CSI Crime Scene Investigation
The show that I decided to use for my analysis is CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, The Complete First Season, Episode 110, “Sex, Lies and Larvae”. The reason I picked this show is because we have it on DVD, which made it easy to watch it several times. This episode has three cases, the first and main case of the episode starts out with two people hiking in a remote desert area and the girl finds a dead body with flies buzzing all around it. The second case involves a stolen painting and the last case is a missing person case.
In the first case, Grissom (who is a forensic entomologist) and Sara (analyst) are sent to the crime scene. The first thing that was noted was that there were beetles on the body but no alkali fluids in the dirt so she …show more content…
He also showed them evidence of old injuries and suspect it is from an abusive relationship. Grissom also finds a musket fly during the autopsy. The women was identified as Kaye Shelton through the AFIS (The Automated Fingerprint Identification System) and her husband was Scott Shelton. Grissom said he knew that they lived downtown because of the musket flies that were on the body, and they are only found in urban areas. Grissom and Sara go to their house to look for evidence. Her husband said that he has nothing to hide and he has been away on a business trip for five days. Grissom finds fiber evidence (similar to the blanket that Kaye was wrapped in). Scott Shelton’s gun was also recently cleaned and a bullet is missing. During their search, Sara smells bleach and finds evidence of blood on the wall. But, the linear regression of the insects shows that Kaye has only been dead for three days. Thus it was not possible for Scott to be the killer since he was not in town three days ago. Both Sara and Grissom think Scott is guilty. But, the insects do not …show more content…
The owner of the paining says that he interrupted the burgler and the alarm system had been disengaged. Catherine and Warrick think that it is an inside job. While they are dusting for prints, they find an ear print which they photograph and lift to compare later. They ask members of the family to come to gather at the house and requested that they get a ear print from each of them. It turns out to be the ear print of their son who is in college. He goes to his trunk and brings the painting back. The father does not press charges. They take the painting in for evidence and has it tagged. But, something does not feel right to Catherine. She investigates the case further and determines that the painting is a forgery, in fact, the son had replaced all of the paintings in the house with fake ones. The father decides to show his son that he now has his attention and presses charges.
The third case is humorous. A husband reports that his wife is missing. Nick is the investigator. They find her car at a bus station and find red hair in the trunk of her car. Later he discovers evidence of blood in the trunk. They rush to a hotel after her credit card was used and find Cheryl Applegate handcuffed to a bed and obviously safe and just having a rendezvous with another man. She explains
In the first case, Grissom (who is a forensic entomologist) and Sara (analyst) are sent to the crime scene. The first thing that was noted was that there were beetles on the body but no alkali fluids in the dirt so she …show more content…
He also showed them evidence of old injuries and suspect it is from an abusive relationship. Grissom also finds a musket fly during the autopsy. The women was identified as Kaye Shelton through the AFIS (The Automated Fingerprint Identification System) and her husband was Scott Shelton. Grissom said he knew that they lived downtown because of the musket flies that were on the body, and they are only found in urban areas. Grissom and Sara go to their house to look for evidence. Her husband said that he has nothing to hide and he has been away on a business trip for five days. Grissom finds fiber evidence (similar to the blanket that Kaye was wrapped in). Scott Shelton’s gun was also recently cleaned and a bullet is missing. During their search, Sara smells bleach and finds evidence of blood on the wall. But, the linear regression of the insects shows that Kaye has only been dead for three days. Thus it was not possible for Scott to be the killer since he was not in town three days ago. Both Sara and Grissom think Scott is guilty. But, the insects do not …show more content…
The owner of the paining says that he interrupted the burgler and the alarm system had been disengaged. Catherine and Warrick think that it is an inside job. While they are dusting for prints, they find an ear print which they photograph and lift to compare later. They ask members of the family to come to gather at the house and requested that they get a ear print from each of them. It turns out to be the ear print of their son who is in college. He goes to his trunk and brings the painting back. The father does not press charges. They take the painting in for evidence and has it tagged. But, something does not feel right to Catherine. She investigates the case further and determines that the painting is a forgery, in fact, the son had replaced all of the paintings in the house with fake ones. The father decides to show his son that he now has his attention and presses charges.
The third case is humorous. A husband reports that his wife is missing. Nick is the investigator. They find her car at a bus station and find red hair in the trunk of her car. Later he discovers evidence of blood in the trunk. They rush to a hotel after her credit card was used and find Cheryl Applegate handcuffed to a bed and obviously safe and just having a rendezvous with another man. She explains