I know many members are employed in CJ. I found last night's Front-line program interesting. The program showed evidence that fingerprint identification and certain other forensic techniques are fallible. The program also called into question the training of some expert witnesses. I know this is a valid point after serving on a jury and listening to BS from one expert witness in my area of expertise. If he had told his associate attorney the correct questions to ask during jury selection I would have been picked to be a jury member.
The whole CSI craze has caused headaches beyond belief.....many of my new CJ students are shocked when I throw the wet blanket over their dreams and explain that they're going to need to spend about 5 years shagging 911 calls in a sector car before they're even considered for any sort of investigative position, and even then, they should be studying a natural science instead of CJ if they want to get into forensic science. Additionally, the CSI craze has poisoned the jury pool.....I had an armed & masked robbery of a Burger King a few years ago where we had multiple independent witness statements of the license plate & vehicle description of the suspect, who was stopped and arrested in a neighboring community. We also had multiple witness statements from people who saw him dump the ski mask, surgical gloves, and fake gun he used in the robbery into a trash can at a pharmacy, with video footage of him doing exactly that from the pharmacy's security video system. It was as much of a slam-dunk case I've ever had in my career, beyond catching someone in the act. I went to the grand jury, which is an entirely one-sided affair, since the defense isn't allowed to offer evidence, unless the defendant directly testifies and is then subject to cross-examination which they can't refuse to answer, so no lawyer in their right mind puts their client on the stand at a grand jury. Anyway, I present the airtight case to the grand jury, and one woman juror started asking ridiculous questions based totally on the CSI-type TV shows. Even though we had multiple independent witnesses, as well as video footage of the suspect dumping the mask, gun, and gloves in the trash can of the pharmacy, she wanted to know if we analyzed hair samples recovered from the ski mask, and other absurd TV-based questions that had absolutely no place in reality. We got a true bill (indictment) in spite of that woman's best efforts to sway her fellow jurors based on the lack of CSI-type forensic evidence, even though we had direct-witness, physical, and circumstantial evidence out the ying-yang. The best moment came when after we got the true bill for armed & masked robbery, then I went back in to testify for the additional charge of being a career criminal. The ADA asked me to review the suspect's criminal record, then asked what he was on parole for at the time of the robbery. I looked directly into Ms. CSI's face, and said "Second degree murder" (true, he killed someone in 1975 and was on parole). Her mouth literally almost fell on the ground. Yes....crime is real, and it isn't a TV show.
My exposure to this has been primarily from the criminal defense side. During an internship with the local Public Defenders office me and a partner did a jury selection. A lot of the evidence was circumstantial. The very first question out of the prosecutors mouth was, "Does anyone here watch shows like CSI?" Half of the jury pool raised their hand. He spent the next 10-15 minutes digging into how "real" the potential jurors thought CSI. Once the ball gets rolling it's hard to spot. I will be the first to admit...When it comes to CSI things the public (at least some) holds most departments to a pretty high expectation. When it's all said and done though, I think things actually come closer to being evened out.
I've been employed as a crime lab analyst (lab rat, not scene investigator) for a little over 14 years. When asked how my job compares to the tv shows, I mention I haven't actually watched any of the shows in several years. But from what I recall, the only semblance to real-life is that we are all very good looking.
Awesome. Bruce, you sound like you deal with the same type of people I did when I was in the Marines. Every new guy coming in was going to be Force Recon or a Sniper. The reality always sucks. Most of them end up lying to everyone anyway, since you can't expect the general public to be up to speed on everything. I've never watched the CSI shows.
Ah yes..the CSI effect comes to play all the time but does not compare to reality.. when are people going to realize that even reality tv isn't "real" .
I used to dust theft recoveries all the time, and lifting prints is really hard and unsuccessful most of the time. It's a real art for those that are good at it. Television makes it look easy, but the reality is very different.
Bruce...so you mean to tell me you can't just pick up random objects, put them in a vial of clear liquid, shake it up and when it turns blue it means they're guilty? If not I think I could loan you some extras I may have laying around from my time in LEO work. Seriously I can't watch those shows and neither can my wife, since I yell at the television while she tries to listen to the pithy dialogue. My biggest pet peeve on these shows is that the lab technicians and forensic analysts are also interviewing the suspects. WTF?!?!? Drives me batty.
Hahaha! I could write a book about what I DON'T know about forensic science, and I'm quite comfortable in my ignorance. The best recent police-related TV show was Third Watch....you can tell they talked to and took the advice of actual cops in designing the character's personalities and the calls they go to. The show was fantastic from the police angle until Tatiyana, Sergeant Cruz, and the Russian Mafia foolishness ruined the whole thing.
Have never seen it but I'll look it up. I'm a tough customer for police movies and television. Up to now my favorite police movie was Narc (Jason Patric and Ray Liotta)...which from the inside looking out at the time of seeing it struck me as being very realistic in how the cops interacted with each other, their department management, the city and at times even the suspects (I especially enjoyed the scene with the crackhead who set his girlfriend's hair on fire). Also the first 45 seconds of the movie blew my mind at how realistic the initial shooting was, dang near had me reaching for a radio to call it in... Have you seen it? Narc (2002) - IMDb
You will LOVE Third Watch, I'd bet the house on it. As for movies, other than kid's stuff like Kung-Fu Panda and borderline kid's stuff like The Three Stooges, the last time I saw an adult (spare the crass jokes) movie in a theater was Apollo 13 in 1995. Yeah, I don't get out much.
I'll give third watch as shot. If you get the urge to run to the local movie store pick up Narc. Heck I've even seen it in the bargain bin at Wally World a couple of times for $5. Great flick.
