"Redrum" Discussion **Spoilers**

That would have been very funny and childinsh had David stuck out his toungue hehe. He really is great...
 
S_Bright said:
edog said:
It worked because it flushed Simon out and they arrested him. That was the point of the whole exercise. Cath, Brass and Keppler did what they had to do to get the job done, period. I agree that it did work.

When it came time to knock this thing outta the ballpark, the Undersheriff screwed up.
Click to expand...

They flushed him out and then he walked. And if it weren't for Nick and Sara finding the fingerprints he would never have been indicted for anything. I'd say normal policework would have tracked him eventually. The undersheriff was jumping the gun, just as Nick pointed out and Keppy and Cath followed without reflection.

Cath wanted a highprofile case and she blew it, she had the culprit walk since she went along with Keppler's more than stupid plan.

Cath put Henry in danger too, messing with a controlled substance that he was in charge of. I have no words of how badly Cath handled this, and for what? the guy would have walked if it weren't for the very people she didn't let in on the case.
Click to expand...

Amen.
 
yeah. i agree. normal policework or no police work. i'd be fuming if someone faked a crime scene in my town, even if it was just to catch a killer. that was not cool.

i thought grissom's gift to sara was too cute :)
 
edog said:
It worked because it flushed Simon out and they arrested him. That was the point of the whole exercise. Cath, Brass and Keppler did what they had to do to get the job done, period. I agree that it did work.

When it came time to knock this thing outta the ballpark, the Undersheriff screwed up.
Click to expand...
ITA. Yeah it was Nick who ID'd the fingerprint in the first minutes of the episode when he, Cath and Keppler were processing the Assemblyman's car. He was also the one who thought of the link between Monique and the Assemblyman's case. But what good will those evidence do if the suspect is nowhere to be found. The reverse forensic's main purpose was to make the fugitive feel he's off the hook so that he would come back to Vegas. So yes in that sense the reverse forensics thing worked because the drug kingpin came out of hiding after the fake crime scene case was played up in the media.
 
ITA. Yeah it was Nick who ID'd the fingerprint in the first minutes of the episode when he, Cath and Keppler were processing the Assemblyman's car. He was also the one who thought of the link between Monique and the Assemblyman's case. But what good will those evidence do if the suspect is nowhere to be found. The reverse forensic's main purpose was to make the fugitive feel he's off the hook so that he would come back to Vegas. So yes in that sense the reverse forensics thing worked because the drug kingpin came out of hiding after the fake crime scene case was played up in the media.
Click to expand...

BUT the problem is that Catherine did not want the others to crack the case because she didn't want to involve them at all. So if the wool really had been pulled over their eyes, the case wouldn't have been solved. It was only when Nick and the rest decided to go rogue. Yes, Catherine got him to come out of hiding, but with her evidence she lost him. And that would've been that, had it not been for the B Team going behind her back.

Yes, the guy was on the lam, but had they not done the reverse forensics and let him go, they might have caught him at a later date and still had relevant, untampered evidence. Perhaps patience is what they really needed.
 
if were going to nitpick over every little detail how about how stupid the idea is in the first place? sure, it made for entertaining tv, but what kind of idiot would come out of hiding because the cops caught someone else who gave a confession? isnt that kind of suspicious? someone confessing to what you did?
people slip up and get caught when theyre in hiding all the time. nick made the connection, they had enough to get this guy for two counts of murder. they had his name and picture, he couldnt hide forever.
plus in the whole reverse forensics thing both catherine and keppler tampered with evidence of other cases, i dont think thats taken lightly. but as weve seen with all the characters in other episodes rules dont seem to apply to csi.
people may say nick and the others had no right to go behind catherine, but others will say she had no right to lie. whos right? no one. its a show, it was written that way to be interesting, create controversy, and hopefully set up long term consequences. mission accomplished.
 
I just have one thought after reading all this and still haven't watched the full ep. If Keppler, Catherine and the under sheriff didn't want the rest of the team knowing, then why in the heck weren't they just told due to the high profile tptb want it kept low key.

After doing that assign Nick, Greg, Sara, & Warrick to oh lets say other cases, cause I am pretty sure there were other crimes in vegas. Which in the long run would have solved the problem.

But then the script didn't call for it but gee give the others their own cases with problems in them. Apparently it was just suppost to be a what could/would happen the show of growth and reaction of and from the characters.

I gave my reasons I think either above or one page back on the team and Catherine, so going there is redundent for me. until I have watched the episode in full. But I thought I would pop a thought in here. :)
 
myfuturecsi said:
vegaslights said:
Nick blew it. He misconstrewed things and didn't know what was happening. Catherine did what she had to do and all in all, she got the killer.
Click to expand...

Wow, I don't think we were watching the same show. Nick was the one that made the original connection between Sara's victim and Catherine's vic.






So, no, Nick didn't blow it. Catherine did. And she admitted it to her credit-an unCatherine thing to do-and Brass even told the UnderSheriff (the biggest jerk of all) that the plan didn't work.

Nick actually solved the case, but as usual, he didn't get credit for it and that's one of the million reasons he's pissed off.
Click to expand...


Yes, I agree wholeheartdly, we did watch the same show,, and on Cath blowing it, she compromised evidence, and sneakily put it in her pocket :eek: and told Nick to "buzz off', he was on the right track, knowing something was amiss, and she kept him in the dark,, poor darling he was so frustrated!! and that is "blowing it" and the undersheriff agreed is a snake, and was in the wrong, but does she have to do the same?
 
pabzi said: i dint get that either. why didnt you see the whole thing yet? you should! did you tape it?
Click to expand...
Yeah I taped it, usually I save the weeks worth of eps I taped (and sometimes watch while taping) and then rewatch them usually saturday or sunday night.
 
That whole fiasco brings the integrity of the entire lab into question. Any defense attorney can have a field day with them in the future. "Hey, you faked a crime scene and tampered with evidence. How do we know this isn't the same thing?"
Click to expand...

This is what bugged me the most about the episode.
I don't mind that Keppler seemed to be taking the lead, after all he did have experience in the reverse forensics type of thing.

But how could any CSI think that faking evidence is a good thing?
Heh, I'd love it if it came up in a court case or something and Keppler could say "Oh yeah, that happened the last 2 times I tried it...why do you think I've had to transfer here!"

Seriously though, I think Catherine was ready to do what it took to close a high profile case. Grissom would have refused to compromise the integrity of the lab by falsifying evidence. And Grissom has never claimed to be a people person, Cath's the one who's supposed to be better at handling her people, and she screwed up big time.

Warrick and Greg seem to be okayish with it - Warrick is a live and let live kind of guy and I think Greg probably feels he's too new a CSI to rock the boat.
But Cath will have to do a lot of work before Sara and Nick trust her again.
(that's assuming that the continuity fairy isn't drunk off her arse again!)
 
desertwind said:
myfuturecsi said:
vegaslights said:
Nick blew it. He misconstrewed things and didn't know what was happening. Catherine did what she had to do and all in all, she got the killer.
Click to expand...

Wow, I don't think we were watching the same show. Nick was the one that made the original connection between Sara's victim and Catherine's vic.






So, no, Nick didn't blow it. Catherine did. And she admitted it to her credit-an unCatherine thing to do-and Brass even told the UnderSheriff (the biggest jerk of all) that the plan didn't work.

Nick actually solved the case, but as usual, he didn't get credit for it and that's one of the million reasons he's pissed off.
Click to expand...


Yes, I agree wholeheartdly, we did watch the same show,, and on Cath blowing it, she compromised evidence, and sneakily put it in her pocket :eek: and told Nick to "buzz off', he was on the right track, knowing something was amiss, and she kept him in the dark,, poor darling he was so frustrated!! and that is "blowing it" and the undersheriff agreed is a snake, and was in the wrong, but does she have to do the same?
Click to expand...

Nick overreacted big time. He compromised evidence, went behind his supervisors back, and there was no reason for him to automatically suspect catherine of doing something illegal. Catherine had no choice, and was sticking up for her team the entire episode, and apologized to them. It wasn't her idea to decieved her team, and I like how no one is blaming Keppler. Cath knew it wouldn't work, and she had to keep it from her team, because if she would have told her team behind the undersheriffs back, she would have been blamed, no matter how the operation failed. Besides, it is JUST a case. I don't see why the young turks needed to know abut the operation. They caught the guy, end of story.

The entire point of the episode was to create this 'mutiny', and if cath had let her team know, then the entire point of the episode would have gone out of the window. I am just sad that TPTB had to throw Cath to the wolves.
 
Actually, Nick is not overreacted big times. He is the one got the killer and figure it out, along with the help of his teams. Catherine and Keppler don't know how to fake the crime scene, if you want to do the fake crime scene, do it yourself. Keppler should shot through the window, instead of hit the window with his gun. Catherine should do the cup herself instead of Hodge doing it and the teams would not find out about it.

The teams will evidentionly find out wheather Catherine tell them or not. You can't hide a secret from the lab, it will spread.

Nick is not going to get the credit, neigther is Catherine and Keppler. Who is going to the credit? Undersheriff McKeen will get the credit. He will probably lie to the sheriff. Anyway, What is Sheriff's name beside McKeen?
 
Another thing to think about for those that think the whole team should have known - does anyone remember what happened in the season 4 opener, Assume Nothing? An innocent comment by Nick to someone he used to know and all of a sudden the killers heard that information on the news and changed their M.O.

the more people that knew about the plan, the more opportunity there was for things to screw up even more in the end.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top