I like it but that idiot said “the man Elmo was sleeping with” ELMO? Geezus

I really enjoyed this podcast. I listen to hundreds of podcasts - mostly true crime - so this unique take on New York’s first murder trial was right up my alley. I appreciated the focus on Elma and who she was as that has been lost over the many years. As a lawyer I also appreciated the significant impact this case had on our current criminal system and how the host weaved those details into the story. Much has certainly changed over the decades but, tragically, the scales of justice are still vulnerable to the power of privilege and money. That story still needs to be told! Well done!

Could have been so much better. The acting is atrocious and ruins the historical narrative.

I don’t usually like dramatizations, but this podcast did a great job interpreting 200-year-old testimony to bring this trial to life. The frequent ads are annoying, but the series makes up for it with good writing and a constellation of talented actors for all the many witnesses. I especially appreciated the historical context added by the host’s narration, and how she always circles back to centering Elma’s story, which got lost in the trial itself. Then ending was especially poignant. I think a lot of listeners were expecting a more erudite delivery, but this series encapsulates the motto “show, don’t tell” – it’s more of a radio show than historical nonfiction.

I give it two stars because the story is very interesting and deserves to be told, so kudos to the producers for taking it on. However, as a member of the listening audience, I sorely resent the dumbed down dialogue and terrible acting. I'm not old enough to have been at the trial (rumors to the contrary) but I know that people did not speak that way in 1800. Oh, and just for the record it’s “Fraunces” Tavern, not “Frances.”

I find this story interesting from a historical and true crime perspective, but I couldn’t stand the use of modern colloquialisms and accents. I don’t understand why some characters from the 1800s sound like valley girls or surfer bros. It really pulled me out of the story…

Bad bad acting, not hysterical, too many “like” In a historical retelling. It’s unbearable and painful.

This podcast is not only ignorant of the law, it’s ignorant of history. They saw an opportunity to whine about “the system” to appeal to gullible leftists and ran with it. Read up on the story, you won’t learn the truth in this podcast.

honestly, I feel robbed! I was basically jumping with joy reading the synopsis of this podcast, only to turn it off within the first 15 minutes of listening. there is modern language in place of the actual words people were recorded to have spoken, as well as a general misunderstanding of what the phrase “historical” means when it comes to… telling history. the lack of well researched historical quotes or full interviews with knowledgeable historians is disappointing!

What a wonderful podcast. It is sad and Elma’s story is loving told so that she does not get forgotten and has yet another injustice added to her short life. Her story is lovingly told and it is a look into the history of the (un)justice system and how it was built. Wonderful story telling. Great podcast.

Twenty minutes in to the first episode and I had to check the reviews. Yup! Lots of other folks caught that “gaslight” phrase and it soured the whole thing. But hey, I get it. Why is Hamilton rapping ok, but “gaslight” isn’t? I don’t know, but it just isn’t. It casts doubt on how much of the story has also been altered.

Not sure why this didn’t get a sold five stars. While I am an editor, a lover of Victorian era fiction, and a stickler for historical accuracy, the point of this pod is not just to present historical events…. It’s to entertain, and to evoke the same reactions/feelings onlookers of the time would have had. Modern language and references make these feelings more accessible. I’m now inspired to do a deep dive on Hamilton, Burr, and the earliest days of the American judicial system. Well done!

I hate when they use modern language in a recreation of a historical event. I had to turn it off when one character accused another of “gaslighting” them (a term that references a movie made in 1944… this podcast takes place in the year 1800…)

Fantastic story telling. Not only sharing the story of Elma but also a look into the history of our judicial system

Why a 3.8? Such a good and riveting account of something I knew nothing about, it’s amazing how stories that were tremendous get lost to time. I hope you do more of these, I thoroughly enjoyed the actors even having a bit more of a contemporary feel to them! Great listen!

Not my typical style of podcast, but this was done so well. Absolutely wonderful. Would give this 100000 stars if possible!

The ending after the verdict. Is so very tender. It touched my heart and got my teary. Not something you’d expect from a history story. A beautiful tribute to people who’d been erased from history.

As a lawyer, I was excited to listen to this podcast because it was supposed to tell a story that explained the origins of our justice system today. But it explained nothing. Not once did it actually draw a line between the specific events of the trial and a current law or rule of evidence or criminal procedure. A more accurate description is that it’s an entertaining historical fiction loosely based on real events. As much as the podcast talks about the presence of stenographers in the courtroom, they chose to change the dialogue to what it might have been in modern times and included phrases and word that never would have been used back then. The most irritating thing though is the way it presents the poor prosecutor as the victim, the defense attorneys as the villains, and then draws an inference that the system is still (if it ever even was) skewed in favor of the defense and not the government. There is no acknowledgment that the founders, who were also defense counsel, were concerned with limiting the power of the government (who was mostly comprised of the rich and powerful) to wrongfully convict an innocent person or to infringe on the personal lives of citizens (as well as doing a favor for their rich friends). It’s irresponsible and flat out wrong to imply that prosecutors might still be the ones caught off guard and unable to prepare for trial. Certainly there are still cases where rich and powerful defendants get away with murder, but the vast majority involve a powerful government and well-staffed prosecutor’s office going up against an indigent defendant and an overworked and underpaid public defender. I just don’t understand what point they think they are making here.

This was so well done! It was riveting and so well produced. I really enjoyed this take on the tragedy of Elma Sands.

I enjoyed the voiceover parts about the legal issues and the fact that Hamilton and Burr were the defense lawyers. But it’s not clear how much of the testimony was actually real, since only notes were taken and later edited by the defense. Use of modern language like “kids” and idioms you only hear today….and even incredible use of the term “gaslit” when that comes from the movie “Gaslight,” in the 1930s or 1940s. I don’t know if the attempt was to make the dialogue ring true to today, but it made me distrust it all, bc is obviously made up anyway. It just sounded silly, given this was 1799 and 1800. Plus, the name of the famous tavern is Fraunces Tavern, not Frances, as it was pronounced. Fact-checking would have caught that—or a side trip to the financial district, bc it’s still there, or was a few years ago, at least, when I ate there. Bottom line: the case is very interesting and I can see why you wanted to bring it to light. But dialogue was way too presumptive and modern sounding, which overshadowed any actual facts, which turned out to be too few.

I am so glad I found this podcast! Listening to it is better than watching a tv show. It’s well-written, historically accurate, thoroughly researched, and the voice acting is on point.

This is such an interesting story. I don’t mind the millennial talk because it’s much more relatable than old English. I’m also a millennial so maybe biased there. I’m hoping for a season 2 that incorporates another interesting story with another judicial first.

The story is interesting but the acting is truly unbearable.

I love this podcast and the way this is told. The acting may be a little much at times, but I’m still here for it. The style is fantastic. Very well made.

Excellent writing and voice actors well done!

Can’t get past the first episode. Why would you present the information this way?

What a great story told in the most horrible way. No one in the 18th century used millennial-style language the way these actors do. How like does someone like in the 18th century like talk so like this? “Don’t gaslight me, Esera“. The word “gaslight” is derived from the 1944 film, Gaslight and only became popular in the 2010’s. How could someone in the 18th century use it? The entire series is riddled with this terrible language.

I thought this is a great story, though, very sad… Thank you for bringing her story forward!! I loved the acting and how it was modernized and felt very much like it could happen again today, also sadly. Perhaps now there would’ve been more of an opportunity for women’s voices to be heard, and a sense of justice for Elma, and perhaps enough consequences that Levi would’ve decided differently.

So good I just subscribed 😎

I really don’t know what this pod wants to be. It’s intro and description seem to promise a serious look into the early American legal process through transcripts. From there, it seems largely to be being played for laughs? Without flagging it in advance, whatever this transcript is, it’s language has been “modernized” such that all of the participants sound like 1990’s sitcom characters. What a huge miss this is.

Could’ve been great with more attention to detail — bits of period-style reenactment mixed with contemporary style narration disorienting effect. It’s like every actor had a different idea about the style and didn’t discuss it before recording. Also, gratuitous commercials even from ep 1, hugely distractive before even really getting into the story.

I was drawn to this podcast because Allison is the daughter of Jason Flom. Allison definitely knows how to tell a good story and to keep listeners interested. I’ve binged this entire podcast in one day and literally couldn’t stop listening. I hope that Allison continues to make more great content like this because I’ll definitely tune in.

I love old time radio because, for the most part, those actors were actors. I also enjoy true crime and am concerned about the justice system. Almost as soon as the podcast started the reenactment on the stand of the first witness, I had to turn the podcast off and delete it. High school actors? After-school specials? So distracting. This was supposed to be, like, the late 1700s and whatever, but like the delivery? So totally NOT of its time. Incredibly distracting, frustrating, took me completely out of the narrative, and makes the entire thing unlistenable. And look. I'm a person who first loved the sometimes-bad, sometimes-good acting of Unsolved Murders by Parcast when that first came out. I do like this concept and style a lot, but this one can't pull it off.

I appreciate trying to use this medium to share this important story and it’s effect on US history and the US judicial system, but I was taken out of it by some of the acting. It enjoyed it but it did veer toward cheesy at times.

I get it that anyone can put out a podcast. But maybe don’t post serious topics as compiled by an 11-year-old with an affinity for history? I’m embarrassed for the adults for whom this measures as “listenable”.

To sum up how knowledgeable the writer is about the justice system, at one point she indicated the prosecutor was denied due process. Interesting case, but the irreverence of it leaves me feeling embarrassed.

The reenactment is pretty terrible. It’s important to remember and learn about history of the justice system, I don’t think this is a great way to honor any of that.

Wish there were more Podcasts made as well as this one!! Look forward to hearing more in the future!

This is the first time I’ve heard of Emma Sands and the story is sad. I always knew the system wasn’t meant to help or protect women. I enjoyed the acting and storytelling. Looking forward to your next story.

Love the idea of telling this story, but overly modern slang /language and casual offhanded acting is distracting and seems corny, soap opera-ish. (Only the British actor at the trial felt real.) Always aware it is a bunch of actors reading corny modernized lines. Wish they had kept it more authentic to the time period and gotten better actors.

The narration is not relative to the time of the event. It sounds like teenagers talking about US weekly. I would love to hear this podcast reenacted in the time period. I feel like they tried to make this edgy- but sadly, it fell flat.

This is a very bad podcast. It’s acted out horribly in a ridiculously unrealistic way.

This podcast may satisfy listeners with no sense of history or sense of evolving language. Terms like “psycho boyfriend” and “gaslighting” and “kids” were coined at least 100-150 years after these actual events. (These jarring time-traveling words/ terms are plentiful.) The “Get away from my sewing machine” line - presumably spoken in 1800 - predates the sewing machine invention in France by 29 years. It was many decades later that sewing machines were in wide use. The story is interesting, the actors play their parts well, and the writers convey the story and characters well, but the podcast hits so many false notes (for me) that the critical sense of time and place, is constantly obliterated. I had to abandon the podcast in Episode 3. There is a lot to praise, the historical context and asides were often delightful. But even the story timelines became muddled for me.

I first learned of Elma Sands when I read City of Liars and Thieves by Eve Karlin, and I have been captivated ever since! Enjoyed the story so much from this new perspective. Williams really brings Katherine Ring’s voice to life. if you enjoy erased as much as I did, you will LOVE Karlin’s novel.

The story was interesting, but I couldn’t stand how it was theater style. Didn’t finish the podcast, just googled the story. It got too cheesy for me.

Looks like you have a good thing going overall. This story deserves more attention. I understand that this old story is being told in a fresher way (why when it’s barely been told in the original way?), but my brain is reeling from terms like “bloomers” and “gaslight” (verb) being used in the year 1800. I do love a good historical mystery. Hoping it gets even better!

As a fan of true crime, I can’t believe I hadn’t heard this one yet! Super gripping story with fascinating historical context and very well told. 10/10 recommend!

I’ve tried to listen and learn from other podcasts but they can get to be dull. The way Erased is presented is very much like a story old fashioned radio program. It’s exciting to listen to part historical part entertainment. I’m afraid it’s ruined my listening experience for any other podcast.

Addicted.

I could deal with the ladies of the podcast speaking in today’s way of talking, but when the husband started talking, I decided to just read about it on my own. You gotta hire professional actors if you’re expecting to charge so much for the podcast. Please don’t take this as insulting, but as a learning moment. Hire professional actors and re—release it. You’re a great host so far. Keep your friends outta your projects.