Thursday, February 12, 2009
What Is the Impact of CSI-style Programming on Jurors?
Currently, there is a new psychological study at the University of Leicester, which analyzes the effects of forensic-related programming on potential jurors in the United Kingdom. Because forensic science is referenced in the news, media, literature, and magazines, it is quite possible that peoples’ perceptions about forensic science are altered. This will, in turn, affect court decisions. Lisa Smith, who is working on the study, said, “In recent years the forensic science techniques available to police have become difficult to understand within the courtroom.” However, today she believes the average person is more aware of forensic procedures, as a result of the news and media. This study is important because it gages how well jurors understand the information presented to them in trials. The hypothesis is that because of forensics prevalence in the media, jurors are better able to grasp difficult concepts. Nevertheless, this may not be the case. The research from the study will settle the question. It is important to understand how informed the jurors are because often the decisions made by the jurors are life-altering.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I enjoyed reading Emma’s current event about how jurors are more aware about the impact of CSI like cases, because I think it is very interesting to figure out how much the media plays into forensic stuff. I like the article, because it is basically saying that crime scene shows such as CSI, bones and other shows are allowing jurors a better chance of getting used to the type of crimes making it easier or harder to make a decision based upon a certain case. I liked how Emma briefly gave a short summery of the article without giving to much away and just giving the main importance of the article. It also was very interesting, because if the jurors didn’t have any exposure to the media then they wouldn’t know a lot about that type of science and possibly make a wrong mistake which could cause a wrong decision where the wrong person goes to jail while the right person gets away and could do the same crime again. Emma also did a very good job on giving two separate sides to the hypothesis and made you think about all the different scenarios that could occur if the media was and weren’t involved in giving an average person a better chance of figuring out that stuff. While I enjoyed everything about the article I do believe that Emma should have added more about the hypothesis and why Lisa Smith believes media is causing jurors to grasp difficult decisions better. While the article was short it fulfilled everything a short summery needs and really makes you think about what could happen in a courtroom with average Joes. I really think it is interesting if they did actual study and released data based upon people in a courtroom who have watched and haven’t based upon the people who watched did they make a better decision or not that would be very interesting and make a much better study.
i thought this article was very interesting. Since a major part of forensics science in using it as evidence in the court room, it is important to understand how jurors receive the information. As forensics science has become a bigger part of the culture, it was smart of these people to conduct a study to see how this has impacted its role in the courtroom. This topic is very relevant to our study of forensics, as well as the field of science in general, The author did a good job of clearly explaining the study and why it was occurring,
I find Emma's article very interesting. Not oly does it show the impact that people have on trials today, it also shows the impact television has on society, and on the way we think. In previous years, many jurors ahve not fully understood the proceedsings and the tests. But today, many more people understand due to TV shows like "CSI" and "Bones". I think this review was very interesing, but I would have liked to have maybe read some juror's opinions after working on a cases. All in all, this was a very good article
I enjoyed this article because Emma really sumarized the article really well. One thing I learned is the fact that people have become unaware of the forensic science techniques. Well done Emma!
I thought Emma's article was very interesting. She did a good job of summerizing, and I thought it was a good choice of topic because the media has become more interested in forensic related issues, through shows like CSI and real life cases such as the OJ Simpson trial, thus it is more important than ever to understand the impact that the media and external forensic's information will have on a juror. I think that perhaps Emma could have added a bit more detail, and perhaps added what the conclusions of the study were, but overall she did a very good job. I think it was very interesting to see that someone is finally taking the initiative to scientifically test a hypothesis that the media has an effect on jurors, and I'm interested to see what the results are!
Post a Comment