Jury Acquittal

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

Since the time that the scientific science dramatization "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation" turned into a tremendous hit and generated its fans, reporters have been worried about what they instituted the "CSI Effect." The hypothesis behind the effect is that fans of the well-known show disguise misguided judgments about the law that they bring with them into the court as jurors. In this way, the trepidation is that the TV show is at last influencing the results of trials - and not in a great manner. Criminal justice researchers have started to study the inquiry of whether nationals who are called to serve on juries bring unreasonable desires and convictions to the court as a consequence of TV projects. The impact that these projects may have on the jurors, their desires, and their choices is known as the CSI effect.

Textbooks are required and can be purchased from the ED MAP Online Bookstore (http://www.edmapbookstore.com/storefront/index/OUBSP) or from most online book retailers.

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)

Unfortunately, life does not always imitate art. Evidence proved that in a number of Durnal studies, that exposure to forensic science television drama series has altered the American legal system in complex and far-reaching ways. Jurors think they have a thorough understanding of science they have seen presented on television, when they do not. In a case cited by Durnal, jurors in a murder trial brought to the judge’s attention that a bloody coat introduced as evidence was not tested for DNA. The defendant admitted being present at the murder scene, so the test would not have thrown light on the identity of the true culprit. The judge stated that television is to thank for jurors knowing what DNA tests could do, but not when it was appropriate to use them. Another study revealed 62% of defense lawyers and 69% of judges agreed that jurors had unrealistic expectations of forensic evidence. Approximately half of the respondents in each category felt that jury selection was taking longer than it used to, because they had to be sure that prospective jurors were not judging scientific evidence by television standards (The CSI Effect,

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

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

Within this paper, I will clarify more about the CSI effect, previous studies on crime-show-viewing habits and a related theory of justice relevant to class.This topic is important to our justice system because people are being found not guilty or being acquitted because of the lack of forensic evidence in jury trials. It is unethical for jurors who watch these shows and base real criminal trials on fictional CSI shows that use fantasy technology and sometimes unnecessary forensic science.

What is the CSI Effect and does it’s effect have an impact on juror’s decision making? “The CSI Effect- defines the impact crime dramas, such as CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, have on juror’s decision –making process (Parker, 2)”. The Article The Portrayal of the American Legal System in Prime Time Television Crime Dramas; investigated how the legal system is portrayed in prime time network television. “Each week CSI drew in audiences averaging more than 10 million viewers (Parker, 109)”. These episodes portrayed forensic scientist using expensive and advanced equipment to do DNA testing and evaluate gunshot residue left at crime scenes. The article The Verdict on Television discusses “The

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

There is a television in most ever persons home worldwide in 2015, and in America specifically, the problem at hand is a transparent falsity. That problem being, how criminal cases are solved and prosecuted. The founding fathers created a document that Americans see as the greatest constitution of all time, based on the longevity, until now. In the quote from the constitution above, the founding fathers set forth the right for a speedy trial, by an impartial jury, in the district of the crime committed, to be confronted by the witnesses against him (U.S. Const. Amend. 6). Unfortunately, due to what is called “The CSI Effect”, these stipulations have fallen short. According to Byers, Author/editor of The CSI Effect: Television, Crime, and Governance, the CSI effect is defined as a belief in the near-infallibility of forensic science and its ability to solve all crimes. At the 2002 conference of the American Association for the advancement of Science, forensic anthropologist Max Houck described the CSI effect as an “infallible Juggernaut” which leads people to believe that science, as portrayed on television, can determine guilt or innocence beyond the shadow of a doubt ( Byers, p. 3). The name “CSI effect” specifically comes from the television show CSI that depicts exactly what Byers described above. CSI is the child of many other shows on television that show seemingly

“Whereas the trial/crime film used to be a relatively niche genre, in recent years, especially in the last two or three, there has been a veritable explosion in the number of trial and crime documentaries across TV” (Bruzzi, 2016, para. 1). There are many television shows and movies that are a part of this same genre, but Criminal Minds stands out because of how realistic the show is and the impact it makes on the viewers. Every episode of criminal minds comes to life right before your eyes and draws you in for the entire day. Although some episodes are scarier than others, every single person that is interested in watching “Criminal Minds” can find an episode they would enjoy

It is also theorized that a juror’s decision can be made with the events from fictional crime shows being a factor. The theory of the CSI effect takes into account how the dramatic portrayal of crime and investigation on TV can influence the thoughts of the public eye (Mancini). Any decision, in court or not, that is based on fictional TV programs end up negatively affecting the general population. It occurs because the people are not able to distinguish between the morals of reality and the dramatic play on TV. Overall, the outcomes of over-representation and desentization from the fictional crime shows puts a negative effect on the