. They represent years of fighting, waiting, hoping, and refusing to give up. At Wickedly Judged , we believe it is important to hear directly from the people living these cases—not only attorneys, investigators, and experts, but the families standing beside those who maintain their innocence. This is Heather's opportunity to tell that side of the story. Listen to her perspective. Examine the case. Ask the questions. Then decide for yourself. The Peter Wlasiuk case continues. And so does Heather's fight for answers.

  ListenShow Notes
• 

  Episode #56

  Pete & Heather Wlasiuk: Questions Remain — Part 4

  Sep 10, 202648 min

  Pete & Heather Wlasiuk: Questions Remain — Part 4 Was justice served in the Peter Wlasiuk case—or are we still missing part of the truth? In Part 4 of our continuing interview with Pete and Heather Wlasiuk , we go deeper into a case that has now been questioned and litigated for more than two decades. Patricia Wlasiuk died in April 2002 after Pete's truck entered Guilford Lake in New York. Prosecutors ultimately alleged that Pete killed Patricia and staged the scene to look like an accident. Pete has maintained his innocence throughout his incarceration. But the history of this case is anything but simple. Pete has been tried three times for the same murder . His first conviction was reversed after the appellate court concluded that the cumulative effect of numerous errors deprived him of a fair trial. His second conviction was also reversed, this time after the court found that Pete had received ineffective assistance of counsel. During the second trial, Patricia's diary became particularly significant. Information from diary entries previously ruled inadmissible appeared in a police evidence log given to the jury. When jurors asked whether they could consider those entries as evidence, defense counsel failed to request a limiting instruction. The appellate decision records that less than ten minutes later, the jury reached its verdict. Jurors subsequently reported that the diary entries caused some of them to change their votes to guilty. Pete was tried a third time in 2012 and again convicted of second-degree murder. That conviction was later affirmed. In Part 4 Pete and Heather continue discussing: The evidence and circumstances they believe deserve another examination Pete's perspective from inside the case Questions surrounding the investigation and prosecution The significance of errors identified during his previous trials The continuing effort to challenge Pete's conviction What it means to fight for innocence after decades of incarceration Heather's advocacy and determination to keep Pete's case from being forgotten The human cost behind years of appeals, court decisions, and legal battles Three trials. Two convictions overturned. More than two decades of incarceration. And questions that Pete and Heather say still have not been answered. At Wickedly Judged , we believe a verdict should never prevent us from examining the evidence, the investigation, and the process that produced it. Listen to Pete and Heather. Look at the documented history of this case. Ask the difficult questions. Then decide for yourself. Was justice served in the Peter Wlasiuk case—or are we still missing part of the truth?

  ListenShow Notes
• 

  Episode #55

  Pete & Heather Wlasiuk: The Fight for the Truth Continues — Part 3

  Sep 3, 202629 min

  Pete & Heather Wlasiuk: The Fight for the Truth Continues — Part 3 In Part 3 of our conversation with Pete and Heather Wlasiuk , we continue digging into the questions surrounding Pete's conviction and what they believe has been overlooked, misunderstood, or misrepresented throughout the case. Patricia Wlasiuk died in April 2002 after a vehicle entered Guilford Lake in New York. Prosecutors alleged that Pete murdered Patricia and staged the scene to appear accidental. Pete has maintained his innocence for more than two decades. This case has already resulted in three trials and two overturned convictions , but Pete and Heather's fight did not end with the third verdict. In this episode, the conversation moves beyond simply asking what happened that night. We look at how the case was investigated, how evidence was interpreted, what was presented to juries, and the enormous difficulty of challenging a conviction once the criminal justice system has decided who it believes is responsible. Pete and Heather also discuss the human side of this fight—the years that cannot be returned, the effect incarceration has had on their family, and what it takes to continue advocating when the legal battle has lasted for decades. In This Episode We discuss: Pete's perspective on the investigation and prosecution Evidence and circumstances Pete believes support his innocence Questions surrounding the state's theory of the case The way evidence and investigative conclusions were presented The continuing significance of Pete's previous overturned convictions The challenges of fighting a conviction from inside prison Heather's advocacy and determination to keep Pete's case visible The personal cost of more than two decades of incarceration Why Pete and Heather continue fighting for another examination of the case Three trials. Two overturned convictions. More than twenty years behind bars. For Pete and Heather, this case is not simply part of the past. It is a fight that continues every day. At Wickedly Judged , we believe cases like Pete's deserve more than a surface-level examination. We look at the evidence, the inconsistencies, the court record, and the questions that remain after the verdict. We aren't asking you to blindly accept anyone's version of events. Listen. Examine the evidence. Ask the questions. Then decide for yourself. Was justice truly served in the Peter Wlasiuk case—or are there still answers waiting to be uncovered?

  ListenShow Notes
• 

  Episode #52

  The Investigator Who Took a Second Look: David Beers on the Pete Wlasiuk Case

  Aug 13, 202646 min

  The Investigator Who Took a Second Look: David Beers and the Pete Wlasiuk Case What happens when an experienced investigator takes a fresh look at a murder case and begins asking questions that may not have been asked the first time? In this episode of Wickedly Judged , I sit down with David Beers , an experienced private investigator and former New York State Police investigator, to discuss his career, the role of private investigators in criminal cases, and his involvement in the case of Peter “Pete” Wlasiuk . Pete was accused of murdering his wife, Patricia “Patty” Wlasiuk, after his truck ended up submerged in Guilford Lake in 2002. The case would eventually involve three murder trials, overturned convictions, disputed evidence, and serious questions about how evidence was investigated and presented to juries. David became involved in Pete’s case after years of litigation. Instead of simply accepting the conclusions of the original investigation, he went back to the evidence and examined the case through the eyes of an investigator. One of the most troubling issues we discuss involves Patricia’s diary . The diary had already played a role in Pete’s first conviction, which was overturned after an appellate court determined that diary entries admitted at trial constituted inadmissible hearsay. But information from the diary surfaced again during Pete’s second trial through a police evidence log. During deliberations, jurors specifically asked whether they could consider that information. Less than ten minutes after being told they could, they returned a guilty verdict. Jurors later acknowledged that the diary information influenced votes during deliberations. David’s investigation uncovered another significant issue involving notes associated with the evidence. According to information discussed in our interview, jurors did not understand that certain notes they relied upon had been written by a detective rather than the forensic laboratory personnel they believed were responsible for them . Jurors later signed affidavits indicating that knowing the true source of those notes would have affected their verdict. That raises an important question: How differently might a jury evaluate information if they know who actually created it? David also takes us inside the process of independently reviewing a criminal investigation. We discuss physical and forensic evidence, documentation, investigative assumptions, and the danger of tunnel vision. Who collected the evidence? Who documented it? Who interpreted it? Were alternative explanations investigated? And perhaps most importantly: Did investigators follow the evidence to a suspect, or did they begin with a suspect and interpret the evidence around that conclusion? We also discuss what happens when an investigator reviewing another investigator’s work discovers information serious enough that he believes it needs to be reported, as well as David’s efforts to bring his concerns about Pete’s case to the attention of authorities. Pete’s second conviction was ultimately overturned, and he would eventually face a third murder trial. This conversation goes beyond the question of whether someone believes Pete Wlasiuk is guilty or innocent. It examines the integrity of the investigative process itself. Sometimes the issue isn’t whether evidence exists. The question is who created it, how it was interpreted, what the jury was told, what the jury wasn’t told—and what happens when someone finally goes back and looks again.

  ListenShow Notes

Recent guests on Wickedly Judged. Study who booked and why before you pitch.

Based on semantic analysis of episode topics and host coverage, this show is a strong guest fit for executives in:

Industry fit is computed by PitchCentric using vector embeddings of the show's episode catalog.