blog




  • Essay / The Csi Effect and Why It's a Problem

    Have you ever seen TV shows like CSI Los Angeles and Criminal Minds? Some of these TV shows are completely scandalous. But some are real and are based on real cases. The problem with these shows is that they don't accurately show how crimes are solved. Many people watch CSI shows and think that the way crimes are solved is actually how real-life cases work. This is called the CSI effect and it's a real problem. Juries watch these CSI shows and think crimes are solved like they are on TV. This led to many false prosecutions. Without these TV shows, some people would not have wasted years of their lives. Time is a precious thing and as human beings we don't have much of it. Being put in prison for a crime you didn't commit is crazy. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essayIn recent years, the CSI effect has become more common. This changed the focus of the courtroom because most shows are based on real cases. The line between fiction and non-fiction has blurred considerably. The television programs feature real cases, but they have been severely edited to add dramatic effect. “For example, the show 48 Hours presented a 35-year-old case.” The CSI effect works by making jurors believe they need strong DNA evidence to arrest someone. But in most cases, DNA is not a major piece of evidence. In some cases, the culprit might be caught in the act, but juries won't convict them because they don't have strong DNA evidence like on the shows. To find out if the CSI effect is a real problem, Gregg Barak and Kim Young, professors at Eastern Michigan University, served a thousand jurors. Jurors were asked about their expectations and requirements for scientific investigations, as well as what they watched on television. Their goal was to find out whether the decisions jurors make are based on the television shows they constantly watch. If they are right and jurors are affected by CSI TV shows, then people may have been wrongly prosecuted. The studies showed that about a quarter expected DNA evidence, half expected scientific evidence in every case, and a quarter expected fingerprint evidence. Jurors expected to see different types of physical evidence. By physical evidence, I mean fingerprints, hair strands, DNA and ballistic evidence. The next part of the survey focuses on the shows they watched. If you watch one law show, you probably watch others. About half of the jurors admitted to watching CSI-related shows. CSI viewers generally have higher expectations for evidence than non-CSI viewers. CSI observers are more likely to need scientific evidence for specific cases. There are cases where CSI viewers will be convicted without physical evidence. Like when there is an eyewitness account of what happened. In rape cases, jurors were less likely to convict without DNA evidence. Gregg Banks and Kim Young believe that the CSI effect is not as influential in business as many think. They said: "Even though CSI viewers had higher expectations of scientific evidence than viewers..