Inaccurate Criminal Investigation

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

Criminology is continuously changing and developing. Advances of technology have made media our primary news source for crime. We believe the stories told by our local news media, not doubting a word because these sources are supposedly reliable. Nevertheless, they sometimes do spread false information. It may be intentional or unintentional. According to Cohen, media presence amplifies a problem which did not previously exist (Steeves and Milford, 2015) thus creating a moral panic. As media influence increases, it is necessary for criminologists to study moral panics, such as the Columbine School shootings or the Hurricane Katrina aftermath.

The CSI Effect is said to have poisoned the minds of jurors and their expectations of presenting evidence by the forensic science T.V. shows like CSI (Crime Scene Investigators) influence their perceptions of jurors being able to provide forensic evidence. “Using the fact that Hollywood could determine the outcome of case by letting the guilty go free, but in a society where the criminal justice system has convicted many people who was innocent.” (McRobert’s, Mills, & Possley, 2005, P. 1). Juror’s have demanded the use of forensic science for forensic evidence in criminal trials which means that prosecutors will have to provide more of the proof of juror’s to get a conviction. CSI Effect believe that crimes show such as CSI have little to no affect on juror’s actions to make a

I agree that our criminal justice system must utilize ways to adapt to the increased expectations of those who we ask to cast votes of guilty or not guilty; keeping in mind that criminals watch television also and there is evidence they are changing their behavior. However, most of the techniques used in crime shows are, at least grounded in truth. CSI collect and analyze evidence,

The CSI Effect is a phenomenon reported by prosecutors who claim that television shows based on scientific crime solving have made actual jurors reluctant to vote to convict when forensic evidence is neither necessary nor available (Nolo, 2011). The criminalistics and criminology aspects are especially exaggerated; most evidence that is shown is not as clear in real life. Fingerprints of victims are not as easily marked or proven. DNA evidence which requires certain equipment/technology in the lab, is usually too expensive, and isn’t even something you would see in most crime labs. Crimes are also not as traceable as they seem on TV. Many crime scenes take up to week’s sometimes even months to get all of the evidence and process it. The CSI Effect is influencing the public because the more popular those crime shows get the number of student majors in forensics science has increased rapidly. They are interested in the fast pace quick higher level learning skills that they portray in the TV only to learn that it is nothing like how it is on TV. The CSI Effect is also affecting the real world of criminal justice because it creates unreasonable expectations in the minds of jurors (Hoffmeister, 2011). They want and expect scientific evidence linking the defendant to the crime

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

Theorist Surette (1998), looks at ‘the law of opposites’, this is the opposite view of the official statistics. It shows that: Property crime is underrepresented, fictional police officers catch the criminal and fictional sex crimes are committed by strangers rather than acquaintances. Looking at the theory we can relate to popular TV Shows such as Dexter (2013), in which portrays the police officers as incompetent. This glamourizes the crime as criminals begin to believe they are able to get away with the deviance / criminal act.

Different forms of media, such as television, films, books, and newspapers, have similar ways of portraying the criminal justice system. The media constructs representations of crime and justice and in doing this, it presents an often dramatized representation of the criminal justice system; and this does not just influence on the public’s lay view of crime but also for criminal justice experts (Marsh, 2014). In the media it is commonly known that they are a business, and businesses need to make a profit. Because of this, the media’s portrayal of the criminal justice system has been very negative. With the news, their main purpose is to produce what sells. So many of them would edit the information they have gathered and make a story that will sell. Also the media does not show the full process of the criminal justice as a quick process, while in fact it is not. For example, last year, Netflix released a short series called “Making A Murderer”. Most people claimed that they feel like they can solve a crime when they finished watching a series. While that series is very factual, it does not hit every single step of the criminal justice process.

American Crime Obsession With crime shows like “Making a Murderer,” “the Killing,” “Luther,” and “The Fall” within reach of every person with a Netflix account, it makes it pretty easy to assume most people have, or will, watch a crime show at some point in their life. Americans are so obsessed with crime and the killers that drive it, which is why we are drawn towards the fictional crime tales. We have been apart of so many involuntary crimes and horrible events which shape our country, yet we continue to take these awful events and seek out more information and news about it. The real reason we’ve become so obsessed with true crime is because of the desire that people have to learn more about the legal system, as well becoming intrigued by watching fictional crime shows.

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

It is no secret that the media is able to influence the general public’s opinion on most anything. Whether the subject is fiction or non, movies, documentaries, and the news especially, are capable of swaying the public’s opinions and perceptions one way or the other. Not even the world of law enforcement is safe from the media’s purview (Barlow, M. H. and Barlow, D. E. and Chiricos T. G., 1995), as media portrayals often romanticize law enforcement as a well oiled machine that always gets the bad guy, and has a perfect relationship with the public. On top of this, the media has displayed a poor habit of portraying crime as predominantly violent and racial, rather than showing the whole picture(Gilliam, F. D. and Iyengar, S. and Simon, A. and Wright, O., 1996). In this paper, the motives driving these depictions, as well as the scope and effect of the media’s influence on public perception of law enforcement, will be explored and discussed.

The media plays the role as entertaining and a source of information to its viewers, however, with the current crime trends, most viewers have the perceptions that our criminal justice system is lacking in areas of proper sentencing and protecting the viewers. All this is based upon what we see in the media is the information reliable or not? I say this because of hearing about news personality lying about their experience only to booster the networks rating. When the criminal justice system has contact with the media, most will withhold information or give misleading information to justify the capture or conviction of a criminal. So not only are we questioning the efficacy of the criminal justice system but the media as well.

Watching reality-based law enforcement shows we realize that people commit different types of crimes that are sometimes unexplainable and bizarre. While watching these types of shows I always keep in mind the crime that was committed and by whom it was committed and what motivated the perpetrator. The cases shown in these shows varied in the types of crimes that were committed. Some crimes where worse than others but my focus was keep record of certain information of the crimes. The information that was recorded was the gender/race of the suspects and officers, the type of crime. With this information it can be determined what is predominant in each case.

All things considered, what the media covers and how much they chose to cover has significantly changed over the years, the most apparent in crime coverage. This consistent coverage of crime gives the audience an opportunity to interact with the media. They can feel a part of the intensity of an investigation, cheer on the enforcers, become immersed in their stereotypes. On the other hand, they can appreciate deviance for its resilience to overcome and resist