TITLE Madison Ohse Stark State College TITLE A woman sits in front of the tv, her dead stare imitating the corpse on screen. The flashing red and blue lights flood her living room. A mystery; brutal rape and murder, a young girl lost to this world too soon. Throughout the episode, climactic plot twists and shocking “aha” moments keep our viewer enthralled. The CSI team detects miniscule evidence to miraculously convict the monster, and the court case ends with a decisive guilty charge. Commercial break. The lady sorts through the mail, bills, ads, jury duty, charity case. Who cares? CSI is back on. Zero in on the inconspicuous jury duty notice, enhance it with the specialized forensic camera. The viewer nonchalantly discards her …show more content…
Television crime drama such as CSI, Bones, and Law and Order frequently employ a hollywood glam-ified version of forensic science, and TV host Adam Conover parodies forensic science portrayals in crime drama television in his television show Adam Ruins Everything (2015). In his tv-show-within-a-tv-show, CSF: Crime Scene Forensics, he discredits basic beliefs held by CSI watchers. Conovers cites multiple examples of the failings of pseudo forensic science. He explains the polygraph is nothing more than an indication of biological functions, the analysis of forensic evidence like hair and fingerprints is rife with human error, and eyewitness testimony is subject to unconscious biases and influences. Many, if not all, techniques observed by the casual viewer are erroneous.CONSIDER PARAGRAPH BREAK HERE Falsified evidence can cause wrongful convictions and even death. Welner et. al. elaborate on the consequences of invalid forensic procedures in their article “Peer Reviewed Forensic Consultation: Safeguarding Expert Testimony and Protecting the Uninformed Court” (2012). “If the current state of expert testimony does not improve, ‘ultimately the justice system may give up on us’” (as cited by Welner et al., p. 3). To throw out forensic evidence altogether would detriment the judicial process, and allow for more bias to pervade courtroom proceedings. Perhaps the problem …show more content…
Holmgren and Judith Fordham examine “The CSI Effect and the Canadian and the Australian Jury” (2011). Two studies were undertaken. The first studied Canadian people who were eligible to be jurors. 74.9% of the random sample watched crime drama television regularly, and nearly the same percentage, 73.1%, felt a conviction would be difficult for them with no forensic evidence (2011, p. S65-S66). Such a statement is problematic because forensic evidence can not always be obtained, thus exemplifying the integral problem with the CSI effect. In the Australian study, real jurors were questioned on forensic testimony, their comprehension, and its use in court. When asked if forensic evidence was more important than other evidence, only 21.9% said it was “not at all”, while the other 70.5% said it held more importance than other evidence, whether to some extent, a considerable extent, or an extreme extent (p. S64). Despite the aforementioned statistics, the authors conclude the CSI effect is nonexistent (p.
Since the airing of the CSI: Crime Scene Investigation and the other televised series that followed have led jurors to compare fiction with reality. The shows have changed the view on the real world of forensic science as the series have a world of forensic science of their own. For this paper the televised series titled Bones by forensic anthropologist Kathy Reichs will be used as an example for comparison. In the series Bones Dr. Temperance Brenan arrives at the scene of the crime to examine the skeletal remains found in the scene of the crime equipped with one or more forensic kits. Upon momentarily examining the skeletal remains Dr. Brenan is able to determine the gender, ethnicity, and age. When this type of scenario is compared to nonfictional
Kassin, Saul, and Lawrence Wrightsman (Eds.). The Psychology of Evidence and Trial Procedure. Chapter 3. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1985. Print.
This paper will consider eye witness testimony and its place in convicting accused criminals. Psychology online (2013) defines “eye witness testimony” as a statement from a person who has witnessed a crime, and is capable of communicating what they have seen, to a court of law under oath. Eye witness testimonies are used to convict accused criminals due to the first hand nature of the eye witnesses’ observations. There are however many faults within this system of identification. Characteristics of the crime is the first issue that will be discussed in this paper, and the flaws that have been identified. The second issue to be discussed will be the stress impact and the inability to correctly identify the accused in a violent or weapon focused crime. The third issue to be discussed is inter racial identification and the problems faced when this becomes a prominent issue. The fourth issue will be time lapse, meaning, the time between the crime and the eye witness making a statement and how the memory can be misconstrued in this time frame. To follow this will be the issue of how much trust jurors-who have no legal training-put on to the eye witness testimony, which may be faltered. This paper references the works of primarily Wells and Olsen (2003) and Rodin (1987) and Schmechel et al. (2006) it will be argued that eye witness testimony is not always accurate, due to many features; inter racial identification, characteristics of the crime, response latency, and line up procedures therefore this paper will confirm that eyewitness testimonies should not be utilised in the criminal ju...
...the public opinion of government trustworthiness. Studies have not been able to clearly define if the CSI effect has had an actual influence on the outcome of trials. However surveys indicate many possible jurors believe they are more knowledgeable about criminology after watching the shows. CSI viewers may become more knowledgeable about forensic science and investigation processes but that knowledge does not affect the outcome of the criminal justice process.
Crime is a common public issue for people living in the inner city, but is not limited to only urban or highly populated cities as it can undoubtedly happen in small community and rural areas as well. In The Real CSI, the documentary exemplified many way in which experts used forensic science as evidence in trial cases to argue and to prove whether a person is innocent or guilty. In this paper, I explained the difference in fingerprinting technology depicted between television shows and in reality, how DNA technology change the way forensics evidence is used in the court proceedings, and how forensic evidence can be misused in the United States adversarial legal system.
Therefore, the criminal justice system relies on other nonscientific means that are not accepted or clear. Many of forensic methods have implemented in research when looking for evidence, but the methods that are not scientific and have little or anything to do with science. The result of false evidence by other means leads to false testimony by a forensic analyst. Another issue with forensic errors is that it is a challenge to find a defense expert (Giannelli, 2011). Defense experts are required to help the defense attorneys defend and breakdown all of the doubts in the prosecutors scientific findings in criminal cases. Scientific information is integral in a criminal prosecution, and a defense attorney needs to have an expert to assist he/she in discrediting the prosecution (Giannelli,
...T. M. (1997). Can the jury disregard that information? The use of suspicion to reduce the prejudicial effects of retrial publicity and inadmissible testimony. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(11), 1215-1226.
A jury is a panel of citizens, selected randomly from the electoral role, whose job it is to determine guilt or innocence based on the evidence presented. The Jury Act 1977 (NSW) stipulates the purpose of juries and some of the legal aspects, such as verdicts and the right of the defence and prosecution to challenge jurors. The jury system is able to reflect the moral and ethical standards of society as members of the community ultimately decide whether the person is guilty or innocent. The creation of the Jury Amendment Act 2006 (NSW) enabled the criminal trial process to better represent the standards of society as it allowed majority verdicts of 11-1 or 10-2, which also allowed the courts to be more resource efficient. Majority verdicts still ensure that a just outcome is reached as they are only used if there is a hung jury and there has been considerable deliberation. However, the role of the media is often criticized in relation to ensuring that the jurors remain unbiased as highlighted in the media article “Independent Juries” (SMH, 2001), and the wide reporting of R v Gittany 2013 supports the arguments raised in the media article. Hence, the jury system is moderately effective in reflecting the moral and ethical standards of society, as it resource efficient and achieves just outcomes, but the influence of the media reduces the effectiveness.
...tood. This problem has persisted through many cases, clearly highlighting the lack of expertise of juries, and if they do not understand the process and basic rules, then they cannot be a reliable body in determining innocence. Jurors incapability of following evidence inevitably leads to guess work with jury’s finding defendants guilty because ‘he looked like he did it’ and ‘he looks like a nonce so he must of done it’. Moreover, cases have been reported of incredulous juries using absurd methods to ascertain a verdict, like in R v Young 1995, where a Ouija Board was used to determine if the defendant was guilty or not. It is clear that it would be better and far more effective to abolish the jury system, and leave the experts and qualified legal professionals to try defendants, as they understand the process and possess the expertise to make balanced decisions.
The article, “Trial Lawyers Cater to Jurors’ Demands for Visual Evidence,” written by Sylvia Hsieh stresses the importance of visual evidence. Hsieh writes
Forensic evidence can provide just outcomes in criminal matters. However, it is not yet an exact science as it can be flawed. It can be misrepresented through the reliability of the evidence, through nonstandard guidelines, and through public perception. Forensic science can be dangerously faulty without focus on the ‘science’ aspect. It can at times be just matching patterns based on an individual’s interpretations. This can lead to a miscarriage of justice and forever alter a person’s life due to a perceived “grey area” (Merritt C, 2010) resulting in a loss of confidence in the reliability of forensic evidence.
In the following literature review, scholarly and peer-reviewed journals, articles from popular news media, and surveys have been synthesized to contribute to the conversation pertaining to forensics in pop culture in the courtroom and the overall criminal justice system. This conversation has become a growing topic of interest over just the past few years since these crime shows started appearing on the air. The rising popularity of this genre makes this research even more relevant to study to try to bring back justice in the courtroom.
Discredit this witnesses, introduce a new suspect, and bury the evidence, these are stages introduced in how to win a case and leave the jury dumbfounded. When we are younger, we always hear of our companions wanting to become lawyers or doctors. I believe the new show offers insight on what our childhood dreams would be like if we pursued them and went to law school. The new thriller has had quite the uproar and has been the topic of most blogs and articles that I have read and been deemed a hit; the show will epitomize legal offices, portray acts of seduction, and ponder our senses of right and wrong.
Bob McKenty suggests in the poem "Adam's Song" that life is not a stationary event, it is forever changing and that in order to handle those changes humor serves as a good buffer. The tone of "Adam's Song" changes distinctly at least three times. McKenty uses rhythm, rhyme, and meter to express the essence of change in the poem and in life.
Forensic Psychology, which is occasionally referred to as Legal Psychology, originally made its debut in the late 1800’s. A Harvard Professor, Professor Munsterberg, introduced the idea of psychology and law with his book, On the Witness Stand in 1908. Since the inception of the idea of psychology and law there have been proponents, as well as though that have spoken against the theories proposed by Munsterberg’s, along with other scientists, theorists, and psychologists that believed that Forensic Psychology had no standing to be linked to topics of law. This literature review will attempt to identify scholarly articles that trace the origins and the movement that led to Forensics Psychology becoming a specialty within the field of psychology. I will also attempt to explain What is Forensic Psychology as well as the part it plays within the legal system.