A judge in Michigan has conducted two studies to address the well-known CSI-effect.
For those of you who are unfamiliar, the CSI-effect is the theory that jurors who have seen a great deal of television shows like CSI, Criminal Minds, and the like are more likely to expect sophisticated DNA and technological evidence to be presented in murder trials. This has been believed to have had devastating impacts on the administration of justice. It is believed that as jurors grow accustomed to technology that may not be available, or even exist, in certain cases, the potential for convictions and/or acquittals that are not founded on the evidence increases.
The Chief Judge of the Washtenaw County in Ann Arbour has attempted to investigate this problem by conducting two studies. In each of them, potential jurors were asked what kind of evidence they would expect to see in the trials of different crimes. Those who watched CSI had higher expectations of the evidence presented in criminal trials, than those who did not view the program. However, the expectations of jurors did not translate into a higher propensity to convict an accused.
The results of the study found other surprising results, however. Potential jurors were asked about their familiarity and use of different technology, such as smart phones, computers, and GPS equipment. Those who were more well-versed in developing technology had higher expectations of the evidence than those who were not familiar with these devices. Again, this difference in expectations did not seem to produce any significant difference in the results of the trial.
The conclusion of the Chief Judge was that the CSI-effect is, in fact, a myth. However, the implications of the study are interesting: do we, as a society, now examine circumstances more closely as a result of our increased use of technology? Has the advent of technology and its role in our lives impacted the way we view the world to such an extent that we are more likely to take a more scientific approach in assessing the circumstances of a given situation?
I’m not sure. I don’t know that I can answer these questions. What I do know, however, is that a lot of the evidence and investigative strategies seen on programs like CSI are a far cry from the realities of criminal justice and its administration.
To read more on the study, please check out the article from the Thomas M. Cooley Law Review.