Talk:Patrick Jane

Is the C.B.I. fictitious?

Please someone show me a link to the C.B.I. And I mean the "California Bureau of Investigation", not some governmental department in California that investigates crimes. The F.B.I. is n't short for "Bureau of Investigation and Intelligence for Federal Government" the only thing about this link http://ag.ca.gov/cbi/ that calls it the CBI is the link itself. The page calls it the BII (several times). Even the AG's page calls it the BII (http://ag.ca.gov/law.php). Padillah (talk) 11:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

CBI is the former official acronym of the agency, apparently, but is still used, much like the ATF, CDC, or MI-6, none of which have current full names accurately described by their (historically based) acronyms. To call the CBI fictional (or fictitious) wouldn't be correct, in my interpretation. oknazevad (talk) 19:59, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but those agencies continue to use (ATF and CDC) or, at least, recognize the acronym (the origins of MI-6). The BII in no way refers to itself as the "CBI". The closest thing I could come up with on the BII site was a 2006 PDF that still had the old name and a single page that simply looks like it was overlooked in the name change. I'm not trying to argue that there never was a CBI, simply that there is no longer one. They have deliberately changed the name, this isn't a case of the name no longer fitting - they have made a concerted effort to change the name. Do a search for CBI on the BII site and see how many pages used to have CBI on them. This was a concerted, deliberate effort to change the name. Now, this does raise the question of time setting, if the show is trying to set it's time period back to when there was a CBI then fine. But they've given no indication of this so it would be OR to assume that. With that in mind I don't see a problem describing the CBI as fictitious. Padillah (talk) 22:24, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I don't think there's any period piece intended here, quite the opposite based on the level of tech in the show. I think the only thing that's really going on here was that show creator Bruno Heller was unaware of the CBI to BII name change when the show was created. (it's a very recent change, from only the last few years.) Once the pilot was shot using the older acronym they were stuck.

It seems pretty obvious to me that the agency depicted on the show is intended to be the agency now officially called the BII, right down to the fact the agency is under the Attorney General. But, as this is not a documentary, it is by definition a fictionalized depiction. That intent is why I would not call it ficticious, as the agency on the show is based closely on the real agency, even if it does use an outdated name for it. oknazevad (talk) 13:06, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Jane's touching others

Jane does not have a problem touching others. He spent an entire episode touching people's faces. He uses the discomfort he causes by touching (or getting inappropriately close) as a tool to put others off their guard. He always holding someone's hand in an effort to determine if they are lying... It's just not so. Padillah (talk) 12:43, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Sleeps under the smily face?

Could someone provide some backup to this? I was under the impression that he didn't sleep at all except on the couch in the office, much less under the very smiley face that marks the crime scene. Any help would be appreciated. Padillah (talk) 21:54, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Pilot episode shows that Jane's house is completely bare except for mattress on the floor in the room where his wife and daughter were murdered. The smilie face is still on the wall. 71.182.181.56 (talk) 06:21, 8 February 2010 (UTC)