The “CSI Effect”
I recently attended the 12th Annual Criminal Justice Institute in Seattle, a two-day State Bar Conference covering the latest trends and caselaw relevant to the practice of Criminal Law. One of the more interesting presentations was given by a Prosecutor who commented on a big Identity Theft case she lost. Like all good criminal lawyers, after the loss she approached the jury to ask them why:
Prosecutor: “What went wrong with my case?”
Juror: “Well, you had all those credit cards and checks, but there were no fingerprints, no hair fibers, no DNA.”
Prosecutor: “… but … we had a confession“.
She referred to this as the “CSI Effect”. Jurors have become so inundated with crime scene reality TV shows that the bar has been effectively raised to the point where, if you’re not providing a technology component to your prosecution (and presumably defense), you’re missing key elements of your case. Expectations have been set, and this bell is going to be hard to un-ring.
RP
January 4th, 2006 at 10:57 am
[…] I’ve commented before on the so-called “CSI Effect” and how the public’s infatuation with crime show reality TV is raising awareness in the jury pool regarding forensic sciences. It appears that the effect is extending to the judiciary now as they become increasingly more aware that competent expert testimony requires more than a resume and an impressive witness. There’s actually, you know, some actual science that needs to happen. (sound of hand slapping forehead) […]
April 12th, 2006 at 7:23 pm
[…] I’ve talked about it here and seen it in action in my own practice. The “CSI Effect” is entrenching itself into mainstream public perceptions of the criminal process. With DNA exonerations becoming as newsworthy as tomorrow’s weather, and the utter saturation of crimeshow television, public expectations have set the technology bar high: if you don’t have DNA evidence, something must be wrong. […]
May 3rd, 2006 at 9:44 am
[…] There were many good reasons for the verdict (e.g., my client was innocent), but any time you pit the word of the defendant and his cohorts against the sworn testimony of multiple police officers, you’re on very thin ice. I can’t help thinking that this case illustrates a variant of the CSI Effect I’ve written about in the past. There’s really no excuse to see prosecutions failing to utilize available technology to make their case. When they fail to produce such evidence, they do so at their peril. […]