"For Gedda" Season Finale Discussion *SPOILERS*

Alas poor Warrick, we knew him well.

I'm so glad I managed to avoid the spoilers, WOW what a shock - just after the scene in the diner, where it looked like we'd have a happy ending for once, it was so different from last season, and then the ending! Even Voiceover Woman on Five was shocked.

As for whether Warrick is as dead as he looks, well there didn't seem to be much blood coming from that neck wound so he could possibly survive that one, but how about the other one? And why did the Undersheriff wait for Warrick to roll the window back up? He'd have had a much better chance of killing him if the bullet hadn't had to go through the glass.

It's going to be a long wait...
 
^ he didn't shoot warrick through glass. the bullet went through and through and the window on the other side broke.
 
Seren_y_Gogledd said:
Alas poor Warrick, we knew him well.

I'm so glad I managed to avoid the spoilers, WOW what a shock - just after the scene in the diner, where it looked like we'd have a happy ending for once, it was so different from last season, and then the ending! Even Voiceover Woman on Five was shocked.

As for whether Warrick is as dead as he looks, well there didn't seem to be much blood coming from that neck wound so he could possibly survive that one, but how about the other one? And why did the Undersheriff wait for Warrick to roll the window back up? He'd have had a much better chance of killing him if the bullet hadn't had to go through the glass.

It's going to be a long wait...
Click to expand...



The reason why the undersherif shot Warrick, is because Warrick knew that there was another dirty cop, and when he was talking to Grissom earlier in the show, he said to Grissom that it wasn't some rookie beat cop that frammed him. I'm thinking that Warrick has his suspicions...
The undersherif did say that's what makes Warrick a great CSI, his determination NEVER TO GIVE UP...
So thats why he shot him, what I dont get is why did the undersherif put the gun in an evidence bag and then drop it on a seat in Warrick's car?
Thats just illogical, unless of course the actuarl plot will come out next season, and the undersherif and Warrick is somehow working together to find the real culprit...
OR that wasnt the undersherif, it was the REAL killer who works high up as well in the Sherrif's department who blackmailed the undersherif, had cosmetic surgery to look like the undersherif....

But thats a line out of Miami or the X files RIGHT?

I had posted this on another website, but i think that it also deserves to be seen here....
 
why did the undersherif put the gun in an evidence bag and then drop it on a seat in Warrick's car?
Click to expand...
he didn't put it in the evidence bag, he just cleaned it from fingerprints. he left the gun b/c it's going to trace after itself and he counts that it will be the only evidence the CSIs will have. the gun is either belonging to Daniel Pritchard (it wasn't in his locker) or from some other untraceable source.

there seems to be no physical evidence linking McKeen to the crime. apart from a motive it looks like a tough case to crack.
 
I can't belive it... :(
The worst part is that I saw it coming about 2 minutes before it happened. It was all happy then he at in his car and I thought the ep was ending, but as soon as the undersheriff came I was like 'it's you, isn't it? dammit, dammit, dammit.'
But I didn't think he was gonna die! :(

(I didn't know about the Gary Dourdan problems til after the episode)
 
I like the idea of McKeen, when he leaned into the car for the final shot, leaves a few hairs from his head behind. Then when the team gets suspicious of McKeen, they'll have something to test his DNA against.
 
^ yeah, but the problem is that, if there is any trace of him (hair, fibers etc), McKeen can always say that he's been in Warrick's car before. it needs to be either a confession, which i don't see happening, or some irrefutable evidence. and McKeen behaved like a professional hitman who doesn't make mistakes.

he could have left a part of a fingerprint on the gun, though. or maybe on the bullets that weren't fired but still are inside. the street didn't look like there would be surveillance, but maybe he was caught on film somewhere on a nearby street.

the fact that will make the investigation easier is that the CSI's know to look for someone important inside the department, someone they know. if McKeen made (or will make) a single mistake, they'll catch him. someone can rat him out in the end of the day too.

they could also try the up-to-down technique creating a list of important law enforcement officers who followed the investigation, narrow them down, and build a case forensically knowing the suspects already. i know it's against the way they always work but isn't this case different? bending the rules the same way they did for Nick in Grave Danger (prepared the ransom money) would be understandable.
 
I hope Warrick tells Nick it was McKeen, or he writes McKeen's name in his bllod, or some sort of clue he knows his friends will understand, or hopefully he knew what was going to happened and had some sort of backup plan, maybe something in his apartment/locker/someplace that has clues in it, that he was onto something bigger.
 
I knew that given the problems Gary's had outside of work that he wasn't recontracted. However, I had hoped that his exit would have been open-ended, like with Jorja Fox's, so he could be brought back again. While it was cool to know this informant to the mob stuff goes way above Gedda and that beat cop, the fact that Warrick was murdered is still making me hurt inside. I hope that somehow that crooked undersheriff gets his ASS nailed to the wall by Brass, Grissom and company.
 
if so bad about Gary's real life problems and the irony and the writing of including the problems of warrick to mirror real life gary's , its just so sad to me.
 
Not sure if this is the right spot for this, and I know some have mentioned this a little before, but I was watching my season 1 DVD's last night and was taken aback on how much of Warrick's storyline in the episodes up to and through "Pledging Mr. Johnson" seem to foreshadow what happened in "For Gedda."

At the end of PMJ, Grissom even warns Warrick that he needs to watch his back because Judge Cohen "has a lot of soldiers". I'm betting one of those soldiers was/is McKeen. TPTB are crazy if they don't make that connection in the upcoming episodes.
 
flashofgenius said:
Not sure if this is the right spot for this, and I know some have mentioned this a little before, but I was watching my season 1 DVD's last night and was taken aback on how much of Warrick's storyline in the episodes up to and through "Pledging Mr. Johnson" seem to foreshadow what happened in "For Gedda."

At the end of PMJ, Grissom even warns Warrick that he needs to watch his back because Judge Cohen "has a lot of soldiers". I'm betting one of those soldiers was/is McKeen. TPTB are crazy if they don't make that connection in the upcoming episodes.
Click to expand...

I thought that myself while watching that episode this evening. Not sure if it will pan out, but it's interesting.

Watching this also served to irk me again about Grissom's treatment of Warrick. It just seems like after leaving the rookie while going to place a bet, having her killed, getting in with the crooked judge (even tho he helped bring him down), then the "Cockroaches" incident, then "For Gedda" where he deliberately went out and did what Grissom told him not to do...again, Grissom was all set to forgive and forget. We should all have such an understanding boss. :rolleyes: It just seemed a little unrealistic for him to get into that much trouble and still be employed.
 
I watched the ep. where they want Warrick fired, but Grissom says "NO" I just lost one CSI, and I'm not going to lose another", and Warrick is so thankful and stated "I won't let you down again" and I was going but you did, in "Cockroaches" & "Lying Down With Dogs":(and Grissom still forgave him:cardie: yeah he's a unbeliveable caring kind boss!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top