Wednesday, February 20, 2019

How do TV crime shows and authentic forensic analysis compare and contrast? Essay

Whats the premier word that comes to mind when you conceive of a TV crime gift? If I had to choose, it would be clue gathering, or even problem solving. TV crime shows ar generally known for the murders and gaffes behind solving who connected the crime because who would want to watch a show about a robbery. In these shows, the producers attempt to exaggerate and speed up the providedt against of forensic abstract. As a result, this would contrast to the authentic, or real life process of crime picture investigations. Although I do believe that there are many big(p) TV crime shows, Id father to pick two specific sequels that would distinctly identify a naturalistic and unrealistic visualization of what a forensic analysis looks resembling an sequence of CSI New York, as most realistic, and an episode of Bones, as the most unrealistic. First, I would like to identify a realistic visualization of forensic analysis by using the episode of CSI New York, pool cue SI. To beg in, the CSIs dispassionate point and examined it in a way that exemplified how authentic forensic analyzers would gather up/analyze evidence.For example, they placed some of the evidence in plastic al-Qaida in an effort to protect the evidence from possible damage, trace evidence was used, and they took pictures of evidence that was uncollectable, or easier to analyze with a photograph. This showed that they were taking into consideration the integral problem with crime scene investigation they knew that evidence would need to be carefully collected, to ensure the smallest amount of modification. Subsequently, the investigators used bits and pieces of forensic psychology to localise patterns in the crimes committed. To illustrate, they established connections, and reviewed potential motives of the killer. Specific to this episode, the board game Clue plays a part to the story as investigators dig deeper into the crime, they nonice that a specific drug was ingested by the two victims, Ellen White, the genuine victim, and Jane Doe, the later bring victim in the series of crimes committed, and alone some psychiatrists fox retrieve to this drug the investigators find the psychiatrist, Carly and plot out the crime to find the killer.Second, I would like to establish an unrealistic visualization of a crime scene investigation, using the episode of Bones, The Memories in the Shallow Grave. Initially, I would group this episode in the unrealistic category because with the evidence they had, they came to conclusions almost instantaneously. To continue, when the investigators wereusing absentminded persons reports to compare suspects, they came to a direct conclusion without further investigation in other words, they knew they had the suspect without corroborating information. The team of CSIs got the news of who the suspect was, and without deeper consideration, they unsloped followed along. Additionally, evidence they had from the gum underneath the pain tball splatter was easily identified with only one tooth impression. Bones, one of the investigators said, Thats as good as a fingermark, when one complete dental impression may not brook been enough to establish who actually did the crime.With this in mind, they had evidence, but not enough to conclude the suspect as guilty of committing the crime. Finally, I would like to pose the inquire of Do crime TV shows really entice jurors or legal professionals when it comes to the criminal justice system? My answer to this question would be yes for two reasons. To start, in the article by Donald E. Shelton, The CSI Effect Does It in reality Exist, I found an interesting statement about expectations based aside of TV crime shows. More specifically, As one district lawyer put it, Jurors now expect us to have a desoxyribonucleic acid test for just about every case. They expect us to have the most advanced technology possible, and they expect it to look like it does on television. Jurors wanted more proof to guide them through the conviction process, but could there have been any other information the court could have minded(p) them?To continue, based off a survey taken from the selfsame(prenominal) article mentioned above, jurors had specific apprehensions of what scientific evidence they wished to receive when certain cases were brought in the lead them. To explain deeper, a higher percentage wanted to see fingerprint evidence in breaking and entering cases (71 percent), any theft case (59 percent), and in crimes involving a gun (66 percent). (Same article as credit given before.) From shows like Law & Order, and CSI, jurors thought evidence portrayed on TV crime shows, were taken into consideration in real crimes. Established from the findings, jurors general expected evidence from TV crime shows to be used in authentic forensic analysis.Does the same word come to mind when you think of a TV crime show? Or has it changed? Depending on your original opinion, your side may have changed or it might have stayed the same. solely I still believe that there are many great TV crime shows, and if I had to pick two specific episodes that would clearly identify a realistic and unrealisticvisualization of what a forensic analysis looks like, Id choose these two episodes CSI New York, as most realistic, and the episode of Bones, as the most unrealistic.

No comments:

Post a Comment