There are a wide variety of creative and interesting crime shows on television today that a great deal of today’s society follow. Shows such as CSI, Law and Order, Forensic Files, and NCIS are becoming increasingly popular and the way the shows are scripted makes for compelling television. While these shows are indeed interesting, they are giving viewers a false sense of knowledge when it comes to the real world of forensic science and the criminal justice system as a whole. The “CSI Effect” is causing everyday jurors to feel more confident in decision making when it comes to cases they are trying which is causing them to need more evidence to convict even for the simplest of crimes.
The “CSI Effect” is “the phenomenon in which jurors hold …show more content…
Although it would seem that this might not have any consequences because it is making jurors more cautious when convicting, it is, in fact, making jurors too cautious and causing an expectation of scientific evidence in every case which is resulting in defendants being “wrongfully” acquitted (Barak …show more content…
The results of the study were that “almost half of the surveyed jurors expected the prosecutor to present scientific evidence of some kind in every criminal case. They found that as the seriousness of the charge increases, so does the expectation for scientific evidence. Almost three-quarters of the jurors expected scientific evidence of some kind in cases of murder, attempted murder, or rape. Even in the less serious cases of breaking and entering or theft, a significant number of jurors expected some scientific evidence. Specifically as to DNA evidence, the jurors in the Shelton, Kim, and Barak study had high expectations in the more serious cases, with almost half expecting DNA evidence in murder or attempted murder cases and almost three-quarters expecting DNA evidence in cases charging rape or other criminal sexual conduct” (Barak 153). This study found that frequent watchers of these forensic type shows had higher expectations than those who did not watch
The “CSI Effect” is “the phenomenon in which jurors hold …show more content…
Although it would seem that this might not have any consequences because it is making jurors more cautious when convicting, it is, in fact, making jurors too cautious and causing an expectation of scientific evidence in every case which is resulting in defendants being “wrongfully” acquitted (Barak …show more content…
The results of the study were that “almost half of the surveyed jurors expected the prosecutor to present scientific evidence of some kind in every criminal case. They found that as the seriousness of the charge increases, so does the expectation for scientific evidence. Almost three-quarters of the jurors expected scientific evidence of some kind in cases of murder, attempted murder, or rape. Even in the less serious cases of breaking and entering or theft, a significant number of jurors expected some scientific evidence. Specifically as to DNA evidence, the jurors in the Shelton, Kim, and Barak study had high expectations in the more serious cases, with almost half expecting DNA evidence in murder or attempted murder cases and almost three-quarters expecting DNA evidence in cases charging rape or other criminal sexual conduct” (Barak 153). This study found that frequent watchers of these forensic type shows had higher expectations than those who did not watch