CSI Effect: Do People Believe Real Criminal Investigation?

“We are being detoured into the land of make-believe” was said by a character on the well-known show CSI Miami by a character named Horatio Caine. On television, a crime drama series called CSI: Crime Scene Investigation was created by a man named Anthony Zuiker. This show has become a foundation for what people believe real criminal investigation is meant to be like. This phenomenon is called the CSI Effect. This well known television show has an exaggerated look into the forensics side of the criminal justice system, and because of this, people are led to think that is what it should always be like in investigations. An example of the CSI Effect and how it affects our criminal justice system is a case in Arizona; a case of burglary; where
The case above has no actual scientific evidence but in the eyes of the law, it is able to sustain a reasonable conviction, even if they only had the tools and an eye witness. Another case in Peoria Illinois was of a gang member being prosecuted for raping a teenage girl in a local part. The evidence that came up in that case was his saliva on her breast as well as a gripping testimony from the victim, the emergency room nurse, and the police. You would think with this evidence, especially the DNA from the defendant, the saliva on the breast, was enough evidence, but when the time came for the jurors to convict whether he was guilty or not, they shocked the courtroom by claiming the defendant was not guilty. Jurors claimed the investigators should have gotten a soil sample and should have seen if it matched from the park’s soil. They saw this on television which is how they knew it was even possible to test the
Jurors should also know that if you have select evidence that guarantees the person, there should be no need to waste resources trying to find evidence that is not really needed. These shows are for entertainment purposes and dramatized to an extreme extent. It is also on a “fastfoward” to fit within the time frame of the show. In the show, it may take a few seconds or a maximum of a minute to get a result back on forensics where in real life it takes much longer. Not all fingerprints are in the database, therefore even if you found this so called scientific evidence, there was no saying if you would actually find a match. The same goes for DNA samples. To prevent guilty suspects from going free because jurors feel there is not enough scientific evidence, we should be informing people of what evidence is sufficient enough for a conviction. Instead of people thinking there is not enough scientific evidence, citizens should know that an eyewitness, or even proof that is directly correlated with the suspect is enough to convict someone. People should know that DNA, fingerprint, soil analysis, and anything else is not as simple as television makes it seem. Things take time, money, and resources that necessarily don't have to be wasted if other evidence is adequate enough for a conviction. Judges should also step in at this moment to make