Each story begins with a murder and an unsuccessful investigation. But with passing time new evidence comes to light, science evolves allowing law enforcement to piece together what happened... Read allEach story begins with a murder and an unsuccessful investigation. But with passing time new evidence comes to light, science evolves allowing law enforcement to piece together what happened, with the killer being Finally Caught.Each story begins with a murder and an unsuccessful investigation. But with passing time new evidence comes to light, science evolves allowing law enforcement to piece together what happened, with the killer being Finally Caught.
Browse episodes
Photos
Featured reviews
Good stories.. true crime lovers may not be familiar with some of them which helps because I feel like I've seen them all at this point. However, the seemingly Canadian "experts" and journalists are completely unnecessary and off putting. There's a narrator, no need for 5 other people to narrate. One young female expert has so much pep in her voice as she talks about murder. The worst is the forensic expert. Her breathy voice is cringy and distracting. I hope she's okay. She sounds like someone is forcing her to read from a script after punching her in the chest. I'll continue to watch only because I'm interested in the stories.
The concept of this series is good and the cases are definitely interesting, however the "experts" are completely unnecessary.
The concept of focusing on lesser known older cold cases that are finally solved is great. I've watched several episodes about cases I had never seen before or knew anything about.
What doesn't work are the plethora of " experts" giving a synopsis every episode. These "experts" are unnecessary when there is also a narrator. The worst offender is the forensic expert, Christine Hannah, who talks with a breathy affect as if someone punched her in the throat. I literally want to gauge my ears out every time she's on screen. The other "experts" seem to recite commentary as middle schoolers giving an oral book report, they're a bit to excited about murder.
Hopefully there will be more seasons, just without these unnecessary cast members that ruin the serious nature of the show.
The concept of focusing on lesser known older cold cases that are finally solved is great. I've watched several episodes about cases I had never seen before or knew anything about.
What doesn't work are the plethora of " experts" giving a synopsis every episode. These "experts" are unnecessary when there is also a narrator. The worst offender is the forensic expert, Christine Hannah, who talks with a breathy affect as if someone punched her in the throat. I literally want to gauge my ears out every time she's on screen. The other "experts" seem to recite commentary as middle schoolers giving an oral book report, they're a bit to excited about murder.
Hopefully there will be more seasons, just without these unnecessary cast members that ruin the serious nature of the show.
The show is actually pretty good for a New true crime series. But it's PAINFUL to watch/listen to Christine Hannah. Please get a new expert to fill that spot if you create a new a season. Her contribution is dull, lifeless, and exhaustingly boring. The viewer is jolted out of the story and investigative procedure whenever her commentary comes in. Getting rid of her segments without a replacement would be better than having her in each episode. I hate to be so harsh but I have quit watching this show after about 1/2 of an episode each attempt (I tried watching 3 times) because it's so difficult to watch. And as a true crime junkie... there isn't much I wouldn't watch.
I came on here to figure out why the forensic specialist on the show sounds breathless and like her breath is being forced out. I haven't found any answers, but I agree with several other posters. Her manner of speaking distracts from the information she is conveying. It's an interesting show, but hard to listen to.
I like the details that they reveal and the show's overall format. However, some of the reinactments are clearly low budget. The episode featuring Thomas Mitchell has some terrible props. Judith Flagg is carrying a bundle with a horrible quality wig sticking out the top and it's meant to be her 8-month-old son.
I like the details that they reveal and the show's overall format. However, some of the reinactments are clearly low budget. The episode featuring Thomas Mitchell has some terrible props. Judith Flagg is carrying a bundle with a horrible quality wig sticking out the top and it's meant to be her 8-month-old son.
I literally created an account just to comment here. I love true crime and am used to commentators on these types of shows. BUT. The "experts" they have on "Finally Caught" are clearly reading cue cards, and badly written cue cards at that. No one naturally speaks this way. A lot of hate has been piled on the female commentators here, but trust me - they are ALL cringe-y. The stories are interesting and tragic, and I love a good "finally solved" cold case show. The producers need to listen to the reviews and interview the people who actually worked on the cases, not the high school drama club.
Did you know
- TriviaThis is among a group of real crime shows that feature certain "experts" talking about details of the crimes depicted, as if they were really involved in the cases. But it's the same "experts" talking about cases from all different places and times, so obviously none of them really were involved in any and are just reading from a script. Jeff Hamilton is the worst at reading scripts and pretending it's his experience.
- How many seasons does Finally Caught have?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content