#csi 15x12 | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

addictedtostorytelling · 9 months ago

Note

Hi! Would you be able to talk a bit about how you see Sara's relationship with Abby Fisher?

hi, anon!

so i will warn you up front: i am a great hater of the later seasons of csi and don't really have anything nice to say about them. that so, this answer is pretty critical of the writing of episode 15x12 "dead woods" and its depiction of sara and abby's relationship.

to give a "desalinized" short version of what i say below here: i actually like the impulse behind the whole "sara has a relationship with a foster kid" storyline; i just don't think the writers executed the idea well. logistically, the whole thing has more than a few holes. also, the vibes are off. ultimately, i have a difficult time emotionally investing because the implied depth just isn't there.

for a much saltier (and longer) explanation, click the "keep reading."

so here's the thing: one of the many skills which the writers of the later seasons of the show lacked was the ability to imply depth in their narratives.

while most of the time, this deficiency manifested in the form of them failing to provide any kind of contextual details about the characters' lives outside of work—would it have killed them to have sara occasionally mention visiting grissom or to every once in a while show her on the phone with him past s11?—it also sometimes did so in the form of them attempting to shoehorn in biographical information for the established characters that either contradicted or at least didn't mesh well with previously related canonical facts (e.g., when they accidentally changed sara's birthday, only to later change it back again).

and, to me, the whole abby fisher storyline falls into that latter category.

don't get me wrong: on paper, i think having sara connect with a foster child and mentor her is a really wonderful idea. executed properly, it could have been a source for some truly interesting character development for her—which, god knows, in the later seasons, she was severely lacking!—and may have even been something healing for her.

it's just—

to my mind, the way the storyline was written is so unbelievable and ultimately incongruent from sara's previously established character history that i can't really buy into it, either intellectually or emotionally.

problem #1 is the supposed timeline of it all.

within the episode, we learn that sara works the fisher case and first meets abby on 08.20.04, as is shown by the dates on the evidence photos taken at the original scene. however, that date falls right during the same interval when sara is supposedly on vacation between s4 and s5 (see episodes 04x23 "bloodlines" and 05x01 "viva las vegas").

and i know, i know! really, that discrepancy is such a small thing that only a truly nitpicky fan like myself might even notice!

i should probably just let it go.

but the thing is, it's not just an issue of sara not technically being in vegas or around to work the case at that time but also one of her not being in the right mental/emotional state to be able open up to a traumatized child then, either.

more on that point below.

furthermore, it's also not the only "fudge" of its kind.

in fact, it's actually indicative of a more general inattention to detail on the parts of the writers.

anthony zuiker took the lead writing credit for this episode, and, honestly, he's somewhat notorious for not knowing his own show's canon. he prides himself on being a big picture "ideas" guy, not a minutiae/details guy, and sometimes, the fact that he isn't the latter thing is really, really obvious. i mean, this is the same man who had to crowdsource major story arc recaps from fans on twitter to remind him of what had been going on on his own show before he wrote the series finale, for chrissake! and even then, he still got a bunch of the "fine print" stuff, like grissom not knowing who russell is, wrong.

this error being just one among many makes me less willing to ignore and/or gloss over it.

beyond the issue of sara's initial meeting with abby not fitting the timeline of the earlier seasons, equally as improbable is the notion that sara maintains regular contact with abby after they first meet.

for one thing, in the early seasons of the show when sara supposedly first meets abby, sara is a notorious workaholic who maxes out on overtime every month. if she's working 70+ hours a week on a graveyard schedule, when is she making time to have visits with this kid—and especially considering that said visits likely have to be scheduled long in advanced and supervised (because there are very strict rules in place regarding how noncustodial adults interact with kids in the foster care system), meaning she can't just swing by for a quick hello after a double shift?

considering that catherine can barely find the time to see her own biological daughter, of whom she has sole custody after early s3, when is sara fitting in hours and hours with abby, to whom she has incredibly restricted access, as per the rules and logistics of the foster care system?

also, for another thing, how does this relationship fit in with all of the canonical events of s5-15?

for example, when sara is recovering from her injuries following her abduction by the miniature killer in s8, what does she tell eight-year-old abby? does she see her during that time or do they go several months without any contact, until sara is healed up enough not to have to explain anything to her? if they don't see each other, what kind of excuses does sara make? if they do see each other, how does sara explain the situation? does she admit she nearly died at the hands of a murderer, knowing how triggering that information might be for abby to hear? or does she lie? or tell some sanitized version of the truth ("i had a bad accident, but i'm okay now")?

and what about the grissom of it all? do he and abby ever meet? if so, when? do they ever spend quality time together and/or develop any kind of relationship, especially after grissom and sara get married? if so, how does sara break the news to a fourteen-year-old abby of the divorce? does abby get any kind of closure for grissom not being a part of her life anymore?

for yet another thing, how does this idea (of sara being a regular presence in abby's life for ten years) fit with sara's nomadic lifestyle in the later seasons of the show, plus abby's general status as a foster child?

not only does sara spend significant amounts of time away from vegas between 2004 and 2014 (especially during s8, s9, s10, and s11), which would make it difficult for her to keep in touch with abby just on her side of things, but based on some of abby and her foster mother's dialogue in episode 15x12 "dead woods," it also seems that abby has only come into her placement with the higgins family fairly recently, perhaps within just the past few years or so, which means that prior to living with them, she likely moves around a lot.

the idea that sara could even keep track of this girl over the years—especially given the privacy laws surrounding foster kids—isn't particularly realistic.

one of the main things former foster kids (and especially those who are in "traditional foster care" as opposed to "kinship care") complain about is the inconsistency of the lifestyle and the fact that people are there one day and gone the next.

while the child protective services agency (cps) does their best to prevent foster kids from having to move placements, over a third of foster kids experience changes to their living arrangements at least three times per year (and some experience even more).

and, again, while cps generally tries to keep kids from having to move schools/districts when their placements change, if they can avoid it, they often don't have a choice; if the kid has been living in and attending school in henderson and the only available placement for them is in reno, then there's not much to be done but to uproot their whole life and ship them 450 miles across the state to their new home.

furthermore, to protect the privacy and safety of foster children, neither cps nor foster families are allowed to give out personal information about foster children—including their placement addresses—to anyone who doesn't have direct "need-to-know" involvement in their case (which would mostly just be custodial caretakers, school officials, and medical professionals).

all of the above so, it would likely be very, very difficult for sara to maintain a relationship with abby, especially over the course of a decade.

that girl has likely been in multiple placements in multiple locations (some of them not in clark county) since sara has known her, and since sara doesn't—even as law enforcement—fall into any of those "need to know" categories of persons who legally receive updates about abby's whereabouts when she gets reassigned, she probably wouldn't be able to follow her movements.

however, even if sara were somehow to (improbably) maintain contact with abby between 2004 and 2007, once sara skipped town and went "off the grid" circa episode 08x07 "goodbye & good luck" and/or later episode 09x02 "the happy place," the second abby moved placements, she likely wouldn't be able to find her again (and especially considering that, at the time, abby would be just eight or nine years-old and wouldn't have a cell phone or email account she could use to reach out to sara on her end of things).

the whole scenario lacks veracity, even with what sara herself has previously said about her own experiences in foster care.

for example, in episode 07x16 "monster in the box," sara remarks to grissom on how hard it is to keep up with foster kids due to spotty record-keeping.

—and that's the main problem, really.

beyond the whole "how would this relationship even work?" of the thing, there is also the issue of characterization—a question of "would sara even behave in this manner?", the answer to which i think, ultimately, is no.

i could forgive all of the logistical errors and the farfetchedness of the situation if the story itself didn't feel so antithetical to sara's character history and jar with everything we know about her development.

see, episode 15x12 "dead woods" suggests that sara sees abby very regularly and plays a prominent mentoring role in her life, enough to know who her boyfriend is—and have beef with him!—and to understand her complicated feelings about her foster family. they supposedly go to concerts together and hang out with some frequency. theirs is an emotionally open and socially intimate connection.

the implication is that sara is almost like a mother to abby—someone abby is even closer to and more highly esteems than her current foster (and soon to be adoptive) mom, joanna higgins; the first person she thinks to call for when she's in trouble.

but that implication doesn't fit with sara's character arc.

see, it's not that i doubt that the sara of 2014 could be open enough to bond with a traumatized foster kid over their shared life experiences and serve as a touchstone for her.

it's that i doubt the sara of 2004 would.

the sara of 2004—and especially the summer of 2004, six months prior to the events of episode 05x13 "nesting dolls"—wouldn't respond to seeing a little girl whose trauma so closely mirrors her own by reaching out to her, forming a deep connection based in mutual disclosure, and involving herself as a surrogate mother-figure in her life.

i'm not saying sara doesn't have the capacity to be nurturing—i mean, i am the person writing a huge geek!baby au series, the latest installment of which is all about sara discovering just how strong her maternal instincts actually are—or that she wouldn't feel for the kid or want to help her.

rather, i'm saying she just wouldn't be able to bring herself to get that close.

think of the analog situation: brenda collins in episode 01x07 "blood drops."

sara has such a difficult time even being around that kid and looking her in the eyes to start off with, all because she knows, on a deeply personal level, what it feels like to be her.

it's not that she's not empathetic toward brenda and her situation.

to the contrary: she can feel her pain all too keenly! she cares all too much!

that's why it's so painful for her to even acknowledge brenda's existence.

her feelings are still too raw for her to really force herself to interface.

though in that case, she does eventually end up dropping her guard and stepping up to advocate for brenda as needed, she only ultimately does so because grissom compels her to act as brenda's chaperone.

had he not given her that assignment and she instead been left to her own devices, she wouldn't ever have gotten close to the girl.

not of her own volition.

she only starts to show that external level of care because she's made to.

and what's noteworthy is that even when she does show it, she still conceals the reason why she is doing so—from grissom, from the rest of the team, and even from brenda herself.

though she behaves very compassionately toward brenda, she never makes their interactions personal. she never lets on that she understands what brenda is going through. she never transgresses the boundaries of what would be considered the expected behavior for any safe and caring adult looking after a traumatized child under the circumstances.

while we as fans can retroactively read her backstory into her actions throughout that episode, she as a character still plays her cards so close to her chest that no one else within the universe of the show can even think about reading them.

indeed, no one but grissom even really notices she's holding them.

and that's because she isn't ready to go "all in" in that way yet.

she isn't to a place where she is ready to face her own trauma, much less confess to it, much less process it—which is what would be required of her were she to allow herself to get any closer to brenda than she actually does.

—which brings us back to abby.

the sara of 2004 hasn't yet reached a place where she is ready to reckon with her childhood trauma yet.

though she wants to—desperately—and will eventually get to the point where she is willing to at least talk about it with grissom (see episode 05x13 "nesting dolls"), honestly, it will still be years before she is finally able to lay her "ghosts" fully to rest (see her letter in episode 08x07 "goodbye & good luck").

and that being the case—

well, i just can't imagine her being as emotionally available to abby as episode 15x12 "dead woods" suggests is the case.

not early on.

not when she would have initially been forming that bond.

that flashback scene from the hospital room where she ends up hugging five-year-old abby?

i can believe that moment could happen.

all but taken by surprise as she is, sara could and would be unguarded enough to open her arms to that little girl and offer her some comfort; she wouldn't reject someone that vulnerable, no matter how scared she was herself. she would recognize all she needed to be right then was a steady shoulder to weep on and a soft voice to reassure. she could hold abby for that moment and validate her cries for her mother.

but beyond that initial instance of connection?

i just can't see 2004 sara continuing to have contact with abby after the case had concluded.

watching that girl be absorbed into the foster care system while grieving the loss of her parents and grappling with the nature of her father's (alleged) crimes would just hit too close to home for sara—and especially at a time when she is herself really struggling with her own trauma.

lest we forget, during the summer between s4 and s5, sara is attending mandatory peap sessions, spending significant time away from the lab on much-needed vacation, and struggling to get her life/career back on track in the wake of her s4 depression and problematic alcoholic usage.

she's not exactly doing hot™ herself.

she doesn't really have much water in her emotional well to draw from in order to share with somebody else.

moreover, she still, to date, has never told anyone about her childhood. she doesn't even yet have the words to talk about it (see her speech to the mirror in episode 05x01 "viva las vegas").

so for as much as her heart undoubtedly goes out to abby, i just can't see her incorporating abby into her life to the degree that episode 15x12 "dead woods" suggests that she does.

it's a "please secure your mask before assisting others" kind of situation with her, you know?

she's still dealing with her own issues and isn't in a state to help someone else at that point—and especially not an incredibly vulnerable child.

and, honestly, i think she'd recognize as much.

she'd know she couldn't be what abby probably would need her to be at that time—and that being so, i can't really see her purposefully inserting herself into abby's world.

she'd figure abby would be better left to "the professionals."

i think the story we're told in episode 15x12 "dead woods" forgets just how jagged the sara of 2004's edges are; it acts as if she has the same emotional capacity back then as she does in 2014, and the fact is, she just doesn't.

had sara met abby in s10 or s11 when she a) was mentally healthy and emotionally stable; b) had gotten some closure on her childhood trauma; and c) had lots of free time on her hands given her whole "long-distance marriage" situation with grissom, then i could see her being able to open up to abby and thrive in a mentorship role with her in the way canon implies she does.

but that's not the story episode 15x12 "dead woods" tells.

it insists that a much younger, much more mixed-up, much less self-actualized sara somehow manages to step into the role of surrogate mother for a physically and psychologically-wounded child whose trauma closely mirrors her own and is able to say and do all the right things, to the point where that child comes to trust her implicitly.

and to me? that's a hard story to believe.

it requires an almost insurmountable suspension of my critical thinking and understanding of sara's character arc.

—especially considering how many needs abby likely has at the time when sara is first getting to know her.

traumatized children require a special brand of tlc.

one of the most important parts of having a relationship with them (as an adult) is to offer them as much stability as possible—meaning if you say you're going to see them, you have to show up; you can't miss the appointment, even if you end up getting pulled onto a double or triple shift; even if you're maybe having a shit mental health day yourself. failure to follow through can result in an erosion of their trust in you and cause setbacks for them in their recovery.

you also have to be very patient and help them regulate what are sometimes some very big emotions. traumatized kids will frequently throw tantrums or act out. they'll oftentimes be whiny or clingy. they'll enact age-inappropriate behaviors. and as the adult in the relationship, you have to meet them where they are, soothe them, and redirect those behaviors once they're calm enough. to do so, you must yourself manage your own emotions. you have to have awareness of the situation and be able to offer them what they need, whether it be cuddles or verbal reassurance or cognitive tools to help them process what they're feeling.

while of course if you as a caretaker or otherwise invested adult can apologize if you make mistakes and do your best to make amends, the point is that you need to be consistent and selfless and place the needs of the child first. and if you're struggling a lot yourself, then you need to make a judgment call about whether your presence will ultimately hurt the child; if so, you need to remove yourself from the situation and get your shit together before you resume interacting with them.

it takes a lot of energy and insight to navigate those kinds of relationships.

again, i'm not saying sara isn't empathetic or that she is incapable of being there for someone who's been traumatized—her ability to step up for members of her team (like nick and greg) after they go through various hardships proves she is more than equal to the task of offering support as needed—but i am saying that i'm not sure the sara of 2004 would choose to voluntarily place herself into that role; not when she has herself been that kid and knows what the stakes are.

realizing how she tends to react in situations where she's triggered, and realizing that just being around abby triggers her, i think she'd opt to stay away (probably more on a subconscious level than a conscious one).

she wouldn't want to screw up.

she wouldn't want to hurt abby because she was "too in her own feelings."

—which i suppose brings me to my last major objection to the whole sara and abby dynamic, which is just how the dynamic itself is written.

like i said: i'm not at all opposed to the idea of sara acting quasi-maternal; i think she probably does have that capacity in her, however deeply sublimated it may be.

i just feel like—once again—the execution in this case is flawed.

the sara of episode 15x12 "dead woods" seems almost strident in her "mama bear" role with abby. apparently, she has lectured abby about her ne'er-do-well boyfriend on more than one occasion. she even serves as a kind of liaison between abby and joanna, confident she has a better read on abby's feelings than joanna does. which, albeit, is a view with which joanna herself seems to concur. she doesn't hesitate to chase abby's shithead boyfriend down the hall at pd and all but assault him or to take abby out on a saturday night, seemingly without asking anyone's permission. though of course concerned about abby's feelings, she's noticeably forward in all of their interactions. she doesn't hesitate to offer advice or even to try to lay down ground rules.

—which, on a superficial level, could be a valid interpretation of how sara tends to love.

i mean, sara has always been a "heart on her sleeve," "in with both feet" kind of gal, just in general. she does tend to love fiercely and be protective of "her people."

right?

i mean, kind of.

in a "broad strokes" sort of way.

but when you take a slightly more nuanced view of her and how she expresses love, her behavior toward abby actually feels somewhat off. it's too aggressive, in a lot of ways. too "in your face."

just like so much of her characterization of the later seasons, it comes across as inexact, like a flattened-out version of her actual personality, with all of the details and complexities of her sanded off.

yes, sara loves deeply and is very emotional by nature. yes, she has a strong sense of what's right and doesn't back down from doing what she thinks is needed. but she also gives the people she loves space and doesn't typically impose on them.

see, for example, the scene in episode 07x06 "burn out," where she both protects greg and redirects grissom's misplaced anger off of him and is very subtle in how she does so, showing great tenderness toward both parties.

she also tends to "know her role."

see, for example, in episode 10x01 "family affair": when she points out that catherine is lacking a "right-hand man," she doesn't attempt to install herself in that position, realizing it's not hers to fill not only for logistical reasons (i.e., because she is only in town temporarily) but also because she and catherine don't have that kind of dynamic with each other; instead, she just gently encourages catherine to seek out someone she trusts and is ultimately very glad to see her eventually select nick.

i have no doubt that sara loves abby and cares very much for her well-being, but i've also got to believe that even for as much as she loves and cares about her, she would always remain highly aware that she was not actually her mother, either foster or adoptive.

and to me, that awareness would cause her to act differently than what we see in canon—less vehement and imposing; less "in the driver's seat" and more "in the passenger's."

there'd be if not some reticence on her part—though maybe that, too—at least some deference.

sara would realize: the people who should be setting rules for abby and finalizing major life decisions with her are her foster (soon to be adoptive) parents, who play a role in her daily life that sara herself doesn't.

and, yes, sara has known abby for ten years while they've only known her for a few years at most, but that's why it would be all the more imperative for sara to make that demarcation very clear for everyone involved, particularly as the higgins family intends to adopt abby and will be her full-time guardians for the next several years.

based on her own experiences in foster care, i think sara would likely understand the importance of setting boundaries and making it clear to abby that though she is her friend and is happy to offer both a listening ear and advice, she is not her parent.

this delineation would have been especially crucial for sara to draw when abby was younger, so as not to inadvertently get her hopes up that sara was going to foster or adopt her.

again, while she could still be (and likely would still be) very nurturing to abby, i just don't see her having that much of an authority role in abby's life.

it just feels like too much of an overstep with a kid she probably only sees a couple of times a month at most* and who, given that she is a foster child, probably needs clearly-drawn relationship boundaries with the adults in her life in order to feel secure.

* even ignoring all of the real life logistics that would make it impossible for them to remain in such close contact.

the last thing sara would ever want to do would be to confuse abby or give her unrealistic expectations or to impose on/complicate/undermine her relationship with her foster family.

so, to me, if it were actually written with sara's core characterization in mind, then sara's relationship with abby would be one with a lot more gentle questioning in it as opposed to brash pronouncements. it'd be less "i told you you have to dump that guy!" and more "what exactly do you see in him? i'm genuinely interested to know." there'd be a pinch more "well, why don't you ask joanna?" and maybe some self-conscious awkwardness at the realization that, yes, in some situations she does know abby better because she's known her longer (but that still doesn't make her "mom").

above everything, sara would be very conscientious about not screwing up™.

she'd remember just how vulnerable being in foster care makes a kid. she'd understand abby was traumatized and likely has attachment issues galore. "sometimes i look for validation in inappropriate places," anyone? she would have doubts about her own capabilities to be as selfless and emotionally available as she would need to be for abby's sake, and, even though she would ultimately find both the strength and the wisdom to step up, she would always remain just a little bit cautious of herself.

she'd consider there are reasons why, even for all the love she has for abby and all she wants to be a part of her life, she never does foster or adopt her herself; that there are certain things she can't give or be, whether it's the time or just the "totality" of that kind of parent-child relationship.

even after ten years, she'd be careful not to cross the wires between "friend/mentor" and "parent."

so.

all of the above said, for as much as i want to like sara's relationship with abby in episode 15x12 "dead woods," to me, it just ultimately doesn't hit.

it feels like something poorly contrived and even more poorly executed.

like so much of the characterization of the later seasons, it falls about two inches to the left of who and what sara actually is and how she would really behave.

in a better world where the later seasons' writers actually knew what they were doing, i would have loved to have seen this storyline done differently.

instead of trying to retroactively insert a relationship with a foster kid into the already established show canon, why not show it develop in real time, starting in s15?

rather than saying, "sara has had this kid in her life all along. you just never knew about it before now!", let the audience watch her meet the kid and slowly get to know her.

let us observe that initial awkwardness. let us see sara's struggle with how much she ought to say regarding her own situation and how much she should keep submerged. let us be present for the moments when sara summons her courage to step up and be vulnerable in ways she didn't realize she was capable of. earn the emotional connection between them. allow the love to grow up organically.

and, yeah, i know, doing things that way would make it impossible to play out the "ten years later, abby's dad gets posthumously exonerated!" storyline of episode 15x12 "dead woods."

but, honestly? that plot was not very well done anyhow, so i don't think it'd be a great loss to sacrifice it in favor of giving sara some actual long-lasting character development.

make sara's interaction with the foster kid into a full-on arc. it could be really good—much more so than what we actually get in canon, which, frankly, just falls flat on multiple levels.

the writers tried to imply depth that just wasn't there and didn't succeed.

anyway.

enough salt out of me; we've got a whole mine here by now.

thanks for the question! please feel welcome to send another any time.

#answered #anon #asks: csi #**#my meta #meta: csi #meta: sara #csiverse #later seasons #15x12 #let's talk shop

16 notes · View notes

addictedtostorytelling · 9 months ago

Note

Thank you for your thoughtful answer about Abby Fisher! You sort of answered this in your original response, but if you wouldn't mind elaborating, how would you have written an arc like that? In canon, we see Sara connect to so many victims/survivors in a way that impacts her own mental wellbeing, and I am wondering what it might look like if that connection was maybe drawn out longer than the arc of one episode, especially because the Abby plot has all the holes you pointed out.

hi, anon!

unsurprisingly, my answer got away from me here, so in case you don't want to read this whole monstrosity, the tl;dr version is:

i'd move the storyline up, making both sara and the kid older when it took place. i'd also show their relationship develop in real time as opposed to inserting it into previously established narrative as a retcon. from there, i'd change certain details to make it more feasible that sara and the kid could stay in contact. finally, i'd put different kinds of narrative pressure on sara to make her more willing and able to open up to the kid regarding her own past.

much, much longer version after the "keep reading," if you're interested.

so to start off here, let's discuss the background specs for this potential arc:

as mentioned in the previous post, i'm convinced this storyline would actually work better and be more viable if it were to take place with an older sara who had already "come out the other side" on her s4/s5 story arc and achieved some stability and healing in her life.

i just can't really see her being prepared to adopt a mentorship role for a vulnerable child probably any earlier than s6.

that said, i also think the most ideal time for the story to unfold would be sometime after her breakdown in s8/s9, as well.

for me, the real sweet spot with her would probably be in the s10/s11 range, when she is happy, settled, stable, and thriving (and also has some free time on her hands because grissom is living abroad).

i'm likewise of the opinion that the story itself would work better if we saw sara's bond with the kid in question develop in real time, as opposed to being told about its development long after the fact (and being asked to believe that sara has maintained this really significant and even life-changing relationship for the past ten years that we have nevertheless known nothing about until present).

along those same lines, i also think the storyline would work better if the kid in question were older than five years-old when sara actually bonded with them.

the kid can still be around early elementary school-age (between 5 and 8 years-old) during the commission of the original crime that puts them into contact with csi, but when sara finally gets to know them and adopts that mentorship role in their life, they should be older, between 15 and 18 years-old.

though i don't actually believe sara is bad with small children—again, i am the one writing a sprawling geek!baby au right now—i think the fact that she thinks she is bad with small children would make her reluctant to try to befriend one (see, for example, her protestations to grissom about taking care of brenda collins in episode 01x07 "blood drops").

that so, i tend to suppose she would have an easier time dropping her guard and bonding with a somewhat older foster child in the preteen to teen age group than she would with a literal kindergartener.

i also think that her dynamic with an older kid would just plain be more interesting than one with a younger kid (because older kids can be held morally and intellectually accountable in ways younger kids can't).

as for the kid's foster situation, i think that whereas episode 15x12 "dead woods" has abby fisher in a relatively new placement with foster parents who don't know her as well as sara supposedly does, in this scenario, it would work better to say that the kid had been in the current placement for several years and that their foster parents know them well.

since sara seemingly never experienced that kind of long-term stability in a single placement herself—according to her conversation with glynnis in episode 05x10 "no humans involved," she bounced around a lot—she might end up being a little bit weird and flighty about the kid's situation in an "i'm not quite sure how to relate" type of way that would make this whole scenario more interesting.

so then thinking of the scenario itself:

let's imagine this story as a three-episode arc (which i'm going to title the "memoriae sacrum" arc).

like i said in my other post, i'm not 100% married to the "foster kid realizes, ten years ex post facto, that their father was not in fact a murderer" storyline (particularly as i find it somewhat ham-fisted), but for the purposes of this thought exercise, we can more or less stick to those bare bones.

that said, one element from the original storyline we're definitely not going to retain is the part where they retconned the nature of sara's father's abuse from what we had always known it to be in earlier seasons.

episode 1

in real life, gary dourdan became a persona non grata at cbs after he left csi under unpleasant circumstances back in 2008—hence the reason why tptb at the show never brought warrick back even in flashback in any subsequent seasons.

that so, if these were "real episodes," there'd probably be no way to swing an appearance from him.

however, let's imagine this arc more like a fic, where we can play around with what characters we want.

so let's say that back in 2000 or 2001 or so, sara and warrick work an apparent murder-suicide case together wherein a father seemingly kills his wife and eldest child and severely wounds his youngest child, shooting them*, before dispatching of himself.

* i don't really think the gender of the kid would matter, so imagine what you like here. this kid can still be abby fisher or it could be anyone else. i'm going to use they/them pronouns in reference to the kid to leave the possibilities open.

whereas in the original case, the killings took place at a mountain campsite, let's say, in this one, they happen inside the family home (which makes them even more similar to sara's own family tragedy and also adds to the circumstantial evidence suggesting the father is the cuprit).

at this time, sara is still a csi level ii, so warrick, at csi level iii, is the actual lead on the case.

the youngest child's injuries are profound. however, when they do eventually come-to enough, warrick is able to interview them.

(sara plays no part in the interviews by her own choosing and never interacts with the kid herself at any point during the investigation.)

unfortunately, the kid is unable to provide any kind of useful information to warrick, as, at this time, they are very young and the situation is so traumatic that they simply can't recall much. they also may have sustained injuries during the attack which impact their cognitive abilities/memory*.

* whereas in episode 15x12 "dead woods," abby fisher is rather improbably shown to survive a close-range gunshot to the head with no long-term impact to her cognitive abilities, i think it'd be more realistic for injury to either be entirely noncerebral in nature or to result in some actual traumatic brain injury symptoms.

warrick being warrick bonds with the child pretty immediately—seriously: one of the joys of the early seasons is watching warrick interact with kids, like when he used to babysit lindsey willows or when he interviews suzy in episode 07x10 "loco motives"—and, as is often his wont with child victims of the crimes he investigates, gives his contact information to them and/or their new social worker, telling them to get in touch with him again in case they ever remember anything and/or even just want to talk about the case with him when they're older and interested in learning the facts.

however, in the absence of any testimony from the child which might suggest differently, the evidence in the case does seem to (more or less) indicate the father's guilt.

since the father is dead along with the rest of the family, there's no one to arrest, so, in consultation with grissom, warrick closes the case—a decision sara has no real reason to question at the time.

particularly as, even back then, as would be shown in the flashback scenes, the case does squeeg her out and somewhat trigger her, given its likeness to her own family history, and she feels like the sooner she can move on from it, the better.

fast forward to ten years later, to 2010 or 2011 (i.e., s10 or s11).

at this point, said surviving child, now an older teenager, appears in the lobby of the crime lab one morning at the tail end of the graveyard shift, requesting to see warrick.

of course, by this time, warrick is dead, so once it's determined what the kid wants—which is apparently to discuss their family's case—sara is summoned to meet with them, as she was the other investigator back in 2000/2001.

and let's say the detective on the case was ray o'riley, who is also, by 2010/2011, canonically deceased, so he's not available, either.

sara is, initially, shown to be uncomfortable at this prospect, citing the fact that she's not warrick and doesn't "have a way with kids" like he used to. however, since she is the only csi still working at the lab who has any direct knowledge of the case and its details—grissom signed off on it as supervisor back in the day, but of course he's no longer on staff—she's pushed into taking the meeting, never mind her objections.

here, i'm picturing ecklie being like, "come on, sidle, just deal with this. it was your case."

she initially tries to be very formal with the kid, but it should be clear to the audience that she's wildly uncomfortable and masking.

however, while her going line is that she's "just not good with kids," between the flashbacks and the real-time scenes, the true source of her discomfiture quickly becomes apparent: namely, the whole "orphan whose one parent killed the other in front of them" likeness between her and this kid in particular.

at first, she assumes the kid has come to the lab because, now that they are old enough, they want to hear the full details on their family's case, as per warrick's offer to them back in 2000/2001 (of which sara is aware because warrick wrote it on the business card he gave to the kid and/or their social worker back in the day).

however, to her great surprise, the kid corrects her: they've actually come to provide new testimony in their family's case, based on some newly retrieved memories of theirs.

much like in canon, they would explain that something had recently caused them to remember details about the murder they were unable to remember previously—and these details contradict the notion that their father was the murderer.

however, let's say that in this version of the story, this recollection on their part happens under even more dubious circumstances than the ones in abby fisher's case, like while the kid is under hypnosis or experimenting with hallucinogenic mushrooms or undergoing a controversial form of therapy or the like.

much as in canon, sara is skeptical, believing the kid simply wants to "rewrite their family history" (an impulse she understands but doesn't necessarily condone).

let's say unlike in canon: the thing that draws sara to this kid even more than just the similarities between their respective family histories is their personality.

honestly? the kid is whip-smart and well-spoken but also angry and rough around the edges; blunt and a little bit awkward, etc.

they match sara pretty much toe-to-toe during this interview, countering her every argument.

when sara tries to let them down gently and tell them that in the absence of any new physical evidence, there's no reason for the crime lab to reopen what seems to have been an open-and-shut case, they get in her face, citing (obviously researched) precedents re: the legitimacy of their chosen memory recovery techniques to her in an attempt to change her mind.

with all of their tenacity, it's hard not to be reminded of her younger self.

but in that resemblance, it's also hard for her not to think of how she operated as a young csi: that tendency she had to "chase rabbits" and let her feelings get in the way of her professional judgment.

she remembers how often she used to be disappointed back then; how she'd get her heart hung up on certain outcomes and then have it shattered when they didn't pan out.

let's say—again, since we're pretending we can get whatever "guest stars" we want here—that after sara goes home for the day, this dilemma is one she talks to grissom (on one of his visits to the states) about, explaining to him that for as much as this kid may want her to start digging, it's possible they may not like what she finds if she does, and she'd hate to cause them even more pain.

she opens up to him: she knows what it feels like to be this kid.

maybe she even admits that when she surreptitiously searched through her mom's legal files back in 2004 (see episode 05x10 "no humans involved"), she was hoping to find not "exonerating" information, per se—as her mother's guilt was never really in question—but at least some new context that might have helped her to better understand or come to terms with her mother's actions, or at least to fill in some of the blanks in her memories.

so she gets the impulse, you know?

(of course, she notes, she never did find any previously unknown information to contextualize her mother's crime. there's nothing that could ever really ameliorate "abused schizophrenic wife brutally stabs alcoholic abuser husband to death in his sleep," is there? the whole situation was just as awful and senseless as she always remembered.)

now, she wonders what her role is here as the adult: to play the realist and put her foot down, telling the kid there is no probative evidence to suggest their father's innocence; or to actually listen to the kid and reopen the investigation (because she understands how often kids—and especially foster kids—tend to have their thoughts and feelings discounted and she doesn't intend to be one of those grownups who just brushes off everything a kid says simply because they are a kid)?

at this point, grissom gives her a nudge: asks her when she looked through her mother's files what she felt when she discovered that there was no "hidden context" and things were always just as bleak and awful as she'd always known they were.

her realization: she accepted it.

was disappointed, but accepted it.

because at least then she knew for sure, you know?

and with that determination, sara decides to reopen the case, securing permission from catherine (who is at this time her supervisor) to do so, albeit perhaps more in a "well, i guess i can't really stop you" way than an "i fully support you in this endeavor" one.

she also enlists greg to help her—or rather, he volunteers because he remembers running dna on the original case back in the day, recalling some unknown exemplar collected from the crime scene he couldn't find a match to then and wanting to follow up on it now that codis is a more fully-developed technology.

the next morning, when the kid once again turns up at the lab, sara gives them the news that she's officially reopening the case, though she makes sure to stress: she's not promising them anything.

even with that caution, the kid still lights up.

for the first time, sara sees them smile—and on the one hand, it obviously terrifies her, having all this kid's hopes rest on her, but on the other, she also can't help but feel somewhat exhilarated, offering this kid at least a chance at an outcome she never had available to herself.

episode 2

this episode marks the beginning of sara's investigation in earnest.

the physical evidence in the original case is both limited and ambiguous in nature.

there were no signs of breaking and entering at the house.

the family members were shot with a gun belonging to the kid's father, and his prints were found on the weapon, which was recovered from next to his body, right where one would expect to find it had he dropped it after committing suicide.

however, there was also a pair of microfiber gloves found next to the father's body, which, while roughly the same size as his hands, were not ones the kid recognizes as belonging to their father.

sara and warrick's going theory at the time was that he had worn the gloves to shoot his family members but then taken them off to shoot himself, though they couldn't figure out why he would have done so, given that he didn't necessarily need to conceal his identity as the killer, his intention always being to commit suicide in the end.

inside the gloves, there is one unsmudged print. however, it is seemingly unrecoverable, due to the nature of the fabric.

the mystery dna greg couldn't match back in 2000/2001 comes from a sweaty handprint on a door handle to a part of the house seemingly out of the way of the murders; it doesn't belong to any of the family members, though it's unknown as of yet to whom it does belong or if it is even probative.

there is also circumstantial evidence to suggest that the kid's father may have been experiencing financial troubles at the time of the murders and that the kid's mother may have been having an affair back then, as well, of which her husband had perhaps recently become aware.

there was nothing at the scene to indicate anyone in the family struggled with assailants prior to their deaths, and both the mother and elder sibling were covered over with blankets, indicating remorse on the part of their killer.

meanwhile, the kid's "recovered memory" suggests that the man who came into their bedroom that night had some distinguishing physical characteristic that their father didn't have.

in episode 15x12 "dead woods," abby fisher's memory centers on a distinctive smell, and maybe the same thing could be the case here, though there might also be some other difference instead; i don't suppose this point really matters much, in terms of the overall story arc.

sara decides to run everything from the top, grissom-style (see episode 01x12 "fahrenheit 932").

of course, in this scenario, the added "warrick of it all" would throw a new wrinkle into the whole operation, as she would be sifting through his old work, potentially looking to overturn it.

imagine: once word gets out that sara is revisiting this case, nick becomes upset with her for distrusting warrick's original determination, feeling as if she is just being contrary and maybe even taking advantage of the fact that warrick isn't around to defend his own conclusions anymore.

and for what?

all because some weirdo (possibly drugged-up) teenager dreamt up a pseudo-memory ten years after the fact?

of course, given his ignorance of sara's past, nick doesn't understand sara's sense of personal connection with (and obligation to) this kid—and especially not because sara is trying with all her might to repress her own feelings and memories and "remain objective" on this case, not allowing her own trauma to color either her investigation OR her interactions with the kid.

—speaking of whom.

the kid turns up again at the lab for what is now a third morning in a row to check on sara's progress.

whereas in all of their previous encounters, the kid has had this somewhat surly attitude—think sara fending off grissom's inquiries about her "diversions" in episode 01x16 "too tough to die"—now, they are starting to come out of their shell.

while it's not a total transformation just yet (much like sara, this kid has been burned a lot and is fairly "slow to warm up"), they are becoming gradually more animated and expressing curiosity about sara and greg's investigative activities.

while it's clear they're trying not to get their hopes up too much—per sara's caution—it's also clear they're not fully succeeding in that trying.

more and more, they're becoming invested.

—and so is sara, who, despite her general trepidations about being "bad with kids," finds herself getting along with this one, especially as she starts to see their personality emerge out from behind that façade of jadedness, and especially as the kid starts to speak somewhat more freely about what their life in foster care has been like for the last ten years.

though sara lets on nothing to the kid regarding her own time in the system, we as the audience should be able to tell: the instability and uncertainty of "living with strangers," of always being the "odd kid out," is something she can very much relate to, and she feels for this kid.

deeply.

unfortunately, the gods of forensics don't seem to be on their side: it seems like whatever new investigative avenues sara and greg develop all eventually terminate in dead ends.

the mystery dna isn't in codis.

the details from the kid's memories are hard to get a fix on.

as the episode goes on, sara's stress grows.

she's still fielding passive-aggression from nick, who resents her taking on the case in the first place, and she is also starting to feel pressure from catherine and/or ecklie, who are annoyed with her for continually tying up department resources (including both herself and greg) as she pursues admittedly flimsy leads in a ten year-old solved case.

worse: the more time she spends with the kid, the harder she's finding it to keep her personal feelings out of the case AND out of her interactions with them.

despite her best efforts, she's getting her heartstrings tangled up in the investigation and in them.

she's also thinking about memories from her own past that she hasn't allowed herself to think about for a long time, and she's, frankly, worse for the wear for it.

after a hard shift fraught with disappointment for both her and the kid, she goes home to grissom, and we get a cuddling in bed scene where she admits, somewhat tearfully, to him that there is still so much she doesn't know about what happened between her parents; so much she can't remember either because it all happened when she was still so young or else because she's repressed it.

memory can be a fickle thing, grissom muses, and she agrees.

tells him she doesn't remember when her mom first got sick or why she (seemingly) never received treatment. doesn't remember when her father's abuse started. doesn't remember why her mother never tried to leave or if she perhaps did but maybe somehow failed. she can't recall what, if anything, precipitated the murder—if her dad's abuse of her mom had recently gotten worse or if her mom just finally after so many years snapped or if her mom's delusions perhaps had become stronger or more violent in nature.

she admits: there is so much about that night she has actively tried to forget and so much she is terrified she will someday be triggered to, against her will, remember.

worried about her, grissom wonders if maybe she should hand this case over to greg, but she tells him she feels she owes it to the kid to keep going, at least until she can definitively say whether or not their father was involved in the murders (regardless of if they ever identify any other potential suspects outside of him).

resolved, sara returns to work the next night.

however, as she starts to dig into the case again, she still isn't coming up with anything to challenge the original narrative.

at a team meeting, nick (who, remember, is the assistant supervisor on grave shift at this point) motions for her and greg to shelve the case, as active/current cases have been piling up in the meanwhile "and warrick already solved this one ten years ago anyway." sara pleads to be allowed to continue her investigation, and catherine compromises by pulling greg off the case while allowing sara to continue to work it solo. she also presents sara with a hard deadline: if she hasn't come up with anything probative by the end of the week, then she's got to drop the whole thing and move onto something new.

the kid appears—like clockwork—the next morning and, upon sara's dismal report, practically begs her to keep going, pushing her to dig deeper, to try just one more thing, please, please.

it's here where, overwhelmed by facing so much opposition on all sides, triggered, mixed-up, and half-defeated, sara finally snaps at the kid—says something harsh about how you can't rewrite history just because you want to; tells them that they have to learn to accept the fact that their father was a bad man, and there's nothing anyone can do to change that reality.

at this point, for the first time, the kid—who, until now, has been very tough and even recalcitrant—breaks.

starts crying.

and sara immediately feels awful.

apologizes—and, in an attempt to extend an olive branch—admits (in her awkward but heartfelt sara way) that she was maybe talking more about herself and her father than she was about them and theirs.

slowly, hesitantly, she tells the kid an abridged version of her story, enough that they also can see the similarities between their experience and sara's and know that she understands where they're coming from.

earnestly, she tells them: she wishes more than anything in the world that she could tell them for sure that their father was innocent and that she could find "the real killer" and lock them away.

but the truth, she says, is that that answer may not be the right one, however attractive it may seem.

she gets real with the kid: without more details, there's starting to be nowhere left to go in this case.

the kid offers to try more of the memory recovery technique—i.e., the hypnosis or the shrooms or the therapy—to help in the effort.

but sara tells them: memory is unreliable, and that technique is unproven.

better to stick to science.

she vows, for now, to keep going.

the kid is grateful to her, expressing that they feel like she "just gets it."

cut to the final shot of the episode: sara appearing super conflicted—honored, on the one hand, to have won this kid's trust, rare commodity that it is; but terrified, on the other, that she is still ultimately going to end up letting them down, which is the absolute last thing in the world she wants to do.

episode 3

insert sara wracking her brain to come up with one last avenue of potential investigation here.

eventually, she comes back to the latent print in the microfiber glove—one piece of evidence that was never run back in 2000/2001.

she thinks the print could be the key to unlocking this case now.

however, recovery will be nearly impossible using traditional collection methods.

even with mandy's help, there's no clear answer as to how to lift the print off of the microfiber without destroying it and while still maintaining all its ridge detail.

as the end of the work week is rapidly approaching, sara fears her time to investigate may well run out before she can derive a solution to her problem. not only does she feel like she's letting the kid down but also in a weird way warrick, who she knows would have done everything in his power to get to the truth, were he still around to run this investigation instead of her.

but just as she is about to succumb to total despair, who should approach her but nick, offering up a memory of his own?

—namely, a technique warrick taught him back in the day that might be applicable to her problem.

cue both nick and sara doing their best warrick impersonations: "i can pull a fingerprint off the air!"

of course, there's no guarantee warrick's technique will work, and it could still result in the destruction of the print. however, it is the best option sara has yet encountered.

so, when the foster kid appears at the lab the next morning, sara poses the choice to them: do they want her to take this one-in-a-million chance (knowing that it could well destroy the only remaining physical evidence that might possibly exonerate their father in the process of so doing) or do they perhaps want to hold off in the hopes that technology will eventually advance to the point where the print will be recoverable by some other, less invasive means sometime in the eventual future?

though they are nervous about the prospect, the kid ultimately decides to take the chance.

so sara pulls the print and is successful in so doing. however, she also destroys the surface from which she pulled the print as she collects it, meaning that the print now only exists in digital facsimile form.

mandy then runs the print, and eventually she determines: it doesn't belong to the kid's father.

its existence strongly suggests that another person was on scene during the commission of the murders and that they handled the murder weapon.

unfortunately, there are no hits on this mystery person's identity.

all of these determinations are made during the night, while the kid isn't at the lab, and sara knows that the next morning, she's going to have to tell the kid: while there's a possibility—and even a good one—that their father isn't to blame for the murders, as of yet, there is no empirical way to definitely prove as much, much less to find out who the real killer is.

and there may not ever be.

however, sara doesn't get the chance to tell the kid anything, because they don't turn up at the lab the next morning.

instead, their foster parent does.

come to find out, the kid had been lying to their foster parents, claiming they were going to early-morning "sat prep" and then beelining for the lab instead.

after one of the kid's friends accidentally let it slip to the foster parents that the kid had never actually attended any of the prep sessions, yesterday morning, the foster parents had trailed the kid to the lab. after the kid got home, they then confronted them.

now, upon discovering what the kid was up to, they have become concerned about the kid's level of investment in the case, fearing they are setting themselves up for a major letdown.

the foster parent explains the situation to sara.

apparently, after their family's murders, the kid bounced around in the system for years. during this time, they experienced all sorts of behavioral problems. earned a reputation with the dcfs as a "problem child."

the foster parent and their spouse were kind of a last-ditch solution; the only ones willing to take the kid in anymore.

it took them a while, but they were eventually able to earn the kid's trust and stabilize them.

now, after four or five years of living in their home, the kid is finally on an upswing: doing well in school, enjoying a social life, and just really thriving for the first time since the murders.

however, given the kid's obvious emotional investment in this case, their foster parent is worried that if they don't get the results they want, they might not be equipped to handle to the disappointment and could suffer a major backslide, right at a time when they're getting ready to "launch." the foster parent doesn't want to see them get derailed or "sacrifice their future for the past."

unaware that sara knows this fact all too well for herself, the foster parent explains: the stats on most "graduates" of the foster system are abysmal, so the best chance this foster kid has is to buckle down and study for the sat, get good grades, and attend college.

"that's their pathway out."

the foster parent has now come to sara in order to ascertain whether or not there is actually any hope that the kid will get the answer that they want, all said and done.

when sara explains the somewhat ambiguous outcome with the print, the foster parent decides not to tell the kid and asks sara for help in thinking up some way to "put the kid off the scent" for the time being, at least until they're emotionally prepared to hear potentially disappointing news.

though conflicted, sara suggests that the foster parent could perhaps tell the kid that she'd sent the print off to the fbi for further analysis and that it might be "in process" for a while (months or even years), and the foster parent thanks her for the idea, assuring her it's in the kid's best interest.

they also tell her: she shouldn't expect to see the kid back at the crime lab anytime soon, as it's probably not the best place for a teenager (and especially a traumatized teenager) to be hanging out before school everyday.

though sara outwardly expresses support for this decision, it's clear she's not 100% sold on the notion that concealing the truth is the best course of action here. she is also obviously devastated that she won't even get to say goodbye to this kid.

after her encounter with the foster parent, greg quickly sniffs out sara's upset, which she blames on the fact that she regrets not being able to get the kid a more straightforward answer.

however, he intuits: she's also sad because, despite all her protestations about not liking children, she's actually gotten attached to the kid, and now she's not going to see them again; she is going to miss them.

though he expects sara to resist this assertion, she surprises him by admitting he's right.

cut to a time jump.

the next morning.

and who should turn up at the lab but the kid, having snuck out on their foster parents yet again?

like sara, this kid has the uncanny ability to detect bullshit, and they're not buying the whole "fbi" story that their foster parents tried to sell them. they want to hear the truth from sara herself about her findings, even if it hurts, they say.

please.

at first, sara is reluctant to defy the kid's foster parents' wishes. she is also scared of sending the kid on a downward spiral and fucking up their life.

but then she realizes: she knows for herself how hard not knowing can be.

so she reaches deep inside herself, sits the kid down, and presents them with the truth in the best, most honest way she can think to, even though it's not altogether positive.

she admits: she can't tell them for certain that their father is innocent, though there's at least a chance he is. she also can't tell them who besides their father might potentially be to blame, though perhaps there is someone out there.

maybe, she conjectures, the databases will eventually kick out a match to that print or the dna that at the moment doesn't exist in their datasets; maybe technology will improve enough to someday fill in some of those blanks.

she'll absolutely keep trying, running the evidence periodically to see if anything turns up.

but in the meanwhile, there's no answer.

and there's also a chance that there will never be one.

on instinct, she confesses to the kid: she's never been certain if her mother habitually kept the knife she stabbed her father with under the pillow and pulled it out "in the heat of the moment" to defend herself OR if she had, in an act of premeditation, fetched it from downstairs after he fell asleep that night.

back when she was a kid, the detectives who worked her father's case had asked her, but she couldn't tell them.

and now she's never going to know.

"i keep trying to remember," she says, "the knife block in our kitchen. if there was an empty slot. if i heard her go back down the stairs and then up again. but i can't. that memory is just gone."

she's sorry, she says, she can't give the kid the answer they wanted.

but.

you can live with it.

there are ways to live with it.

someday, she promises, the kid will make other memories that their brain will allow them to retain; happy ones. they'll still carry the memories of their family with them, too. but they'll grow around the grief. have new experiences. give and receive love.

the kid ends up crying then, sobbing, totally unguarded and childlike, that they miss their family, and sara hugs them and says she knows, she knows.

cut to the end of the episode.

the kid's foster parents have come to pick them up from the lab.

they're apologetic to sara that the kid was "bothering her," but she tells them she doesn't mind. she also explains: she told the kid the truth, and they took it well.

"kids are more resilient than you think," she offers.

the foster parents agree.

they start to take the kid home, gently chastising them, on the way out the door, that now that they've skipped sat prep for a week, they're going to have to enroll in another session and take the course over again.

on hearing this statement, sara pipes up, "i could maybe help with that—if you want." stumblingly, she explains that she got a near-perfect score on the sat and attended harvard at age sixteen. "out of foster care," she adds.

and so it is that sara becomes this kid's tutor.

i imagine from this point, though the main storyline would be concluded, we (as the audience) would still see periodic evidence that sara was indeed keeping up with this kid and continuing to meet with them fairly regularly.

there could in time be other storylines for them.

if we want to go the tamer route:

maybe something to do with sara struggling to balance her work responsibilities with her new mentorship role.

alternatively or additionally, maybe her supporting the kid as they deal with some complicated feelings after their current foster parents propose adopting them.

on the one hand, they want to say yes, because they love their foster family and crave that sense of belonging. on the other hand, it feels like a betrayal to their bio family in some way, especially since they're so close to "aging out" anyhow.

maybe the kid meeting grissom and developing a relationship with him, too.

maybe the kid doing some kind of volunteer work or internship connected to the lab to help with their college applications, with sara supervising.

maybe them, with sara's help, starting a forensics club at their high school.

if we want to go the angstier route:

perhaps the kid still occasionally struggles. gets involved with substance abuse or has serious behavioral problems. ends up in trouble with the law, to the point that sara is obliged to confront them.

alternatively, maybe the kid has to unexpectedly move placements, and when they do, they confront sara: ask her why, if she supposedly cares so much, she doesn't offer to foster or adopt them herself. after all, aren't they close? doesn't she get it?

and who knows? maybe sara actually considers the possibility or even decides to go for it. has to broach the topic with grissom. reevaluate their lifestyle. could be an interesting development for both of them.

if we want to go the super angsty route:

turns out, the kid's dad didn't kill their family, and the real killer has somehow realized that the kid survived and the case has been reopened and that sara is periodically checking into it. maybe the killer then targets the kid, knowing they are the only person who could potentially identify them. maybe the kid is in real danger, and it's up to sara to catch the killer before they come to harm.

in any case, i'd definitely want to see more of sara interacting with this kid, building a real relationship with them over time—one that fit with her core characterization and didn't attempt to make her into something she wasn't.

excepting a scenario in which she did actually choose to foster or adopt this kid, i'd like her to toe that line, being a friend and supportive adult but not trying to fill the role of "mom."

i'd like to see her friendship with this kid challenge her in productive character ways and be consistently depicted, to the point where it was easy to believe that this bond was an important and regular part of her life.

anyway.

there would be other ways to write the whole thing than with this "memoriae sacrum" version, certainly.

but that's at least one way i could see the premise of "sara befriends a foster kid" working better than the option we're offered in canon.

thanks for the question! please feel welcome to send another any time.

#answered #anon #asks: csi #**#my meta #meta: csi #hypothetical scenario #let's talk shop #csiverse

5 notes · View notes