Forensic Analysis: The Real CSI

The CSI effect is common among jurors and other people because they assume everything they see on tv shows like Law and Order and Criminal Minds is what really happens in real life cases. The juries who believe in this misconception can cause a problem in the courtroom because they would question why everything isn’t being subject to forensic analysis. Also some jurors may believe that forensic science is a perfect science thats always accurate however they ignoring the possibility of human or technical error. In the movie “The Real CSI”, it is stated that someone can be considered an expert based on knowledge, skill, experience, training or education, the real issue is that once a judge says they can testify they are considered and expert.

They expect that DNA evidence will be present in every cases and that things like fingerprint analysis can prove that a person committed a crime. Yet if people remained uninformed they will ignore the possibility of human error. In the movie a so called expert was certain that a man named Brandon Mayfield was the bomber in the Madrid train bombings even though he was nowhere close to Madrid at the time. All because they found a partial fingerprint at the crime scene, which the forensic scientists claimed to be a 100 percent match. This turned out to be completely false and Mayfield was proved to be innocent. This further proves how human error is very relevant in the forensic science world, and that people shouldn’t believe that everything that they see on crime shows is true. If someone’s fingerprint is slightly close enough to someone else’s they may become

They will be under the presumption that everything they see on tv really happens. They will have the mindset that a crime can only be solved with forensic evidence otherwise it is subject to error. However, the reality is that DNA evidence is the only proven science. Most people when watching crime shows, assume that forensics are done in mere hours. The truth is that it takes forensic scientists days, even weeks to get the results that they need to pursue a case. People also believe that every single case has some type of forensics. There have been many cases that have little or absolutely no forensic evidence. For example, there was a man who was charged with killing his wife and he ended up being guilty. Yet there was no forensic evidence, the only thing that the cops had was a theory but they had no evidence to back it up. People need to understand that every case is different and none of them are perfect and are going to be prone to some type of error. The difference between the many forensic types is that there is no real scientific evidence proving it. DNA is the only forensic type that can be scientifically explained and relied on. DNA was developed by medical science while the other forensic sciences was developed by law enforcement with no real scientific