Deadline⁠27%

Raw & New Yorker Studios Teaming On Limited Series Exploring New Evidence In White House Farm Killings ⁠23%

By Max Goldbart⁠33%

7/16/2026, 1:00:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 21 faulty reasoning types, including Biased Writer Voice, Appeal to Authority, and Appeal to Emotion, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 23.5% saturation with 90 hits. Analysis detected 909 faulty-reasoning hits from 383 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 36.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠23% (16,924 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 77.30% of the article peer group.

EXCLUSIVE: Crime 101 producer Raw and New Yorker Studios are teaming on a limited series exploring new evidence in the notorious White House Farm killings. 
The as-yet-untitled show comes from showrunner Emilia di Girolamo (Deceit, Three Pines) and will take in new evidence uncovered by New Yorker writer Heidi Blake in 2024 that could overturn Jeremy Bamber‘s conviction after 40 years. 
Casting is still to come and we are told Raw is in talks with several broadcasters. 
In 1985, Bamber’s adoptive parents Nevill and June Bamber, his sister Sheila Cafell, and her six-year-old twin sons, Daniel and Nicholas were all found dead in their home at the now well-known White House Farm. 
Bamber was arrested and imprisoned a year later but has always maintained his innocence. 
The killings were explored in an ITV series in 2020, in which Bamber was played by Jeremy Fox and the investigating officer by Stephen Graham, but since then more has come to light. 
In the 2024 New Yorker investigation, Blake uncovered fresh evidence. 
The following year, she built on her reporting with audio series Blood Relatives from the Pulitzer Prize-winning podcast In the Dark, which drew on hundreds of thousands of evidence files, most of which were unknown to the jury at the time of Bamber’s trial. 
If exonerated, Bamber will be victim of the longest-running wrongful imprisonment for a miscarriage of justice in English legal history. 
Di Girolamo is currently adapting Alice Feeney’s latest thriller My Husband’s Wife for Carnival and is attached to adapt hit RTÉ podcast Finding Samantha, about international con-woman Samantha Azzopardi for Keeper Pictures.   
Raw has made numerous hit documentaries like The Tinder Swindler and Don't F**k with Cats but has recently been pushing more into scripted with the likes of Chris Hemsworth-starring Crime 101. 
“If you think you know this story, think again,” said di Girolamo. 
“Heidi Blake’s brilliant journalism uncovered shocking new evidence that seriously undermines the safety of Jeremy’s conviction. 
We won’t be telling the same story that has been recycled in countless true-crime books, documentaries and TV dramatisations. This is a story of police incompetence, judicial indifference, fearless journalism, a dedicated campaign team, and one man’s 41-year fight for freedom.” 
Executive producers on the project are Sam Tipper-Hale, Dimitri Doganis, Helen Estabrook, Sarah Patzer, Blake and di Girolamo.   
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 3.1%Max Goldbart: 3.5%Deadline: 2.4%Confirmation Bias3.1%This article: 10.7%Max Goldbart: 0.9%Deadline: 1.2%Anchoring Bias10.7%This article: 17.2%Max Goldbart: 3.7%Deadline: 3.1%Availability Heuristic17.2%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.5%Deadline: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.9%Deadline: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 23.5%Max Goldbart: 8.1%Deadline: 6.5%Framing Effect23.5%This article: 13.3%Max Goldbart: 0.9%Deadline: 0.5%Loss Aversion13.3%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.6%Deadline: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 9.4%Max Goldbart: 3.4%Deadline: 2.5%Optimism Bias9.4%This article: 4.7%Max Goldbart: 2.5%Deadline: 0.8%Pessimism Bias4.7%This article: 16.4%Max Goldbart: 8.5%Deadline: 6.7%Negativity Bias16.4%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 2.1%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.2%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.6%Deadline: 0.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 14.9%Max Goldbart: 15.3%Deadline: 6.1%Halo Effect14.9%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.3%Deadline: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 8.6%Max Goldbart: 2.4%Deadline: 1.3%Recency Bias8.6%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.3%Deadline: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.3%Deadline: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 8.6%Max Goldbart: 0.6%Deadline: 0.2%Straw Man8.6%This article: 20.6%Max Goldbart: 9.5%Deadline: 3.9%Appeal to Authority20.6%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.9%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 4.7%Max Goldbart: 0.3%Deadline: 0.3%Slippery Slope4.7%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 5.0%Deadline: 3.5%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.5%Red Herring0.0%This article: 8.1%Max Goldbart: 1.7%Deadline: 0.8%Bandwagon8.1%This article: 17.5%Max Goldbart: 2.8%Deadline: 3.6%Appeal to Emotion17.5%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.3%Deadline: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 1.6%Deadline: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.3%Deadline: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.6%Deadline: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 2.2%Deadline: 1.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 4.2%Max Goldbart: 2.0%Deadline: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.2%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.9%Deadline: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 7.3%Max Goldbart: 6.4%Deadline: 2.9%Unattributed Quote7.3%This article: 3.1%Max Goldbart: 2.1%Deadline: 1.5%Quote-first Misdirection3.1%This article: 22.5%Max Goldbart: 12.2%Deadline: 6.7%Biased Writer Voice22.5%This article: 4.2%Max Goldbart: 2.5%Deadline: 1.0%Indoctrination4.2%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Max Goldbart: 0.0%Deadline: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 14.6%Max Goldbart: 2.1%Deadline: 2.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…14.6%

383 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker16%attributed speech322writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageEmilia di Girolamo • 12 words • 100.0% coverageEmilia di Girolamo • 16 words • 100.0% coverageEmilia di Girolamo • 33 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Emilia di Girolamo

100%flagged-word coverage
61 attributed words100% of attributed speech70% writer coverage
0%37.5%75.0%Biased Writer Voice+61.0 ptsWriter: 12.7%Emilia di Girolamo: 73.8%73.8%Unattributed Quote+45.9 ptsWriter: 0.0%Emilia di Girolamo: 45.9%45.9%Indoctrination+26.2 ptsWriter: 0.0%Emilia di Girolamo: 26.2%26.2%Quote-first Misdirection+19.7 ptsWriter: 0.0%Emilia di Girolamo: 19.7%19.7%Attempt to Sell a Product -17.4 ptsWriter: 17.4%Emilia di Girolamo: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.