American Courtrooms Skewed by "CSI Effect"

[~Shard~]

Quite a good discussion going on - I would like to contribute to it myself, however I'm in a rush, so all I'll say for now is that CSI rocks.

 

[jayscheuerle]

But can juries understand that 99.9?

If it means that 1 out of 1000 men would show up as a match to that DNA, that's an awful lot of other potential suspects. Five alone in my little town.

But, boy, you tell me as a juror that the evidence is 99.9 percent sure it's me, and I'm an average Joe, I'm gonna assume you're leaving that .1 to cover your tail and that it really doesn't mean anything. If I'm me, that 99.9 percent sure makes me 25 percent sure we have the right guy.

So, is that what "99.9 percent sure" means, or does it mean something else that would help me to raise that 25 percent? Do juries think this far, or does 99.9 = 100 in their minds?

Often, using 99.9% with scientific evidence is the practical equivalent of 100% and should be taken as such, because the number 100% can never legally or scientifically be used. If the chance against you being the exact match is 1 in 10 quadrillion (far higher a number than there are people on this earth), they'd still have to say 99.9% or 99.9999% because they can't say 100%.

 

[tweakers_suck]

Oblique lighting using flashlights

dejo,

You are correct. It would be nice if they would just turn the lights on. That is the first thing you do. But then it is often helpful to use the technique of oblique lighting with flashlights - looking for blood, semen, or other body fluid and even other trace evidence like hairs and fibers becomes more noticable. And sometimes on CSI you'll see the Crims using alternate light sources (blue, orange LEDs type flashlights for example). Many times interesting items will 'glow' (especially semen) using alternate light sources.

As a practical experiment do the following. Go into a room with some type of tile or smooth floor, then turn out the lights. Using a flashlight and oblique lighting look at the floor. Get down on hands and knees and what do you see? You most likely will find shoe impressions made in the dust or made from dust. This is an example of why the Crims on the tv show scan the room with flashlights.

 

[tweakers_suck]

To GorillaPaws,

A problem I see with the "CSI effect" that has yet to be mentioned, is the potential for its abuse when the defendant cannot afford the costly expert testimony to counter the science done for the prosecution. The DA runs the most damaging evidence through a forensics lab and it sounds very official etc. but the defendant who has a public defender doesn't have the resources to examine any of the evidence that may prove his/her innocence. To me, the "CSI effect" has the potential to increase the "buying justice" effect that we see today, along with many of the other problems stated earlier. (Sorry, my post isn't very articulate - I've had a long day).

The defense counsel has an equal right to any and all evidence. If the defendent cannot afford to hire an attorney, they get a public defender. If the defendent cannot afford to have testing done privately, the judge can order testing done at the expense of the court. (I am not a lawyer, so I don't claim to know all of the ins and outs of courtroom rules. Just my own experience).

In some agencies, the crime lab will also do work for the public defenders office. Money should not be an issue for testing, I never take money into account when deciding if evidence should be tested or not. I only care if I can answer a scientifically valid question related to the case by doing a test.

 

[EminenceGrise]

The tv shows make it difficult all around IMHO. Juries expect science to make the case solid and concrete, and to do it in an hour. But most cases are not like the tv shows. If we had the unlimited resources, people and money, every item of evidence could be tested. The problem you have comes in placing value to that evidence. So what if there is gsr on a gun? You'd expect it to be there. Lots of evidence is asked to be examined, but when you look at the case background many times it is not very probative. But juries want it examined. If it is not, DA's want you to come to court and explain why we didn't test it. If we don't test it, the defense argues that the crime lab and police aren't doing all they can for the case and the defendent is really not guilty.

I imagine it's especially difficult when everyone thinks you can just run it down the hall and pop it in {insert ungodly expensive piece of equipment here} and get a pretty result in about 5 minutes like they do on TV. It always cracks me up when I see mass spectrometers, etc. littered around the place like every crime lab has ten of them, and a few in the back for good measure. I bet most crime labs would kill* to have even half of the equipment they show in one episode of CSI.

* Well, considering the line of work, maybe not.

 

[ejb190]

ejb190, need a job?

Actually.... I have been thinking about a change of careers. I'm not really sure how to break into forensic sciences with my background, but I am working my way through the hiring process with a federal law enforcement agency.

 

[ejb190]

I bet most crime labs would kill* to have even half of the equipment they show in one episode of CSI.

I was thumbing through a book on the CSI TV shows the other day. One of the producers commented that the lab sets are better equiped than 95% of the crime labs and that most of that equipment is real and functioning!

 

[apple2991]

I was thumbing through a book on the CSI TV shows the other day. One of the producers commented that the lab sets are better equiped than 95% of the crime labs and that most of that equipment is real and functioning!

Does this seem wrong to you?

Oh, the joys of consumer-oriented capitalism.

 

[MongoTheGeek]

Does this seem wrong to you?

Oh, the joys of consumer-oriented capitalism.

Piss and moan that it isn't realistic.
Whine and complain that it's too real.

The spend $4-5 million an episode. Blowing the budget for one episode to set up a really great set isn't really a big deal.

Think about this. 40 million viewers. Thats a dime of marketing tax per person.

Podunk, IL wants the lab. 100,000 citizens. $400 in property taxes.