CSI Effect
The CSI Effect, also called CSI syndrome or CSI infection, is due to a variety of portrayals and exaggerations of forensic science in crime drama or television shows like “Crime Scene Investigation” which impact on public perception (Ramsland). The CSI effect also refers to juries asking for more forensic evidence in criminal cases during the trial to improve views of prosecutors effectively the standard of proof. With development of technology, and technology becoming more common throughout society, people might have higher expectations for forensic evidence collection (Shelton).
The term CSI effect is from a television series “Crime Scene Investigation”, which was aired at 2000. CSI narrates a fictional team of crime scene investigators in Las Vegas, the biggest city in Nevada, United States, who crack mystery murder cases through modern forensic techniques. In this drama, each episode will find at least one body. Then, investigators will start their investigations. They will collect and analyze forensic evidence, question witnesses and eventually arrest the suspect. The popularity of this drama also led to two sets of derivative works. They are “CSI: Miami” in 2002 and “CSI: NY” in 2004 respectively. Each of these dramas received success and more similar drama appears. Conversely, the other crime dramas series have associated effects on the CSI, such as “Criminal Minds”, “Bones”, “Naval Criminal Investigative Service” and “Body of Proof” etc. (Ramsland) According to AC Nielsen ratings survey data, there were six crime dramas in the U.S top ten most popular television programs in 2005. CSI also was the ratings winner in November 2007 (Ramsland).
Many popular crime drama series have been criticized as unrealist...
... middle of paper ...
...t is reported that the results are produced by the CSI effect, not only in the United States, also in Australia, the United Kingdom and Germany. Although forensic courses have become more popular, which means more people will choose to enter the crime room to work, some people worry that these programs did not let the students fully prepared to work on actual evidence (Police). After graduation, these students often cannot firmly grasp the basic scientific principles. Many forensic science students saw the simplified procedure in learning and came to a too clear conclusion, which could lead to their biased perception of forensic science (Bergslien). Some police tried to improve the science literacy of these future forensic and jurors and trained them into "CSI citizens" by letting local citizens become familiar with the "real forensic capabilities and limitations".
Since the airing of the CSI: Crime Scene Investigation and the other televised series that followed have led jurors to compare fiction with reality. The shows have changed the view on the real world of forensic science as the series have a world of forensic science of their own. For this paper the televised series titled Bones by forensic anthropologist Kathy Reichs will be used as an example for comparison. In the series Bones Dr. Temperance Brenan arrives at the scene of the crime to examine the skeletal remains found in the scene of the crime equipped with one or more forensic kits. Upon momentarily examining the skeletal remains Dr. Brenan is able to determine the gender, ethnicity, and age. When this type of scenario is compared to nonfictional
CSI: Crime Scene Investigation was introduced to viewers in October 2000. Since that time, the franchise has added two versions in major metropolitan areas, now addressing crime scenarios in Las Vegas, Miami and New York City. Based on the most recent Nielsen ratings for primetime television shows, the CSI franchise claimed approximately 35 million viewers during the 2010 – 2011 viewing season. The popularity of forensic science drama on television has led officers of the court to voice opinions that there is a “CSI effect” which alters the juror pools and outcomes of criminal trial proceedings. The differences between made for television fiction and actual crime solving are many and when jurors consider themselves pseudo-experts those lines may get blurred in the courtroom.
CSIs must photograph/sketch crime scenes, take measurements, make observations, testify against criminals in court, and collect, pack, label, document, and analyze evidence (Career Cruising). All of these tasks CSIs must complete, require them to handle a variety of tools including: cameras, tripods, flashlights, notepads, utensils to collect physical evidence, measuring tapes, rulers, microscopes, fingerprinting kits, and even guns in some cases (Career Cruising). CSI agents collect to different types of evidence, when they investigate a crime (Byrd). The first type of evidence is testimonial evidence, which is the answers CSIs questioning suspects and witnesses are given (Byrd). Physical evidence, which is the other type of evidence, is any type of three-dimensional evidence collected at a crime scene (Byrd). Although different CSI teams from different areas of the world can consist of multiple branches, including: detectives, technicians, medical examiners, scientists, and lab analysts, they still use forensics, which is science and technology, to investigate crimes (Zullo). There is always crime, but when there are no current cases; CSIs go back to old/previous cases (McFadden).
In Richards Willing’s “CSI effect” the author tells the reader how, as a result of crime scene shows’ popularity, the misconceptions they create, and the combining of real life events with TV fantasy, crime scene shows have affected jurors and the oucomes of court cases. The shows’ popularity has increased peoples’ interest in forensic science and has caused workers and students to transfer into the field. The second effect crime scenes created is the misconception concerning when to use forensic tests, as well as misconceptions about the speed and accuracy of forensic workers and machines in tracking and identifying the culprit. Willing tells of a murder trial in Arizona in which the defendant’s bloody coat was listed as evidence, but was not tested. Although the defendant had already told investigators that he was at the scene of the crime, with the jacket, jurors asked for forensic DNA evidence linking the defendant to the bloody coat and to the crime scene. The juror’s exposure to crime scene shows had given them knowledge of forensic tests, but not knowledge of the proper use of the tests. Crime scene shows mix real life with TV fantasy. According to willing’s studies, highly attractive forensic workers and stunning suspects, along with very neat crime scenes on crime scene shows deemphasize the real life violence and brutality of crime. Similarly, tv reality shows have influenced people’s ideas about real life and real relationships through the effects of image, misleading information, and popularity.
In the essay, The CSI Effect by Richard Willing, he explains how television shows have and are affecting todays people and society. One show in particular he mentions is the CBS crime-scene/drama series CSI (Crime Scene Investigation). Willing says that shows like CSI raises jurors’ expectations in courthouses. Some lawyers have said that CSI and related shows have jurors relying too heavily on scientific findings and are not willing to accept those findings without taking into consideration that it was compromised by varying errors. Jurors have learned a lot about DNA tests from these programs, but not taught about the right time to use one in court. This “CSI Effect” is felt beyond the courtroom as well. Some of the science is state-of-the-art
In 2006, over 100 million people in the United States tuned in to watch either CSI or any if the other forensic and criminal investigation related television show each week (CJSG). Since then, the number of viewers has increased rapidly, as well as the amount of television shows with the same type of theme. As a result of the increase of these television programs, researchers are discovering a new phenomenon called the ‘CSI Effect’ that seems to be fueling an interest in forensic science and criminal investigations nationwide. This effect is actually the ability of criminal justice themed television shows to influence and increase victims’, jurors’ and criminals’ ideas about forensics, DNA testing and methods, and criminal investigations (CJSG). Although the connection between the CSI Effect and a criminal’s mind is a growing problem, the CSI Effect influencing jurors in the United States by causing unrealistic expectations for definite forensic evidence, creating an increased ‘knowledge’ about forensic science and by creating an expectation for criminal cases and trials to be equivalent to what happens on popular criminal justice television shows is a much bigger issue.
Therefore, the criminal justice system relies on other nonscientific means that are not accepted or clear. Many of forensic methods have implemented in research when looking for evidence, but the methods that are not scientific and have little or anything to do with science. The result of false evidence by other means leads to false testimony by a forensic analyst. Another issue with forensic errors is that it is a challenge to find a defense expert (Giannelli, 2011). Defense experts are required to help the defense attorneys defend and breakdown all of the doubts in the prosecutors scientific findings in criminal cases. Scientific information is integral in a criminal prosecution, and a defense attorney needs to have an expert to assist he/she in discrediting the prosecution (Giannelli,
Introduction Forensic science has become a major component in criminal investigations, helping to identify offenders, tie suspects to a crime scene or relate a victim to their killer. Typical murders often take as many steps as they feel necessary (picking up bullet casings, covering their victim in lime or acid, vacuuming and bleaching the crime scene) in order to avoid forensic identification of their crime. The research question I am asking is how much forensic science is having an impact on the rarest of murderers, serial killers. This research may help to identify if in fact serial killers are willing to change their behaviors and adapt to the advancement of forensic science. This research may also identify which methods of forensic science are more effective in relation to the investigation serial killers and may also help investigators differentiate between what is part of the modus operandi and what is part of avoiding detection.
Whereas the real picture of forensic evidence is unlike what is represented in movies and television shows where a fingerprint or a trace of hair is found, then it’s game over for the criminal. Reality is not as straightforward. As more people are exposed to the unreal forensic world through television and media the likeliness for a wrong conviction increases with juries assuming the evidence involves more science than what it really does, this is known as the CSI Effect. Further education and training is needed for the people of the court, the forensic specialists, and so called experts. The people in courts do not question any of the ‘professionals’ and just trust in their expertise. The court could overcome this perception by requiring explanation of error rates in a forensic field. To do this, testing examiner error rates will be necessary which means further research. Forensic science has such a large effect on the prosecution of suspects, experts have been known to provide questionable and at times incorrect evidence. When a false conviction occurs the true perpetrator is set free. Once realized, the public doubts the justice system and the reliability of the forensic evidence even more. At this point in time, forensic is an inexact
Take one crime drama series and investigate the respects in which it both: 1) reworks established crime drama formula and conventions; and 2) offers novelty in terms of such aspects as concept, characterisations, episode structure and visual style.
Forensic psychology is an area of psychology that has been rapidly gaining popularity in recent years. Entertainment media’s fascination with the intersection of crime and psychology has fueled the growing interest in the field. According to Jane Tyler Ward, PhD, forensic psychology can be defined as psychology that “emphasizes the application of research and experimentation in other areas of psychology to the legal arena.” Although forensic psychology is popular right now, it was not until 1962 that a court case set the precedent that properly trained psychologists could provide expert testimony (Page 20). Additionally, forensic psychology was not APA (American Psychological Association) certified until 2001 (Page 16). The field of forensic
What exactly are these shows that are causing so much controversy in the criminal justice and forensic science fields? The more well known CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, reeling in almos...
In my opinion, I believe that it is not appropriate to represent forensic science practice in the media. After all, it is all fiction. According to Kim and Barak after their jury survey that have found out that “jurors were more likely to find a defendant guilty than not guilty even without scientific evidence, if the victim or other witnesses testified, except in the case of rape. If the prosecutor relied on circumstantial evidence, the prospective jurors said they would demand some kind of scientific evidence, before they would return guilty verdict” (Shelton, 2008). Jurors depend quite often on scientific evidence which is not always present, hence 40% of science on CSI does not exist in real life. This is evident in the episode when the
Forensic science has now been recognized as an important part of the law enforcement team to help solve crimes and cold cases. The advances in technology are being used each day and we must continue to strive to develop better advances in this field. The recent discovery of using DNA in criminal cases has helped not only positively identify the suspect, but it has helped exonerate hundreds of innocent individuals. “With new advances in police technology and computer science, crime scene investigation and forensic science will only become more precise as we head into the future.” (Roufa, 2017) Forensic science and evidence helps law enforcement officials solve crimes through the collection, preservation and analysis of evidence. By having a mobile crime laboratory, the scene gets processed quicker and more efficiently. Forensic science will only grow in the future to be a benefit for the criminal justice
“The word ‘forensics’ means “connected with the courtroom”; so forensic science is, therefore, concerned with gathering hard evidence that can be presented in a trial” (Innes 9). Forensic science is a science that is applied specifically to legal matters, whether criminal or civil. “Few areas in the realm of science are as widespread and important as forensic science” (Hunter 12). Forensics is the one science that is most commonly used in everyday life. It is also a branch of science that incorporates other branches of science such as biology, chemistry, and etc. Since it is used almost every day “No one can dispute the importance of the contributions to society made by forensic science; the ability to solve crime is undeniably important” (Hunter 13). Forensic science has given criminal investigation a new edge. “Advances in science have opened the door for more effective evidence discovery, howev...