1. Introduction
The “CSI Effect” or known as “CSI syndrome” is a term used to describe on how the overstated frictional portrayal of forensic science and technology shown on the crime investigation drama series, such as CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, Law & Order etc. had generated a psychological impact to the judicial system and public, in which there is a raise of unrealistic expectations of forensic science and technology by case victims and trial jurors (Ramsland, 2010) (Vazakidou, Smith and Mawby, 2015) (Wikipedia, 2017). (73 words)
In this review, possible relationship between the forensic fiction and the crime victims’ expectations in regard to the real-life investigation procedures will be explored, where various aspects of the research
…show more content…
fingerprints, DNA) from the scene, in which it is not allowed. It is important for the crime scene investigator to ensure no errors are made at the crime scene and should proceed with the collection of trace evidences immediately upon their arrival at the crime scene. Hence, it is inappropriate to conduct two research surveys with the case victims at the crime scene, as critical evidences such as fingerprints can be easily degraded or destroyed by environmental conditions and any presence of contaminants (Beresford et al., 2012) (Lennard, 2001). Hence, the approach mentioned in the proposal can jeopardise the entire case. (133 words)
2.4. Analysis Lastly, the researcher did not justify in details on the types of statistical tools used to interpret and analyse quantitative data to prove the certainty of the findings on whether there is a possible relationship between the forensic fiction and the crime victims’ expectations. Hence, the researcher’s assumption might sound less credible. (52 words)
3.
…show more content…
Smith, L. (2017) ‘Ethical Considerations in Research’. CH7204: Research Methods. Available at: https://blackboard.le.ac.uk/webapps/blackboard/execute/content/file?cmd=view&content_id=_1204602_1&course_id=_8122_1 (Accessed: 3 March 2017).
6. Smith, L. (2017) ‘Planning Research: Literature Reviews and Research Proposals’. CH7204: Research Methods. Available at: https://blackboard.le.ac.uk/webapps/blackboard/execute/content/file?cmd=view&content_id=_1204601_1&course_id=_8122_1 (Accessed: 3 March 2017).
7. Vazakidou, E., Smith, L.L. and Mawby, R.C. (2015) ‘The CSI Effect and Victims’ Expectations and Satisfaction; The Crime Scene Officer Perspective’ (poster presentation), The annual PG British Society of Criminology conference: Criminology, voyages of critical discovery. Plymouth, UK, 30 June - 1July. Available at: https://www2.le.ac.uk/institution/fpgr-archive/2015/meet/2015/posters/eleni-vazakidou (Accessed: 15 February 2017).
8. Weissman, J., Pratt, L.A., Miller, E.A. and Parker, J.D. (2015) ‘Serious Psychological Distress Among Adults: United States, 2009-2013’, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 203. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db203.pdf (Accessed: 12 March 2017).
9. Wikipedia (2017) CSI effect. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSI_effect (Accessed: 15 February
CBS’s CSI: Crime Scene Investigation exploded into popularity when it aired in 2000, opening doors for the creation of other similar criminal investigative television shows involving forensic evidence such as Cold Case, Criminal Minds, and Bones. Many of these CSI-type shows present a murder or crime solved within an hour-long episode using forensic evidence conceived by glamorized CSI personnel and sometimes fabricated methodologies and technologies that only exist on television. Despite just being shows, one wonders whether these popular shows have skewered public perceptions about forensic evidence in real court cases and have impacted the outcome of court verdicts. The CSI Effect, explained by Kim, et all, was named after the television show
With producing reality shows comes producing inaccuracies in portrayals in order to reach as many viewers and gain as high ratings as possible every week with each new episode. Every day life is boring, yet people tend to be attracted to the relatable shows that portray real life in eccentric ways – ways that they believe could be imitated by the average person. In many cases, these shows could remain harmless, as it is entertainment. No matter how crude or erroneous, it is just television. However, what happens when these sources of amusement actually start being damaging? Research has shown that crime shows like the ever popular CSI: Crime Scene Investigation have started becoming significantly detrimental to criminal cases, influencing a juror's perception of what should realistically be going on with acquittal rates and wrongful convictions, but researchers have also started to find a rising fault in the prosecution, using this false perception to their advantage.
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.
Bond, J. (2007). Value of DNA Evidence in Detecting Crime. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 52(1), 128-136.
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.
The definition of forensic science is any scientific research, method, or theory used to analyze evidence in an attempt to solve legal cases (Cho). In recent years, there has been growing public interest in forensic science, arguably because of the numerous television programs that glamorize its practices. This phenomenon is part of what is known as the CSI effect, or the process through which devoted fans of popular crime dramas develop unrealistic notions of forensic science methods, practices, and their applications in real life cases (Mancini 544; Stevens 37; Ley, Jankowski, and Brewer 52). The CSI effect has had more negative impacts on forensic science and society than positive impacts, especially in regards to what goes on in the minds of jurors who frequently watch television programs about crime. Studying the CSI effect also leads to tough questions about the ethics of portraying real stories to entertain the audience. The use of these true stories is justified in certain contexts, such as instances when societal issues arise, and as long as there is respect toward the privacy of family members and friends involved in such tragedies. The solution to the negative consequences of the CSI effect could be to produce television programs that are somehow informative and entertaining, but this would make it difficult to hold the interest of a viewing audience that craves drama and action.
Another discrepancy between actual forensics and how it is portrayed in the media is the availability of information in databases. There is only a small percentage of the entire population’s fingerprints or DNA samples stored within databases such as the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS). This makes finding a match between a DNA sample or fingerprint difficult, as a match would only be found if the person’s information was already stored within the database. If there is no match previously stored in a database, the fingerprint or DNA sample could be potentially rendered useless within a trial. Typically, in order to perform an analysis, investigators must already have a suspect in mind and request a DNA or fingerprint sample from him or her. If the suspect does not want to provide one however, the sample collected as evidence may not count as valid. The CSI effect creates an idealized image that all crimes can be solved with a hair or drop of blood, but this is not always the case in real life.
With a record of an average 119 television channels available to each household, television dominates American life (MediaBuyerPlanner). This wide assortment of television gives viewers many different realities to imitate, like a small child following and obeying its parent. One of the leading television shows in our society is the CSI franchise, with three different extensions. CSI, and shows similar to it, portray the criminal justice system in a negative light, which causes confusion between reality and fiction. Television is a means of entertainment, yet its influence on today’s generation is powerful and enchanting. Television shows centered on criminal justice are implausible portrayals of reality that create unrealistic expectations of evidence in the courtroom, as well as creating superfluous fear of murder for the viewers.
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.
Forensic psychology is such a complex sub-discipline of psychology, and this complexity makes it difficult to define. The simplest way to define forensic psychology would have to be: sub-di...
Forensic Science, recognized as Forensics, is the solicitation of science to law to understand evidences for crime investigation. Forensic scientists are investigators that collect evidences at the crime scene and analyse it uses technology to reveal scientific evidence in a range of fields. Physical evidence are included things that can be seen, whether with the naked eye or through the use of magnification or other analytical tools. Some of this evidence is categorized as impression evidence2.In this report I’ll determine the areas of forensic science that are relevant to particular investigation and setting out in what method the forensic science procedures I have recognized that would be useful for the particular crime scene.
Quinsey, V. (2009). Are we there yet? stasis and progress in forensic psychology. Canadian Psychology, 50(1), 15-15-21.
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.
With the popularity of television shows such as “CSI: Crime Scene Investigation”, “Bones” and “NCIS” to name a few, jurors have come to expect highly sophisticated, state of the art crime lab facilities with technicians who can solve crimes in a matter of hours with even the most obscure evidence. They also expect those technicians to be reputable and truthful and to present the facts in court. But, there are those who fear that this isn’t always the case and question the autonomy and independence of public crime labs. Most crime labs in the United States are public entities that are directly tied to law enforcement agencies and many times are housed in the same building.