Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on criminal justice process investigation
An essay on forensic science
An essay on forensic science
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on criminal justice process investigation
Besides the classic medical drama, some of the most popular and most watched shows from week-to-week depict the criminal investigation process. Some of these shows revolve around the courtroom. As viewers, we are able to hear about the crime and watch lawyers argue a case. Other shows take us inside the police station to see how law enforcement operate and solve cases. However, the general public’s interest in crime solving seemed to begin when a certain show came around that took us into the forensic lab and explained the intricacies of evidence, from fibers to DNA. From the first explanation of how evidence can make or break a case, the world was hooked. The world was so enthralled with crime investigation that our court system would soon …show more content…
According to David Neubauer and Henry Fradella, the CSI effect is when “jurors wrongfully acquit guilty defendants when no scientific evidence is presented (2014). This is problematic because our criminal justice system relies on an unbiased jury to reach a verdict. If a juror has an inaccurate idea about what evidence determines a person’s guilt, then this could affect the outcome of a case. This could also potentially alter how a legal team would choose to argue a case, especially when it comes to the prosecution where they need the jury to give a guilty verdict. However, the CSI effect can also affect other areas besides how a jury views evidence. The CSI effect deals with the overall misconception the public has about who investigates crimes, how these crimes are investigated, and how evidence is used to determine guilt …show more content…
The inaccuracies with how crimes are investigated and solved on television can become problematic for many reasons. The jury can have misconceptions about what is and is not decent evidence. They could also hold investigators, and the entire legal team, to an unrealistic standard. Therefore, this could potentially lead to cases not receiving necessary guilty verdicts (Ramsland, 2009). In conclusion, while some experts argue that this phenomenon is not something to worry about when it comes to potential juror members, these types of shows will continue to be popular. Therefore, it is important to educate potential jurors about discrepancies within these shows so they can formulate a logical conclusion about the presented
Other evidence located within the grave consisted of a generic watch, two cigarette butts, a button, a washer and a shell casing. All of these could be analysed for finger prints and DNA. The cigarette butts would also show a serial number indicating the brand (shown in Figure 3), which can be useful if it is found a victim or offender smokes a particular type of cigarette.
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
In the following literature review, scholarly and peer-reviewed journals, articles from popular news media, and surveys have been synthesized to contribute to the conversation pertaining to forensics in pop culture in the courtroom and the overall criminal justice system. This conversation has become a growing topic of interest over just the past few years since these crime shows started appearing on the air. The rising popularity of this genre makes this research even more relevant to study to try to bring back justice in the courtroom.
As one of the seven jury deliberations documented and recorded in the ABC News television series In the Jury Room the discussions of the jurors were able to be seen throughout the United States. A transcript was also created by ABC News for the public as well. The emotions and interactions of the jurors were now capable of being portrayed to anyone interested in the interworkings of jury deliberations. The first task,...
...the public opinion of government trustworthiness. Studies have not been able to clearly define if the CSI effect has had an actual influence on the outcome of trials. However surveys indicate many possible jurors believe they are more knowledgeable about criminology after watching the shows. CSI viewers may become more knowledgeable about forensic science and investigation processes but that knowledge does not affect the outcome of the criminal justice process.
Crime is a common public issue for people living in the inner city, but is not limited to only urban or highly populated cities as it can undoubtedly happen in small community and rural areas as well. In The Real CSI, the documentary exemplified many way in which experts used forensic science as evidence in trial cases to argue and to prove whether a person is innocent or guilty. In this paper, I explained the difference in fingerprinting technology depicted between television shows and in reality, how DNA technology change the way forensics evidence is used in the court proceedings, and how forensic evidence can be misused in the United States adversarial legal system.
Simpson case was an extraordinary example of the importance of ethical considerations during any investigative process. It was very unique, in that O.J Simpson, at the time, was very wealthy and was able to afford a great defense team (Gordon III, 1997). This case was also very unique, in that the extensive experience of the defense team was able to highlight their perspective on the poor handling of evidence and the costly mistakes made by the prosecution. It opened the eyes of the LAPD and forensic entities across the country (Gordon III, 1997). The decision of the jury was not a reflection of the prosecutions’ lack of evidence, however, it was the unethical behavior of the investigators involved, the questionability of the handling of the evidence by investigators and forensic analysts (Gordon III,
The crime scene was then examined and a list of possible pieces of evidence were recorded down. Including a sketch of the crime scene, Anna Garcia’s house, with the locations of all of the pieces of evidence. All of these items listed help develop a theory about Anna’s death. This theory then helped establish a list of possible suspects. The person of interest list included a number of four individuals and each one had a relation with Anna. The list included (1) Alex Garcia- Anna’s ex-husband. They had an unpleasant divorce the year before and in a result Alex quickly remarried a much younger woman, while Anna remained single. Alex and his newlywed wife are expecting to have a baby soon. Although, Alex may be suffering from a few financial
A jury is a panel of citizens, selected randomly from the electoral role, whose job it is to determine guilt or innocence based on the evidence presented. The Jury Act 1977 (NSW) stipulates the purpose of juries and some of the legal aspects, such as verdicts and the right of the defence and prosecution to challenge jurors. The jury system is able to reflect the moral and ethical standards of society as members of the community ultimately decide whether the person is guilty or innocent. The creation of the Jury Amendment Act 2006 (NSW) enabled the criminal trial process to better represent the standards of society as it allowed majority verdicts of 11-1 or 10-2, which also allowed the courts to be more resource efficient. Majority verdicts still ensure that a just outcome is reached as they are only used if there is a hung jury and there has been considerable deliberation. However, the role of the media is often criticized in relation to ensuring that the jurors remain unbiased as highlighted in the media article “Independent Juries” (SMH, 2001), and the wide reporting of R v Gittany 2013 supports the arguments raised in the media article. Hence, the jury system is moderately effective in reflecting the moral and ethical standards of society, as it resource efficient and achieves just outcomes, but the influence of the media reduces the effectiveness.
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.
Media portrayal of crime and criminal justice has become incredibly widespread in the last decade, with crime often considered both a source of news and entertainment. As a source of entertainment, crime and criminal justice have emerged as central themes across various sources of media. Most individuals do not have any direct experience with the criminal justice system, so their only source of information on this topic is the media. Particularly in television shows, portrayals of crime and criminal justice can be seen in everything from courtroom dramas to nightly news programs. Indeed, the popularity of crime shows has lead to some of television’s most enduring series, such as Law and Order and CSI. Because of this, fictional
Every year, innocent people are given prison sentences to crimes they did not commit. Statistics are kept by the Criminal Justice Department on the number of wrongful convictions but according to research, it has been estimated to 5% of the cases tried have resulted in a false conviction. Reasons due to false convictions are misidentification from a witness, false confessions, forensic mistakes, DNA testing, coercion, and more. A number of ideas will be argued as possible solutions to help lower the number of wrongful convictions that are given the innocent people who fall trapped to this system. A study by Barry Scheck [2008] on forensic evidence revealed that not more than 20% of the felony cases involved biological evidence [Scheck, 2008, p.4]. Although the number seems low, the proper handling and testing of biological evidence can offer some hope to an innocent suspect. Other variables that lead to wrongful convictions are false statements and confessions. Which that can be taken from suspects through questionable actions of methods. [Leo, Ofshe, 1998] or that pooled from jailhouse snitched, informants, or cooperators. Many people believe that the use of evidence has been corrupted in the system while others believe that cases where evidence is used are deviations from the typical process. “Eyewitness misidentifications were a factor in over 70% of wrongful convictions.” The knowledge that a free citizen could be unreasonably sentenced to prison or executed by the State is totally opposed the thought of shrewd treatment likely in the United States. DNA is the leading cause to wrongful convictions. If the problem is to be talked and fixed, it must first be understood; not as it is seen, but as it is. It is difficult to express...
Holmgren and Judith Fordham examine “The CSI Effect and the Canadian and the Australian Jury” (2011). Two studies were undertaken. The first studied Canadian people who were eligible to be jurors. 74.9% of the random sample watched crime drama television regularly, and nearly the same percentage, 73.1%, felt a conviction would be difficult for them with no forensic evidence (2011, p. S65-S66). Such a statement is problematic because forensic evidence can not always be obtained, thus exemplifying the integral problem with the CSI effect. In the Australian study, real jurors were questioned on forensic testimony, their comprehension, and its use in court. When asked if forensic evidence was more important than other evidence, only 21.9% said it was “not at all”, while the other 70.5% said it held more importance than other evidence, whether to some extent, a considerable extent, or an extreme extent (p. S64). Despite the aforementioned statistics, the authors conclude the CSI effect is nonexistent (p.
Forensic evidence can provide just outcomes in criminal matters. However, it is not yet an exact science as it can be flawed. It can be misrepresented through the reliability of the evidence, through nonstandard guidelines, and through public perception. Forensic science can be dangerously faulty without focus on the ‘science’ aspect. It can at times be just matching patterns based on an individual’s interpretations. This can lead to a miscarriage of justice and forever alter a person’s life due to a perceived “grey area” (Merritt C, 2010) resulting in a loss of confidence in the reliability of forensic evidence.
Collecting evidence from a crime scene is a crucial aspect of solving crimes. Before evidence can be seized, there must first be a court order approving the search of the crime scene and the seizure of the evidence found at the scene. Standard protocol for officers is for them to always use latex gloves, avoid plastic bags, double wrap small objects, package each object separately, and to collect as much evidence as possible. It is better to have too much evidence than to not have enough. There are countless amounts of evidence that can be found at a crime scene.