CSI On T. V. Compared To Real Life

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

Many jurors may be more decisive based on actual development in forensic technology; it is likely under the CSI affect to acquit a guilty defendant. The weakness of CSI effect does have a negative effect on the criminal justice system. There a lot of misconceptions associate with crime shows. For instance, in shows such as Law & Order and Crime Scene Investigation, DNA test results only seem to take an hour or a few hours when in reality, it can take days or weeks to get the results back, depending on which DNA testing facility is used.

Nearly anyone you ask would be familiar with the television show CSI. The crime lab is colorful and high-tech with all of the fun toys and machines that analysts use to test the ever abundant amount of forensic evidence from every crime scene. It makes for an exciting drama that you cannot help but get immersed in—it also gives us a false illusion, however, creating what has been dubbed as the “CSI effect” (Baskin, 2011). This effect describes the idea that crime shows such as CSI generate unreal expectations, making viewers believe that forensic evidence should be existent in all criminal trials, therefore affecting their overall perspective on a case (Baskin, 2011). But in reality, forensic labs are not that glamorous. In fact, the

Forensic Science has contributed to our world a great deal. People often misunderstand Forensic Science and believe it is much more capable than it really is. As a matter of fact what you see on T.V. is around 80% false or over exaggerated in some way. To Start of, Criminal Investigation is the largest and most known form of Forensic Science. Some of the more known areas include; Fingerprinting, Ballistics, DNA Identification, Fiber Samples, Computer Animation, Documentation analysis, etc. To get this out of the way in the beginning, what you saw on last night’s law and order is far from the truth. Things they do in a matter of hours take months at a time, and most of the time aren’t even plausible concepts.

In March 2005, CBS News Correspondent, Brian Dakss (2005), wrote an article which referenced the “CSI effect” after he reported, “It seems the popular CBS TV show on crime scene investigators is having an effect on real-life jurors. They want a clear trail of evidence, or they won 't vote guilty." The Early Show, national correspondent Hattie Kauffman stated, “More than 60 million people watch the CSI shows every week, which means a lot of potential jurors now have high expectations of forensic evidence. The CSI Effect is felt in courtrooms from coast to coast” (Dakss, 2005)

The CSI Effect is the belief that television crime shows are effecting decisions made in the court rooms from jurors. Prosecutors and Judges believe that these shows are causing jurors to be out of touch with reality when it comes to making a decision about a case in the court room. The Jurors are said to be out of touch with reality because they have a demand for conclusive scientific evidence. People who experience the CSI Effect tend to think they are experts in the field. Many forensic professionals have faced the occasional person at a crime scene telling them how to do their jobs the way they saw it on CSI (The CSI Effect-Crime Museum, n.d.).

The CSI Effect is becoming to take it’s place in courtrooms and the prosecutors aren 't liking it. Prosecutors are feeling there is no hope for getting a conviction when it’s come to the CSI Effect because they believe that it has control over the juror’s applying justice to criminal. The CSI Effect is being criticized for not allowing prosecutors a fair chance at a conviction in a jury trial for the belief that Jurors are influenced by what they see on T.V shows and how they believe that the use of forensic science should be used more to prove a person guilty of a crime. The CSI Effect is to be determined if whether or not it can affect the way a case is determined in the eyes of the jury.

As a final point, being a CSI is the career for me because working in the law department is a dream of mine and it’s something I want to accomplish. For this career I will work very hard to become a CSI by getting a bachelor's degree in forensic science. From all the information I researched now I know what I will need to do to be able to become the investigator I want to be. From this researched I learned what it is that a criminal investigator does it made me understand more about what the career I want is all about and what is required to be professional for this career. This research will help me later when I am in college and working for this major because I know more information about this career that I will need to do to become an investigator.

There is even an interactive exhibit known as “CSI: The Experience” in Orlando, Florida where people can pay to try out their investigative skills in crime scenes and laboratories similar to ones that real forensic specialists use.

Have you ever watched a crime scene drama on television and now believe you are a forensic science expert? This is what you call the “Crime Scene Investigation Effect (CSI)”. It came into light in the early 2000’s. In 2008, Monica Robbers, an American criminologist, defined the CSI Effect as, “the phenomenon in which jurors hold unrealistic expectations of forensic evidence and investigation techniques, and have an increased interest in the discipline of forensic science”. (Economist 2010) Millions are watching these CSI drama TV shows. In 2012-13, NCIS: Naval Criminal Investigative Service, was named the most popular watched television program in America, bringing in more viewers than Sunday Night Football according to Mancini, author of The "CSI Effect" In an Actual Juror Sample: Why Crime Show Genre May Matter.

Like you see in the Crime scene investigation shows like CSI and Bones, there are many things that go into investigating shows a lot of those things happen but it takes much longer than forty or sixty minutes to solve the crime. While crime scene investigating is very serious job, collecting evidence at crime scenes requires education and knowing of what you're doing, requires hard work, and it can be difficult to perform this job.

In this video Correspondent LOWELL BERGMAN questions the scientific validity of forensic science. He also expresses that it is not as simple as it appears on television shows. Detective. Joanna Grivetti who is a crime scene investigator in Richmond, California explains that the real life CSI is getting dirty, smelling things you don’t want to smell, seeing things you don’t want to see and dealing with blood in order to collect evidence that may seem small at the time, but will ultimately (possibly) be a big deal in solving the case.

There has been a lot of research intending to fully discover the extent of the CSI effect television that has found its impact to be negative. Of the multitudes of negative impacts of the CSI effects, among the most prevalent are the unrealistic expectations that viewers have of DNA and other types of forensic evidence in the courtroom. In Ley, Jankowski, and Brewer’s study, they analyzed a large sample of CSI episodes for their content relating to forensic science. The study found that that in 94% of all episodes in the sample the detectives used DNA evidence to solve cases. Also, in 88% of all cases shown, the

CSI will be called to court to give evidence and expertise to the judge, jury and barristers depending on how serious the case is. When appearing in court you must dress smartly, for example, A suit or a sensible dress, when a beeing called upon you will be swearing an oath and hold a bible while doing so, the must state the name and relevant qualification and occupation and their employer, for

The episode showed many realistic and unrealistic things that were astonishing. . Jeffrey Toobin, a CNN wrote an op-ed in the New Yorker explaining the impact of television and the court room. Toobin points out that CSI the show had glamourized the investigative process and the science on how the results were actually given. (Toobin, 2007) The realistic things that were noticed were how they gathered the bodies and body parts. They were tagged with identification and taken to an area to be examined further. They were able to get the killers finger prints while he was in the hospital because he was the only survivor of the crash. The photographer took photographs of the crimes scene and how the investigators conducted their jobs. They interviewed the next of kin immediately after determining the identity of the passengers.