The mass media genre known as true crime is dismissed often as a more sensational, less reliable iteration of traditional crime journalism. Consumer and editorial confusion exists because there is no overarching criteria determining what is, and what is not, true crime. To that extent, the complete history of true crime’s origins and its best practitioners and works cannot be known with any certainty, and its future forms cannot be anticipated. Scholarship is overdue on an effective criteria to determine when nonfiction murder narratives cease to be long-form crime reporting and become something else. Against the backdrop of this long-evolving, multi-faceted literary/documentary genre, the researcher in this exploratory, qualitative study seeks to (a) examine the historical tension between formal journalism and true crime; (b) reveal how traditional journalism both reviles and plunders true crime for its rhetorical treasures; and (c) explain how this has destabilized the meaning of the term “true crime” to the degree that a more substantive understanding needs to be established. Through a textual analysis of the forms and functions of representative artifacts, the researcher will suggest that a Theory of True Crime could be patterned after time-tested analytic codes created for fiction, but structured in a simple two-stage examination that would test for dominant characteristics of established true crime texts.