C is for CSI: Crime Solving Illusions

I'm very glad that I am a citizen of a country, and resident of another country, where 'beyond reasonable doubt' is the threshold for convicting someone of a crime*. In recent years, however, jurors have demanded a higher and higher threshold of proof, sometimes beyond the laws of physics or available technology.

This insistence on forensic evidence has been traced back to the rise of popular crime dramas, in particular CSI.  Because of the format of the show, evidence collection and processing is done at a breakneck pace that's just not possible in an overworked crime lab. Some of the technology in the show doesn't even exist-- for example, the ability to enhance a grainy photo into a high-res image, or look at it from another angle. In several high-profile cases, a jury has actually failed to convict someone based on the absence of forensic evidence that would have been impossible to gather. Ironically, the necessity of forensic evidence to get a conviction has put a huge strain on already overloaded crime labs, slowing the process further.

It's not all bad news though. Some studies indicate that fans of the show were more likely to think critically about expert testimony in the courtroom. Outside the courtroom, they were also less likely to disturb a crime scene and accidentally destroy evidence before law enforcement arrived. Finally, some lawyers were happy to see jurors engage with forensic evidence presented instead of ignoring scientific findings in favour of flashier (but less reliable) eyewitness accounts.

In the end, the CSI effect is a combination of education and science wish fulfillment, of the encouragement of investigation and critical thinking and of unrealistic expectations for crime scientists. But in the end, if it's encouraging us to do better and seek answers harder, it may be a good thing in the long run.

*Scotland actually has three possible verdicts: guilty, innocent, and 'not proven'. The third is basically indicates the accused is suspicious, but there is reasonable doubt as to their guilt or insufficient evidence.