Podcasting, ProfessionaIism & Plagiarism: How Ashley Flowers Turned Her True Crime Podcast Into A True Crime

The deep roots of podcasting began in the fertile soil of independent podcasters with limited equipment resources, budgets smaller than a child's allowance, a "learn as you go" training program, and a fervent love of the medium. Making money back then? A bonus, to be sure.

Because of those humble beginnings, podcasting has always been a cooperative, mutually beneficial, and close-knit community. Podcasters would guest on other podcasts all the time. Podcasters would credit other podcasters with a generous sense of comradeship. Consequently, podcasting wasn't a zero-sum game or "dog-eat-dog," but more like you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours and the listeners benefited from that collaborative approach.

I remember interviewing Charlie Harding, co-host of the Switched On Pop podcast nearly three years ago. I asked him about other music podcasts. This is what he said:

"Podcasters enjoy getting together, and the industry is collaborative and respectful, less than it is cutthroat, and partially that is because it’s in a growth cycle. We all benefit from more people listening, and it’s not a zero-sum game. With Chris Molanphy, we’ve never met in person. I just reached out to Chris via Twitter, and that sparked a connection that led to Nate and I guesting on an episode of Slate Hit Parade. When it comes to chart knowledge, Chris is truly the master."

That camaraderie extends to other podcast genres, including true-crime podcasts. There has been a cooperative, collaborative community of true-crime podcasters for years if listeners don't know. They help each other out. Sometimes work on the same crimes. But they follow specific unwritten rules.

First, they credit others who have done research before them. Second, they cite their sources exhaustively. Third, they often work with victims' families, so they are solicitous of the grieving family's needs and don't exploit them for download numbers or ad revenue. Fourth, while true-crime podcasters attempt to cooperate with law enforcement, they also exhaustively review the actions of law enforcement and are not afraid to criticize their actions when warranted.

This article is about professionalism and plagiarism in the true-crime genre. This piece isn't a scoop by any means. Allegations of plagiarism and a lack of professionalism by this podcast and podcaster have been well-publicized by such media sources as The New York Times, Variety, and Buzzfeed.

Why bring this up again?

First, because the podcaster accused of plagiarism several years ago has responded to the charges by simply removing the offending, plagiarized episodes without so much as an admission of culpability. In fact, the podcaster in question removed episodes from her true-crime podcast that had not been targeted as plagiarized. Why? Because she knew it was just a matter of time before those episodes would be discovered as plagiarized.

Second, because she's done it again.

Who is this podcaster, and what's the name of her podcast?

It's Ashley Flowers, and her podcast is Crime Junkie, one of the most listened-to true-crime podcasts in the industry.

I know that your next question is: Why is a podcast that plagiarizes so popular?

Answer: true-crime podcasting takes a massive amount of time and research. It's not just combing through crime reports and witness statements, but it's connecting with victims' families. It's attempting to report a heinous crime so that it is factually accurate, respectful of survivors and victims, provides listeners with insight into the crime, and sometimes even solves a crime.

Of course, when you just copy other podcasters' research and report it as your own, true-crime podcasting does become a lot easier.

In an August 2019, Variety article by Todd Spangler, he reports that, "Among the plagiarism allegations that have emerged against Flowers: Cathy Frye, who wrote a four-part series about the murder of Arkansas teen Kacie Woody for the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette in 2003, alleged in a post on Flowers’ Facebook page Sunday that “Crime Junkie’s” March 2019 episode on the Woody case relied entirely on Frye’s work without any citation."

Spangler cites two other examples:

Robin Warder, who hosts the true-crime podcast “The Trail Went Cold,” wrote a post on Reddit in 2015 about the mysterious death of a man named Henry McCabe. Warder told Variety that in a May 2018 “Crime Junkie” episode covering the same case, at one point in the podcast, “Ashley Flowers is practically reading [from the Reddit post] verbatim without credit.”

In a Reddit post two months ago on the “Crime Junkie” subreddit, a listener claimed that the “Crime Junkie” March 2019 podcast on Kirsten Hatfield, an Oklahoma girl who disappeared in 1997, was an almost “word for word copy” of a 2018 episode of “On the Case with Paula Zahn” that aired last year on Investigation Discovery.

A 2019 New York Times article also pointed out the accusations of Robin Warder and Cathy Frye and then added a new one, which seemed especially chilling.

Steven Pacheco, the host of the “Trace Evidence” podcast, said that “Crime Junkie” had used his work without permission as well.

Pacheco released a video juxtaposing quotes from his own 2017 podcast about Asha Degree, a nine-year-old girl from North Carolina who disappeared in 2000, with an episode that “Crime Junkie” aired in January.

To quote the Times article, "When he listened to that ‘Crime Junkie’ episode, Mr. Pacheco said he was surprised to hear the hosts describe the site where the child disappeared not as a forest, as published news reports called it, but rather as a “tree line,” which was how he described the location on his podcast after he had gone to look at the spot in person."

In late 2019, Indianapolis Monthly even weighed in on the podcast plagiarism scandal with an article detailing some of the same charges of plagiarism. However, the magazine did uncover a more insidious -- although entirely legal -- modus operandi of Crime Junkie.

A lack of professionalism.

Indianapolis Monthly noted that "episodes take about 40 hours to produce. But the production values of the podcast itself are unfussy. There are seldom interviews with anyone connected to the crime (one notable exception: the Tinsley murder, in which Flowers talks to the victim’s mother and a detective involved in the case). There is rarely documentary sound, just some trademark electronic music, and over it, Flowers and Prawat having a conversation about a murder or disappearance. There is also little reporting. 'I always start with Google,' Flowers told WTHR in an interview earlier this year. 'I find out what’s available. I think some of the best cases that we do are when I have to track down old news articles. Whether that’s in an archive, in a library, or available on Newspapers.com.'”

However, Indianapolis Monthly saved the worst for last, detailing a sold-out live show where Flowers and co-host Prawat discussed the murder of a young girl that was a live, ongoing investigation where the hosts allegedly implicated the girl's father, given the apparent nonchalant tone of his 911 call. While the audience was hoodwinked into believing that the victim's father was a suspect, a local sex offender was subsequently arrested.

What Indianapolis Monthly pointed out goes beyond charges of plagiarism. It's a lack of professionalism, which is a quality that listeners should demand.

I know what you're saying—old news. Flowers didn't apologize or reach out to any of their podcasters whose work was purloined, but she did take down the episodes.


She's learned her lesson. Move on. Everybody makes mistakes.

Maybe Ms. Flowers has heard the charges and criticism loud and clear and is ready to right that wrong?

I'm sorry to say. No.

Exhibit number one: Audiochuck, Flowers' podcast company, then re-uploaded the offending episodes. What Audiochick did was only edit the show notes. Most of the plagiarized episodes are indeed still available to download or stream and loaded with ads, which means that they're still making money off of the plagiarized episodes. Apparently, Audiochick has absolved itself because now they have updated their show notes to give credit to others. That's disturbing.


Exhibit number two. Just last week, the editor of the Podnews newsletter -- widely read in the podcasting community -- reported on a new podcast by Ashley Flowers's podcasting company, Audiochuck. Called The Deck and released earlier this month, this podcast is eerily similar to a May 2020 podcast called Dealing Justice.

In his article, Cridland explains:

"In 2019, Dubasak and her co-host, Lori Jennings were pitching the idea of a TV show based on cold-case playing cards: cards used by prison inmates, which have led to new information and, in many cases, crimes being solved."

Cridland then explains how, "Dubasak and Jennings worked with Tommy Ray, a retired detective with the Florida Law Enforcement Team who had helped launch the program, for contacts with the affected families, and worked with him on the most appropriate way to cover the cases. Then the pandemic hit and Dubasak and Jennings to make their idea into a podcast."

Dealing Justice posted its first three episodes on May 29, 2020. The podcast's second season returns this spring.

However, a new show from Ashley Flowers’s Audiochuck podcast company, called The Deck, launched on February 2, based on the same playing cards and the same format.

The team at Audiochuck had worked with Tommy Ray, who told them about Dubasak and Jennings’s podcast. Dubasak and Jennings also sent an email to Audiochuck, highlighting the existence of their original podcast.

Cridland says, "We took a listen, and the shows seem eerily similar. Dealing Justice’s episode titles - “10 of Hearts: Tina Milford”- are almost identical to The Deck - “Linda Smith (9 of Hearts, Idaho)”.

Cridland concludes that "copyright in a show format is a debated point; but given that Audiochuck was aware of Dealing Justice, and The New York Times even calls Dealing Justice a “similar podcast” in its writeup, it seems disappointing that attempts haven’t been made to work together; especially given Flowers’ previous comments."

Exhibit number two: This last section isn't about plagiarism by Ashley Flowers but more about journalistic standards, maintaining an objective and a professional relationship with the investigating law enforcement agencies.

Let's start by introducing the true-crime podcast The Murder Sheet, which launched a miniseries — titled “You Never Can Forget,”  delving into the unsolved murders of four Burger Chef employees on November 17, 1978. The episodes on the Burger Chef murders ran from late 2020 into 2021. The Murder Sheet podcast debuted to overwhelmingly positive reviews and excelled at reporting on violent crime in the restaurant industry. The podcast's July 2021 episode called "The Wendy's Murders" is especially chilling and incredibly well researched and expertly reported.

The co-hosts, retail sector journalist Áine Cain and attorney Kevin Greenlee (who represented one of the victim's family members) did extensive research on this horrible crime in Indiana.

How does The Murder Sheet relate to Ashley Flowers?

In November 2019, Ashley Flowers released a four-part podcast called Red Ball about the Burger Chef murders. To produce the show, Flowers handed over complete editorial control to the Indiana State Police and its lead investigator on the Burger Chef case, Bill Dalton. In exchange for allowing the state police to control the podcast narrative, Dalton allowed Ashley Flowers to exclusively read and monetize investigative case files that not even the victims' families had been allowed to read.

In two December episodes, The Murder Sheet has covered Flowers and Dalton in the Burger Chef murders. Co-hosts Cain and Greenlee even read a letter from another true-crime podcaster, Chris Davis, who also covered the Burger Chef murders. It's important to note that Cain and Greenlee had severe disagreements with Davis over the Burger Chef murders coverage. Still, the podcasters could coalesce around a joint condemnation of Dalton and Flowers. In his letter, Davis puzzles over the responses he received from Dalton, who claims that he will not release case information to local media because they "will use it to make a name for themselves."

Meanwhile, Dalton was allowed to basically produce the Red Ball podcast by Flowers, who --according to Davis -- admitted in a magazine article that the Red Ball podcast was intended to give her a 'stepping stone to Hollywood." Apparently, Dalton had no problem boosting the career of Flowers.


"We're disturbed by the fact that Ashley Flowers — a figure with a troubling history of stealing others' work, flouting journalistic principles, and failing to acknowledge the labor of existing true crime shows — has continued to profit despite refusing to acknowledge her extensive wrongdoing," The Murder Sheet's Cain and Greenlee said in a joint statement. "When some in the media uphold Flowers as an inspirational figure, they insult the efforts of people within the true crime community working to produce shows in an honest and ethical manner."

In the end, you decide. Serial plagiarism. Getting caught in 2019 and then doing it again in 2022 and getting caught again.

Or is it the lack of professional standards by "investigating" cases by having a dialogue with the co-host or instead of doing a bonafide investigation that can take months?

Or is it misleading a live audience about a potential murder suspect?

Finally, is it crossing ethical boundaries to work with an Indiana State Police officer to release a late 2019 podcast mini-series called Red Ball about the murder of Burger Chef employees where law enforcement offers crime files to only Flowers in exchange for a "vanity project" for the police?

You're the jury. Unlike physical juries, you do not have to sequester yourself. Instead, I encourage you to read about Ashley Flowers from as many sources as you feel you require to make a fair and objective judgment.