Forensic Science, Wrongful Convictions, and American Prosecutor Discretion

Abstract

A hot controversy exists about the reliability of forensic science as reported by prime-time drama television series in bringing violent criminals to justice. This exploratory research will show that neither forensics or its fictionalised (CSI Effect) accounts, nor substantial evidence secured by police investigators, shape prosecutor decisions to charge a suspect with a crime, which can often result in freeing guilty suspects and convicting innocent individuals. In the summer of 2006, 444 American prosecutors responded to a survey. The findings reveal that judges, juries, and defence lawyers are influenced more by prime-time American drama forensic accounts than by the substantial documented evidence of a case. It was also discovered that regardless of the dangerous apprehension of violent criminals by the police, some suspects are never charged because of faulty prosecutor behaviour. One implication of these findings is that police officer alienation from the legal system is at an all-time high, and that prosecutors lack professional supervision and personal motivation to represent the 'people', giving rise to vast human and legal rights violations of suspects and defendants.

An Analysis of Crime Scene Behavior in Korean Homicide

“…The fact that this phenomenon was present in those cases characterized by expressive homicide may reflect chronological change or cultural effect, as previous studies have connected forensic awareness to instrumental homicide (Salfati & Haratsis, 2001; Santtila et al, 2001; Santtila et al, 2008). As most offenders have become quite knowledgeable about forensic techniques to clean up forensic evidence left behind (Stevens, 2008), this may facilitate the commission of homicides when people use it as a last resort to deal with trivial conflicts that they experience in their daily lives (e.g., marital infidelity, arguments, collisions for money and love, quarrel or fight).…”

Compensating the Innocent: Perceptions of Exonerees’ Deservingness to Receive Financial Compensation for Wrongful Convictions

“…While there is no certain way to know how many people have been wrongfully convicted in the United States, Risinger (2007) estimated that up to five percent of criminal convictions may occur when the individual is actually not guilty. Several systemic causes of wrongful conviction have been identified in the literature (Weathered, 2007), including faulty eyewitness testimony (Scheck, Neufeld, & Dwyer, 2000), false confessions and incriminating statements (Leo & Davis, 2010;Redlich, 2004), unreliable forensic science or forensic errors (Denov & Campbell, 2005), and personal bias or tunnel vision on the part of prosecutors (Stevens, 2008).…”

Beyond Frequency: Perceived Realism and theCSIEffect

“…According to the majority of officers interviewed, there is a potential for public trust in the reliability of police forces to decrease due to unrealistic expectations created by CSI-type shows. This decrease in trust and reliance has been shown in the results of Stevens's (2008) study on the CSI effect and legal actors. It was found that police reports and non-forensic evidence collected by the police have had a reduced effect on guiding prosecution strategies in recent years.…”