I find the research question “How do Crime Television Dramas Impact Real Life Cases?” very fascinating because it questions a unique argument that most people tend to overlook. I want to find out if watching popular television shows like CSI and Criminal Minds changes the public’s perception of law enforcement agencies when assessing crime cases. This research question does not affect my values but I do think it is important to know how and why television makes such a significant impact on our society. Personally, I have no experience regarding this specific topic but I hope to have some knowledge of it in the future. I have a goal of working for the Federal Bureau of Investigation as a Staff Operations Specialist which means I will be managing and assessing crime scenes and cases. Learning more about the major differences between television crime dramas and real life enforcement agencies could potentially change my mind about wanting to work for the FBI. I am qualified to write about this topic because I myself watch crime dramas on the television. I can understand why viewers have certain expectations and assumptions about federal law enforcement agencies because the crime television shows are very realistic.
The article “Is the “CSI Effect” Influencing Courtrooms?” discusses how death investigation in America is nothing like what you watch on the television. Prosecutors have been arguing that shows like CSI are creating expectations that every trial must feature highly technological forensic tests. This article explores the idea that blaming the CSI is too simplistic. A chief judge of Washtenaw County, Donald Shelton noticed that reports on the CSI Effect were on anecdote and was very short on data. Shelton and his colleagues conducted a study that revealed more than 2,000 jurors television habits. John Grossman, the undersecretary of forensic science and technology, believes that the CSI effect impedes forensic pathologists testifying in court. This article is from the National Public Radio which is a reliable source because it is a privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization that provides news to a network of 900 public radio stations. The author was not bias because he didn’t tell his own opinion he wrote about the creator of CSI and public officials. The article “The CSI Effect’s Negative Impact on Juries” informs readers that jurors are now demanding expensive and often unnecessary DNA tests, handwriting analyses, gunshot residue testing, and other procedures that are not pertinent to the case. The CSI effect has influence over the entire criminal justice system including prosecutors and defense attorneys who now feel the need to be more thorough in their cases. The article presents an interesting argument informing readers that here is a historical precedent with television affecting the judicial system. In a specific case regarding Robert Blake, there was …show more content…
Creator of CSI, Anthony E. Zuiker claimed that this is the first time in American History that the jury can’t be fooled. The article brings up an example about a murder trial that happened in Boston and how the jury acquitted the defendant due to lack of DNA evidence despite the fact that there was testimonies of two eyewitnesses. According to DNA specialist Dan Krane, on shows like CSI, viewers "never see a case where the sample is degraded or the lab work is faulty or the test results don't solve the
The article “Is the “CSI Effect” Influencing Courtrooms?” discusses how death investigation in America is nothing like what you watch on the television. Prosecutors have been arguing that shows like CSI are creating expectations that every trial must feature highly technological forensic tests. This article explores the idea that blaming the CSI is too simplistic. A chief judge of Washtenaw County, Donald Shelton noticed that reports on the CSI Effect were on anecdote and was very short on data. Shelton and his colleagues conducted a study that revealed more than 2,000 jurors television habits. John Grossman, the undersecretary of forensic science and technology, believes that the CSI effect impedes forensic pathologists testifying in court. This article is from the National Public Radio which is a reliable source because it is a privately and publicly funded non-profit membership media organization that provides news to a network of 900 public radio stations. The author was not bias because he didn’t tell his own opinion he wrote about the creator of CSI and public officials. The article “The CSI Effect’s Negative Impact on Juries” informs readers that jurors are now demanding expensive and often unnecessary DNA tests, handwriting analyses, gunshot residue testing, and other procedures that are not pertinent to the case. The CSI effect has influence over the entire criminal justice system including prosecutors and defense attorneys who now feel the need to be more thorough in their cases. The article presents an interesting argument informing readers that here is a historical precedent with television affecting the judicial system. In a specific case regarding Robert Blake, there was …show more content…
Creator of CSI, Anthony E. Zuiker claimed that this is the first time in American History that the jury can’t be fooled. The article brings up an example about a murder trial that happened in Boston and how the jury acquitted the defendant due to lack of DNA evidence despite the fact that there was testimonies of two eyewitnesses. According to DNA specialist Dan Krane, on shows like CSI, viewers "never see a case where the sample is degraded or the lab work is faulty or the test results don't solve the