The CSI Effect has altered the way the criminal justice system operates. The CBS CSI Trilogy, in particular, has changed public opinion of forensic science forever.

“The CSI Effect is real, and it's profound," says jury consultant Robert Hirschhorn, who also says he purposely selected jurors familiar with CSI and forensics-type shows for the Durst trial in Galveston Texas in September 2004.

Juries Now Want More Forensic Evidence

In the Durst trial despite plenty of non-forensic evidence, prosecutors couldn't convince a jury that real-estate millionaire Robert Durst had murdered his friend and neighbor, Morris Black, even though Durst admitted inadvertently killing him. The problem was that Black's head couldn't be found. The head, the defense argued, contained key evidence that Durst had acted in self-defense.

Jury consultant for the defense, Robert Hirschhorn sought out jurors who were familiar with shows such as CBS’s CSI: Crime Scene Investigation to spot the importance of precisely such a gap in the evidence. That wasn't difficult: In a survey of the 500 people in the jury pool, the defense found that about 70% were viewers of CBS's CSI or similar shows such as Court TV's Forensic Files or NBC's Law & Order.

Definition of the CSI Effect or CSI Syndrome

Wikipedia defines it as follows: The CSI Effect (sometimes referred to as the CSI syndrome) is a reference to the phenomenon of popular television shows such as the CBS CSI franchise, Law & Order, Silent Witness, Bones and Waking the Dead raising crime victims' and jury members' real-world expectations of forensic science, especially crime scene investigation and DNA testing. This is said to have changed the way many trials are presented today, in that prosecutors are pressured to deliver more forensic evidence in court.

What is Good About the CSI Effect?

• Juries are more educated about forensic science.
• The TV watching public is demanding more from the criminal justice system.
• Prosecutors are kept on their toes diverting juries from television type expectations.

What is Not Good About the CSI Effect?

• Criminals are getting smarter about forensic science, i.e. rapists are forcing victims to shower to remove trace evidence.
• Prosecutors have to spend a lot of time explaining to juries that DNA evidence isn’t always essential.
• Real Forensic Science is much more complicated than it looks on TV.
• Juries demand DNA analysis for every two bit 7-Eleven holdup.

More Forensic Science Departments

An increasing number of colleges and universities are adding forensic science departments, programs and courses because of increased student interest. Even high schools are inserting forensic science into their curricula.

Dispute Over the CSI Effect

According to Author Andrea Campbell's website, the CSI Effect, she dispels fallacies about crime and crime scenes and how they are portrayed on screen and television in her book, The Myth of CSI: Is Forensic Science the Panacea of Justice?

She says: Unlike television infotainment, true criminal evidence collection and methodology can be at its extremes: both boring and unpredictable science. Juxtaposed against real life, however, its inherent nature produces stories stranger and more interesting than anything made up.”

Ongoing Interest in Forensic Science will Keep the CSI Effect Alive

CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, the CBS television series, and its two spin-offs, CSI: Miami and CSI: New York, routinely appear near the top of the Nielsen ratings. An international survey in 2005 concluded that CSI: Miami was the most popular program in the world.

With no sign of the interest in forensic science matters abating and with similar television programs and cable stations and re-runs, the CSI Effect should still be with us for a long time to come.

* Andrew P Thomas wrote an article titled: The CSI Effect: Fact of Fiction, in the Yale Law Journal. It is worth a read.

More Forensic Science Articles:

Forensic DNA

Chemiluminescent Luminol

Spotlight on Fire Investigations