Exploring the Impact of the CSI Effect on Jurors: Analysis and Solutions - Report Sample

1. Do you believe that the CSI Effect detracts from the search for truth and justice in the courtroom? Why or why not? Please fully explain your decision.

CSI effect can sometimes distract the search for truth and justice in courtrooms. Just like many things would affect human being's behavior and way of thinking, CSI TV shows also have an impact on the way people think and behave. Jurors, attorneys, judges, and journalists are not an exception (Johnson, 2016). Even though they have undergone training and academic courses that equip them with knowledge and skills on how to discharge their duties, behavioral activities can make them change their way of thinking.CSI is one of the most influential TV shows due to its ability to show many details that jurors and attorneys may not get. According to the research, it was revealed that jurors who watch CSI and other related programs are likely to demand more evidence to enable them to make a decision. Jurors may acquit guilty defendants or fail to acquit innocent defendants because of the CSI effect.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

2. According to the NIJ Journal article by Honorable Donald E. Shelton, "Many attorneys, judges, and journalists have claimed that watching television programs like CSI has caused jurors to wrongfully acquit guilty defendants when no scientific evidence is presented." (2008).

Based on the research performed and the conclusions based on this research, do you agree with this statement? Please fully explain your response.

Indeed, the content many attorneys, judges, and journalists get from CSI enables them to convince jurors to wrongfully acquit a guilty defendant especially when there is no scientific evidence is presented to them. The CSI sometimes has aired people who were not acquitted yet they were innocent. Such kind of information can sabotage the work of the jurors; every juror would want to make a decision backed up by strong evidence that happened to be found scientifically (Waltke et al., 2017). However many cases do not have scientific evidence. Jurors would [refer to acquitting them rather than using the available evidence that may be reliable to hold someone guilty. It has made them believe that only scientific evidence is credible enough. It is evidence because the highest percentage of jurors requested scientific evidence before discharging their decisions.

Shelton Donald E. (2008). The "CSI Effect": Does It Exist? NIJ Journal 259, pp. 1-7.

CSI effect exists, although the effect might not necessarily be a result of the CSI TV shows, there are effects to jurors, attorneys, judges, and journalists who watch court proceedings on TV that are live, edited, or not edited. The show most of the time has been able to show convincing instances where the courtroom has been presumed to have made wrong decisions (Adrita & Ungureanu, 2016). The evidence from the programs has pushed for the concerned to make no mistake and the only way to do that is by using credible evidence that happens to be scientific if there is no evidence the jurors are likely to wrongfully acquit a guilty defendant’s effect exist but the effect does not refer to the CSI programs only it is inclusive to other related TV content.

3. Describe and fully explain two (2) concepts of how to alleviate the “CSI Effect”. How could these concepts be incorporated? Why do you believe these concepts would be influential?

(a)The system should provide better ways in which the jury may have to perform their tasks in a way that is not influenced by any external force like the CSI. The system should empower its jurors to enable them to make a decision even though forensic information is not available(Chin & Workewych,2016). There different other ways that the jury can rely on to avoid wrongfully acquitting a guilty defendant and therefore failing to deliver justice.

(b)The other concept is for the court system to invest more in providing evidence that the jurors want. Providing the evidence the jurors want will enable them to make their decisions confidently without the fear of being judged by third parties like TV (Lodge & Zloteanu, 2020). Also, it is only scientific evidence is the most reliable evidence that does not bring much doubt to any judgment made. It is very difficult to find someone guilty using other forms of evidence other than forensic ones.

References

Johnson, M. (2016). The CSI Effect: TV Crime Dramas' Impact on Justice. Cardozo Pub. L. Poly & Ethics J., 15, 385.

Waltke, H. E. A. T. H. E. R., LaPorte, G. E. R. A. L. D., Weiss, D. A. N. I. E. L. L. E., Schwarting, D. A. W. N., Nguyen, M. I. N. H., & Scott, F. R. A. N. C. E. S. (2017). Sexual assault cases: Exploring the importance of non-DNA forensic evidence. Natl Institute Justice, 279.

ANDRITA, M., & UNGUREANU, C. Aspects related to CSI Effect.

Chin, J., & Workewych, L. (2016). The CSI effect. Available at SSRN 2752445.

Lodge, C., & Zloteanu, M. (2020). Juror's expectations and decision-making: revisiting the CSI effect. The North of England Bulletin, 2020(2), 19-30.