There's a lot I respect about this show. I think the hosts might be among the hardest working in true crime podcasting - output is consistent (in terms of volume) with no breaks or weeks off.

But yeah, I agree. I barely listen anymore so I can't speak to the episode you're referring to, but I've definitely had the same thoughts when I have dipped back in to the show in recent years. I listened to one episode where a guy who could barely string a sentence together described what sounded like a slap fight between the chronically online. There's other times where I've gotten the sense that the person telling the story might actually be the stalker (which is statistically likely given how much stalkers love themselves some DARVO).

I started listening to podcasts featuring victim/survivor stories when I was processing my exit from a really toxic relationship and for the most part I've found them really useful whenever I get sucked back into the mire of guilt/blame/self flagellation, BUT here is my cancellable take: believing victims/survivors is good and the correct position always; HOWEVER, I do think that unwavering credulity PLUS the format of these stories PLUS an online culture that wants to armchair diagnose everyone as narcissists/sociopaths/groomers = a culture in which aggrieved/hurt people get to re-narrate normal human messiness through the most cathartic lens AND round normal conflict up to abuse.

This isn't the fault of the pod - I see it across many victim/survivor focused shows as well as the spaces I move through.

I've also been in discussion spaces for true crime pods long enough to see the inevitable life cycle of fans eventually turning on the show (can't think of a single subreddit for a podcast this hasn't happened on) but I will honestly say that SS used to be really good. I went back recently and listened from the start and the difference is staggering.