Across both the personal and investigative strands of the novel, gifts of jewelry acquire meanings that shift according to the intentions behind them, the relationships they represent, and the emotional responses they provoke. Cumulatively, jewelry functions as a symbol of desire, manipulation, memory, and power. The symbol first appears in a deceptively casual form when Shanker declares that jewelry is the surest way to win back his girlfriend: “Women never say no to jewellery […] They don’ chuck it, an’ then they fink about you every time they fuckin’ look at it” (168). His logic foreshadows how gifts in the novel can serve ulterior motives.

The silver charm bracelet Strike gifts Robin, composed of symbols that reflect their shared history, serves as an implicit declaration of his love. Although the bracelet is aesthetically “clunky and inelegant,” for Robin, “nothing else anyone gave her […] could possibly mean as much” (329). The gift is an emblem of Strike’s unspoken affection and a pure expression of the bond between them. Its deeply personal nature contrasts with Strike’s habitual reserve, revealing more sincerity than any verbal declaration he might have attempted.

Robin’s response to jewelry from the men in her life captures her emotional dilemma. Her joy at Strike’s charm bracelet is juxtaposed with her horror upon discovering the “small diamond solitaire” (721) that Murphy has hidden in his wardrobe. Tasteful and conventional, the engagement ring represents the orderly, traditional life Murphy wants, echoing the sapphire ring Robin’s first husband, Matthew, gave to her. That both Murphy’s ring and Strike’s bracelet remain unworn and hidden by the novel’s end underscores Robin’s indecision. She cannot commit to Murphy’s vision of stability, nor can she fully acknowledge the implications of Strike’s gift and her own feelings for him. Galbraith uses these gifts of jewelry as a symbolic battleground for her conflicted desires and anxieties about the future.

In the investigative narrative, jewelry often signals vulnerability, danger, or exploitation. Niall gives Rena Liddell a silver necklace as an act of compassion, but its protective intent cannot ultimately shield her from grief, mental illness, or institutional neglect. Similarly, the violet bracelet Tyler gives to Chloe (Jolanda) is a token of affection and shared secrecy, tied to her real birth name, yet it inadvertently triggers the chain of events that leads Griffiths to murder both Tyler and Chloe/Jolanda. What begins as an intimate gift becomes a symbol of catastrophic exposure. Griffiths’s weaponization of jewelry is illustrated in the ruby necklace he gives to Sofia Medina and Sapphire Neagle. Strike’s observation that “for Griffiths, that ruby necklace seemed to be the equivalent of Daesh’s orange execution jumpsuits” (847) highlights how the serial murderer uses jewelry as a grooming tool to lure and mark victims. Across these varied contexts, Galbraith highlights the contrast between jewelry that expresses a genuine emotional connection and gifts that exert exploitative control.