Media and Public Perception vs. Evidence in The Book of Cold Cases: Theme Analysis
Thematic Claim: When Narrative Outruns Proof
In The Book of Cold Cases, Simone St. James argues that media narratives and public opinion can function as a form of conviction that overrides the absence of physical evidence. The novel shows how a woman—Beth Greer—is tried and condemned in the court of public opinion long before any legal verdict, and how those narratives are shaped by biases about gender, class, and sexuality. At the same time, the book complicates this critique: media attention can also be a tool for uncovering truth, and the line between evidence and story is never cleanly drawn. The central claim is that public perception is a powerful, often unreliable force that can convict without proof, but that it can also be redirected toward justice when evidence finally catches up.
Tracing the Theme Across the Plot
1. The 1977 Media Frenzy: Conviction by Headline
The novel opens with the aftermath of the Lady Killer murders, and the media’s role in shaping Beth’s fate is established early. When two men are shot in Claire Lake, the press immediately seizes on Beth as a suspect. The evidence is thin: a witness claims to have seen a woman with red hair leaving the second scene, and Beth owns a trench coat and a car like the one described. But as Shea Collins later recounts, “No one could come up with a reason for a rich girl with no problems to start killing random men. But someone had. And Beth Greer sold papers.”
The media’s coverage is explicitly driven by marketability. Headlines like “Is She the Female Zodiac Killer?” and photos of Beth looking “beautiful and cold and carefree” turn her into a spectacle. The novel notes that her car was seized and her mansion searched, but “no evidence was found.” Yet the public narrative has already convicted her. The witness’s identification is shaky—he was drunk, and later admits he only saw the back of a head—but the press runs with it. Beth’s wealth and beauty make her a compelling villain, and the lack of physical proof becomes irrelevant to the story being sold.
This section establishes the core tension: the media creates a narrative that fits cultural fears about a “female killer,” and that narrative sticks even when evidence fails to support it. The public’s hunger for a sensational story outweighs the need for proof.
2. The Trial: Evidence vs. Narrative in the Courtroom
The trial transcript in Chapter Thirty-seven dramatizes the clash between narrative and evidence. The prosecution calls Dr. Oliver Da Sousa, a psychiatrist who never examined Beth, to testify that the murders were committed by “a woman who is mentally ill, possibly delusional, and has a pathological hatred of men.” Da Sousa admits he has not met Beth, but he bases his conclusions on the “facts of the case” and on stereotypes about women who appear normal but are secretly dangerous. The defense attorney, Ransom Wells, systematically dismantles this testimony: he asks whether Da Sousa can explain why the notes found with the victims do not match Beth’s handwriting, why no physical evidence connects her to the crimes, and whether Da Sousa once called Beth “sexy as hell and probably a slut.” Da Sousa has no answers.
The trial becomes a battle between a narrative built on prejudice and a defense that points to the absence of evidence. The prosecution’s case relies on Beth’s demeanor—she was “calm” when interviewed, which is presented as suspicious—and on her sexuality, which the media has already weaponized. The jury ultimately acquits Beth, but the public narrative does not change. The novel notes that after the acquittal, headlines still asked, “Has a Deadly Female Killer Gone Free?” The trial’s verdict is legally binding, but it cannot undo the conviction already formed in the public mind.
This section shows that even when evidence is presented in a formal setting, the narrative constructed by the media and by biased “experts” can outweigh it. The trial is not a search for truth but a performance in which the prosecution’s story is more compelling than the lack of physical proof.
3. The Modern Re-Examination: Shea’s Investigation and the Podcast
Decades later, Shea Collins becomes obsessed with the case, and her investigation reveals how media narratives persist and evolve. Shea initially approaches Beth with the same assumptions the public holds—she has read every rumor and watched the 1981 TV movie Deadly Woman, which portrays Beth as a manipulative killer. But as she interviews Beth, she begins to see the gaps in the story. In a podcast episode from Chapter Forty-six, Shea and host Paula Watts discuss the case, acknowledging that the media’s portrayal of Beth was shaped by sexism: “Any woman who doesn’t fit inside a neat little box, any woman who has sexuality as blatant and unapologetic as Beth Greer’s, maybe that woman is dangerous.”
Shea’s own fame becomes part of the narrative. After she is injured and her website gains traffic, she uses her platform to keep the spotlight on Beth, which leads to the reopening of the Julian Greer case and the discovery of Lily Knowles—Beth’s half-sister, who was the actual killer. The DNA evidence from a body found at Claire Lake matches Beth’s family, identifying the victim as Lily. This evidence, which had been lost or ignored for decades, finally overturns the public narrative. But it takes a dedicated investigator and a media platform to bring it to light.
This section complicates the theme: media attention can be harmful, but it can also be a tool for justice. Shea uses her podcast to challenge the old narrative and to push for new evidence. The novel suggests that public perception is not static—it can be reshaped by new information, but only if someone is willing to dig past the surface story.
Character and Symbol Connections
The theme is embodied in the novel’s characters and symbols. Beth Greer is the primary victim of media narrative. She is aware of how she is perceived and uses it to her advantage, but she is also trapped by it. The red shawl she wears at her acquittal is a symbol of her public persona—it is both a costume and a connection to her mother, Mariana, whose red lipstick Beth also wears. The shawl represents the way Beth controls her image, but also the way that image is constructed for public consumption.
Shea Collins represents the shift from passive consumer of media to active investigator. She begins by believing the narrative, but her interviews with Beth force her to confront the lack of evidence. Shea’s own website and podcast become part of the media landscape, and she uses them to challenge the old story. Lily Knowles is the hidden truth—the actual killer, who is never seen by the public. Her existence is suppressed by the Greer family’s secrets, and her story only emerges through DNA evidence.
The ashtray appears in a scene with Sylvia Simpson, Julian Greer’s former secretary, who dismisses Beth as “just as crazy as her mother was” and insists she “should have gotten the death penalty.” Sylvia’s ashtray, stubbed out with a cigarette, symbolizes the casual, gossipy way public opinion is formed—based on hearsay and prejudice rather than evidence. Joshua Black, the detective, is a counterpoint: he refuses to speculate about Beth’s demeanor, sticking to factual observations. Ransom Wells, the defense attorney, challenges the prosecution’s narrative by pointing out the absence of physical evidence.
Complexity and Contradiction
The novel does not offer a simple moral. Beth is not entirely innocent—she is manipulative, and she enjoys the mystery surrounding her. She tells Shea, “I don’t quite think I’m innocent, do you?” and she admits that the trial was “all rumors and lies.” The novel leaves open the possibility that Beth knew more about Lily’s crimes than she revealed. This ambiguity complicates the theme: the media may have convicted an innocent woman, but Beth’s own behavior is not blameless.
The media is also shown to be a double-edged sword. The same sensationalism that destroyed Beth’s reputation also keeps her story alive, and Shea uses that attention to uncover the truth. The podcast episode in Chapter Forty-six is a meta-commentary on how true-crime media can both perpetuate stereotypes and challenge them. The novel suggests that public perception is not inherently good or bad—it depends on how it is used.
Finally, the lack of physical evidence is central to the theme. The state went to trial with no murder weapon and no forensic evidence, yet the public believed Beth guilty. The novel shows that evidence can be lost, ignored, or destroyed—the bullet from the Lawrence Gage case is missing, and the DNA evidence is only found decades later. This suggests that the justice system is fallible, and that public opinion often fills the gap left by incomplete proof.
Study Questions and Answers
1. How does the novel use the 1977 media coverage to show the power of narrative over evidence?
The media coverage of Beth Greer is driven by sensationalism rather than facts. The press runs headlines like “Is She the Female Zodiac Killer?” and publishes photos of Beth that emphasize her beauty and coldness, even though no physical evidence connects her to the murders. The witness’s identification is unreliable, but the media presents it as fact. This shows that public perception can convict someone without proof, especially when the subject fits cultural stereotypes about gender and class.
2. What role does the trial transcript play in the theme?
The trial transcript dramatizes the conflict between narrative and evidence. The prosecution’s psychiatrist testifies without examining Beth, relying on assumptions about her mental state and sexuality. The defense points out that there is no physical evidence, no handwriting match, and that the psychiatrist’s own comments are sexist. The jury acquits Beth, but the public narrative remains unchanged, showing that a legal verdict cannot undo a media conviction.
3. How does Shea Collins both perpetuate and challenge the media narrative?
Shea initially consumes the media narrative—she watches the TV movie Deadly Woman and reads every rumor. But as she interviews Beth, she begins to question the story. She uses her podcast to keep the spotlight on Beth, which leads to the discovery of Lily Knowles and the DNA evidence that exonerates Beth. Shea thus becomes a media figure who uses her platform to challenge the old narrative, showing that media attention can be redirected toward truth.
4. What do the red shawl and the ashtray symbolize in relation to public perception?
The red shawl is a symbol of Beth’s public persona—it is a costume she wears at her acquittal, and it connects her to her mother. It represents the way Beth controls her image, but also how that image is constructed for public consumption. The ashtray, seen in Sylvia Simpson’s scene, symbolizes the casual, gossipy nature of public opinion. Sylvia stubs out her cigarette as she dismisses Beth based on hearsay about her mother’s mental illness, showing how prejudice is passed down without evidence.
5. How does the novel complicate the idea that media narratives are always harmful?
The novel shows that media attention can be harmful, as it convicts Beth without proof. But it also shows that media can be a tool for justice. Shea’s podcast and articles keep the case alive, leading to the reopening of the investigation and the discovery of Lily’s DNA. The podcast episode in Chapter Forty-six explicitly discusses how true-crime media can both perpetuate stereotypes and challenge them. This complexity suggests that public perception is not inherently good or bad—it depends on how it is used and whether evidence eventually catches up.