How far back can they go...?

[toddsmitts]

So far, every season has broke the preceding one's record for the oldest case:

-Season 1 had "The Letter" from 1939. (65 years old)
-Season 2 had "Best Friends" from 1932. (73 years old)
-Season 3 had "Beautiful Little Fool" from 1929. (77 years old)
-Season 4 had "Torn" from 1919. (88 years old).

Could future seasons go further back, in the 1910's, 1900's, or even the 19th century?

At some point, even the most loyal would start to find it a bit silly. In both "Beautiful Little Fool" and "Torn", everyone involved had died except for a little girl who was now and old woman. In both cases, the long-dead killer had conveniently left a recording confessing what they'd done, which, of course, the detectives don't find until they'd deduced the killer's identity anyway.

So what do you think? Would you buy going further back, or should "Torn" be the limit?

[zoé]

I am ready to overlook some realistic aspects when it is well done. I can keep in the back of my mind the fact that they are conducting an investigation that won’t likely lead to an arrest and enjoy the episode anyway.

I also don’t mind the lack of witnesses, on the contrary, I really liked that they used the letter exchange in The Letter or the poetry in Best Friends for their investigation, but in Beautiful Little Fool and Torn, the confessions on tape or vinyl were way too far-fetched for me and made me cringe.

So far, the real limit for me is that they can’t properly get the last flashback when they have nobody alive (the doer or a witness) to tell what happened.

edited because I carelessly put a season 5 spoiler in it, sorry ...

[ali]

I like oldest cases, but I think they can't go back more than 1910's.

As zoé I felt the recorded confession a bit forced, although I loved those episodes.
Is not impossible throw light on very old homicides, but it isn't a police investigation anymore: no witnesses, no evidences, no motifs.

A case in the 19th century can be interesting, but it would be something different from a typical Cold Case investigation; it's just like about the identity of Jack the Ripper: does anyone think it's a police matter? Jack the Ripper is literature now.

[beldasnoop]

I did think it might be fun to have a show where some historical society or something challenges the Cold Case squad to solve a (fictional or fictionalized) famous unsolved murder case from the 19th century, for a publicity stunt or something. At first, Lilly and co. would go into the case as just a curiosity and not take it all that seriously, but they would get more involved as they find previously undiscovered evidence.

I also think (as I posted in the "Old or New?" thread) that it would be interesting to have an older case (from the 1910's perhaps) that used double flashbacks because their main interview subject would be the grandchild of a witness who remembers a childhood with the grandparent talking about the case, so the flashbacks would be to the grandchild's childhood, and also back to the time period of the case.

Also, perhaps the "final reveal" in these kind of episodes could come from a diary entry, or perhaps just an imagining by the detectives of what must have happened.

[Collider]

I could buy into a 19th Century case, for sure, especially one involving some kind of historical society, like you mentioned, beldasnoop.

As part of my IRL job, I spend a lot of time transcribing handwritten letters and notes from the 1700s, and you'd be amazed by the sort of stuff these people would send to each other, and how much of it gets retained by those sorts of repositories over time... so I definitely see it as feasible that some historical society might come across something that would relate to some murder or another in the 19th Century and, say, maybe a friend or relative of someone on the squad, with inside knowledge of this discovery, could dare the team, during a 'slow week', to see if they can solve it.

It'd no doubt be fairly tongue-in-cheek, and may involve a little touch of suspended disbelief... but I can see it as being doable, even with no living suspects / witnesses to interview.

[eduardodelroice]

Nice thread!
It would be nice but not that much, I mean I think the show has to be a little realistic. In this case, I think they could solve a case from 1912 or 1912, just few years before Torn(1919) but 1900 or 1880 would be TOO unrealistic

[toddsmitts]

"BLF" and "Torn" were still connected to the present (albeit barely) by having ONE living witness each.

If we dispense with that, then the show could theoretically go back forever.

I do think the recorded confessions are one of the bigger stretches. A little too "deus ex machina" for my tastes. Of course the detectives NEVER find them until after they've deduced the killer's identity anyway. And no one else of consequence has heard them in the intervening decades.

That's part of the reason I'm a little dubious about going back even further than that.

[longislanditalian2]

I don't think they could go back past the early 1900's like someone had mentioned, it is too unrealistic in a sense. Would be intersting if Cold Case did that but then again you could make it like serial killer case spanning different years; even that might not be a bad thing.

[yankee1151]

Jul 15, 2008 13:21:54 GMT -5 toddsmitts said:

I do think the recorded confessions are one of the bigger stretches. A little too "deus ex machina" for my tastes. Of course the detectives NEVER find them until after they've deduced the killer's identity anyway. And no one else of consequence has heard them in the intervening decades.

I agree with this (and bolded the most maddening part about it, for me). The fact that these recordings just magically appear at precisely the right time is laughable. I mean, the fact that they exist at all (yet the cases are still cold) is pretty funny, but everything is just way too convenient, including the memories of witnesses that despite being like seven years old - were not only conveniently present for all these pertinent conversations, but also remember them as if they were yesterday. But whatevs. Most of the old cases frustrate me, but the two recorded confessions were just a bit too much to not hinder my enjoyment of those particular episodes.

I do think Collider's idea is intriguing, though. If it was a matter of solving the case with no living witnesses, recorded confessions, etc, it could be very interesting. They'd have to get really creative, and I'm kind of curious as to how they'd do it. Suspending disbelief might be a bit easier if I wasn't being asked to pretend that a 60 year old was 100, or that no one ever listened to such-and-such recording for eighty years, etc. Perhaps they could even use forensics - I might find it believable that some random piece of potential dna evidence was sitting around for years because it's happened before. If no one's touched the file in 100 years, I can see finding something useful when it's revisited now, with all the new technology that exists today. The suspension of disbelief would be, of course, that the file still exists. LOL.

[toddsmitts]

Obviously, it's too late now and "World's End" WAS a good eppy for the most part, but wouldn't it have been cool if they'd done a hundred year-old case for the hundredth episode?

[Khaya]

Sept 27, 2008 11:28:48 GMT -5 toddsmitts said:

Obviously, it's too late now and "World's End" WAS a good eppy for the most part, but wouldn't it have been cool if they'd done a hundred year-old case for the hundredth episode?

Would that have been possible? It would all depend on diairies and stories parents told to children. I think it would end up being an unrealistic story.

[Gina]

It would have been cool, but like Khaya said, how would we know that we got the right killer? What's the point, anyway? They're all dead, it's not like you can put anyone in jail.

[toddsmitts]

Sept 27, 2008 17:48:00 GMT -5 Gina said:

It would have been cool, but like Khaya said, how would we know that we got the right killer? What's the point, anyway? They're all dead, it's not like you can put anyone in jail.

The killer was already dead in a few other episodes. It was just a thought. Seriously, do people think they should go back further or not? I'm just curious.

[SamIam]

I think they might, but they usually use a lot of psychology, you know they don't use as much forensics as other shows, and if everyone was dead they would only have evidence to look at. No suspects or witnesses or friends. It might not be as interesting.
<3 Samantha

[eduardodelroice]

Now with what I've seen from Season 6, I have to say that I don't think they will do a case older than "Torn"(1919) because It'd be not realistic at all... Maybe 1917 but something from 100 years ago would not be possible

[Gina]

Personally, I would prefer them to do newer cases. I recognize the music more, and it's waay more realistic, not like "In 1918, Susie Lee killed Jean Louise because of women's rights blablabla, and we found this out because of Susie Lee's diary."

[silversideup]

Dec 20, 2008 20:19:44 GMT -5 Gina said:

Personally, I would prefer them to do newer cases. I recognize the music more, and it's way more realistic.

I totally agree with you. I always prefer the recent cases and, as we've seen several times, a new case can be as exciting as an old case.

[eduardodelroice]

Yep, I agree with lolgirly and silverside... "Torn" was the limit... More than that... No!

[valrush]

I found older cases interesting, but always wondered what the fall-out would be.  Take, for example, 5-7: World's End.  The father was obviously too sick to be a threat anymore.  The only one who could have pressed charges was the son, and even he just wanted his mother's case dropped.  What exactly would be the law side to this order? Would they actually arrest someone in those old case situations, or was it more about just getting answers for family members?

Regarding the 100-year-old case, it is not completely impossible.  If you remember from 1-13: The Letter, Lilly and Scotty found a crime ledger going back to 1903.

[ninja1088]

May 17, 2019 13:19:24 GMT -5 valrush said:

I found older cases interesting, but always wondered what the fall-out would be.  Take, for example, 5-7: World's End.  The father was obviously too sick to be a threat anymore.  The only one who could have pressed charges was the son, and even he just wanted his mother's case dropped.  What exactly would be the law side to this order? Would they actually arrest someone in those old case situations, or was it more about just getting answers for family members?

Regarding the 100-year-old case, it is not completely impossible.  If you remember from 1-13: The Letter, Lilly and Scotty found a crime ledger going back to 1903.

I would say in the case's of World's End and Churchgoing People,there wouldn't be a trial since the doers in those cases had obvious health problems that would make them unfit for trial.
In other cases though such as WASPS or Factory Girls,I don't see any reason why there wouldn't be jail time since the doers were of sound mind when they were arrested and confessed to it.
Getting away with a crime for a long time isn't going to help them avoid prison.