CSI: NY (2004–2013)
2 user 2 critic

Dead Reckoning 

While investigating the DNA from a murder scene, Hawkes discovers that the DNA is connected to more than a dozen cases over a three-state area. But does the city really have a serial killer on their hands, or is there another explanation?



(created by), (created by) | 2 more credits »

Watch Now

From $1.99 (SD) on Amazon Video


Add Image Add an image

Do you have any images for this title?



Episode cast overview, first billed only:
Stella Bonasera
Lindsay Monroe
Sid Hammerback
Adam Ross
Haylen Becall
Zoya Carter
Beth Garrett
Marcia Vasquez
Chief Brigham Sinclair
Kevin Carter


A woman is cleared of murdering her cheating husband by DNA, despite the fact she confessed to being the murderer. As the team search for answers, the phantom murderess may be involved in 21 other crimes. However, the top suspect is only accountable for 3 of the 21 crimes, and is cleared of a fourth by that crime being committed at the exact same time as another. Who or what caused this? Meanwhile, Don's behaviour is called into question after he nearly gets himself killed by hesitating during the armed arrest of the suspect. Written by movieguy3

Plot Summary | Add Synopsis


TV-14 | See all certifications »



Release Date:

14 October 2009 (USA)  »

Company Credits

Show detailed on  »

Technical Specs


Sound Mix:


Aspect Ratio:

1.78 : 1
See  »

Did You Know?


Crime scene clean up technicians are supposed to wear personal protective equipment (P.P.E.) such as full body coveralls (Tyvek suits) and full/half face respirators. Haylen Becall is seen at the end of the show without wearing any P.P.E. See more »


Detective Mac Taylor: You're aware of the consequences of what you're about to do?
Deborah Carter: Yes. I imagine that this is every detective's dream.
Detective Don Flack: Every detective's dream is have people stop killing each other.
See more »

Frequently Asked Questions

This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.

User Reviews

Based on a true story
5 November 2009 | by (Vancouver, Canada) – See all my reviews

This episode rang a bell while I was watching it and when I googled it, I realised why. The idea is based on a true story that was reporting in the media in March 2009.



As a story for this show, I think it worked really well. It really makes you think, though, about the assumptions the CSIs have to make about the way they work and the equipment they use. Although the threads of evidence they cling to are so fragile in one sense, they can still pull the investigators way off track with relative ease. When they also have to contend with a legal system that could seize on a screwup like this to cast doubt on all their evidence, the pressure becomes even clearer.

6 of 6 people found this review helpful.  Was this review helpful to you?

Contribute to This Page