Writers On Writing / Researching clues, evidence, and crime with Dr Rachel Franks


‘To be “convincing” and “engaging” are two sides of the same coin. To write convincingly is one of the best methods to engage your reader: if your reader believes you and the crime story you’re telling, then they will follow you to the last page.’



 
Writers on Writing is our regular conversation with a writer or industry professional about the writing craft, industry insights, and their own practice. This week, we spoke to Dr Rachel Franks about finding physical and online evidence for crime-writing that creates a narrative readers believe.

How should budding true crime and crime fiction writers avoid ‘dumping’ all their research onto the page?

It can be tempting to share all the labours of your research with your readers; all those hours given to chasing various lines of thought, getting lost down rabbit holes, finding the almost-perfect “interesting fact”. 

In writing up a crime story – fact or fiction – I always start by creating a very basic timeline that is clear and succinct. Then, I will layer additional material until that line becomes something more compelling than a series of key events on a calendar. It’s like starting with a skeleton and then slowly adding muscle and flesh and everything else that makes us human. 

One of the hardest things when writing crime stories is to “just tell the story”. Background, context, description are all important but can be a little bit too alluring. It’s easy, as writers, to be caught up in all that work that lifts a timeline: crime – investigation – resolution. We can see everything as a crucial component of the story, but we risk losing the central narrative when we force too much on a page. 

If you felt overwhelmed while doing your background research, then your reader will almost certainly feel the same way if they also have to trawl through everything you found. And remember that nothing is wasted. Even if something is not clearly articulated, all the research helps you avoid putting mistakes into print.

Is there a tangible difference between going digging in the physical archives and researching online? And do technological advancements such as generative AI enhance or diminish the researching experience?

I much prefer working with physical records than with digitised materials if I’m looking at diaries or letters or anything that has a personal element to it. There’s real magic in touching something that – precious or perfunctory – has a deep connection to the story you’re writing. A piece of paper that was scribbled on, was kept, tucked away, added to, sometimes scrunched up, occasionally with a coffee stain. These slips of evidence contribute to larger stories, and they often hold their own micro-stories as well. It’s like holding someone’s hand.

In looking for the big patterns around a crime event or trying to establish context for a story, then online tools are essential. I do a lot of research using newspapers, making resources such as Trove (hosted by the National Library of Australia) critical to my work. Databases, provided by libraries, are also important in following up on how some of the more scientific or technical aspects of a crime did, or might, unfold. 

With regard to AI, I don’t use it at all. I know a few writers who find some AI tools useful, but I don’t think they have a natural place in a writer’s toolkit. The technology is improving every day, but it still relies on what it scrapes. Much of the information AI draws on is accurate, but it also replicates errors. Sure, AI might tell you something quickly, it might proffer you a paragraph you can edit (it might even help you answer questions for an interview!); but I firmly believe the human brain will always be better at generating text that goes beyond (mis)information and makes people actually feel something.

How do you balance writing convincingly with writing engagingly?

To be “convincing” and “engaging” are two sides of the same coin. To write convincingly is one of the best methods to engage your reader: if your reader believes you and the crime story you’re telling, then they will follow you to the last page.
 
Interestingly, the overlap between true crime (and the need to be convincing) and crime fiction (the need to be engaging) is much blurrier than is often thought. There’s a long history of fiction writers taking their plotlines from news headlines past and present, while true crime writers have borrowed the techniques from fiction writers to produce works that are more layered and nuanced than journalism traditionally allows. 

Why is crime writing so enduringly popular amongst readers? Is there something prurient about our insatiable appetite for true crime?

As I have written elsewhere, crime is timeless and universal because criminals have never felt restricted by era or geography. With this idea that “the criminal is always there”, crime stories offer outlines we can adapt for personal preservation. Yes, for some people, engaging with news stories dedicated to crime is a simple matter of keeping up with current affairs. For many, there is a desire to learn about what leads to crime, how criminal investigations are undertaken and how the justice system does, or does not, work. For yet others, including increasing numbers of women, it is a survival strategy to learn about the criminals who live alongside us.

Another essential, but often overlooked, lesson from crime writers is the way they document efforts to redefine some “criminal” behaviours. Over recent decades, for example, we have seen the decriminalisation in many countries of homosexuality alongside the re-criminalisation in some places of abortion. True crime stories help us to track these changes that can also offer rich material to those producing crime fiction.
 
These types of tales are also remarkably resilient, we reimagine them for each new generation. The old fears are always there, but crime writers tap into the fears of the modern world as well. The criminal is always current. 

Dr Rachel Franks is the Coordinator of Scholarship at the State Library of New South Wales and an Honorary Associate Lecturer at the University of Newcastle. She holds PhDs in Australian crime fiction (Central Queensland University) and in true crime texts (University of Sydney). A qualified educator and librarian, her extensive work on crime fiction, true crime, popular culture and information science has been presented at numerous conferences as well as on radio and television. An award-winning writer, her research can be found in a wide variety of books, journals, magazines and online resources. She is the author of An Uncommon Hangman: The Life and Deaths of Robert ‘Nosey Bob’ Howard (2022).

Join Dr Rachel Franks for her course, True Crime and Crime Fiction: Researching and Writing in the State Library Archives, Saturday 13 September 2025, 10am-4pm at the State Library of NSW.

If you want to be the first to read great advice, prompts and inspiration from our incredible tutors, subscribe to our weekly e-newsletter Newsbite. 

More from Writing NSW

Check out our full range of writing courses in Sydney, our online writing courses and our feedback programs to see how we can help you on your creative writing journey. Find out about our grants and prizes, as well as writing groups across NSW, and sign up to our weekly newsletter for writing events, opportunities and giveaways.


Related Newsbites

0
    0
    Your Cart
    Your cart is emptyReturn to Shop