Category: Crime Investigation

Introduction

What makes an individual commit a crime? How best can one understand crime happening in society? Well, the study of criminology enables an individual to evaluate and, in the process, understand the criminal activities while putting into consideration the process of committing those crimes and how to control them within the constraints of the society. Moreover, the study of criminology helps one understand the ways to react to these crimes.

Crime causation

Having completed the majority of my course work in criminology, my perspective on crime causation has evolved greatly. Prior to the completion of my course, I based my arguments and understanding of the early theories drafted by the ancient criminologists, who maintained that there are people who were born criminals while others were not. Currently, I believe that those ancient beliefs are incorrect and baseless.

Furthermore, I have been enlightened in the fact that individuals are not born criminals; thus, one cannot judge a criminal by merely looking at them. Most importantly, the criminologists of today have produced more advanced and detailed theories depicting why people commit crimes. It is evident that presently, there are different types of criminals who indulge in diverse criminal activities; as a result, it is impossible to describe them under one theory.

Hence, they are explained under the multiple theories that have been formulated. Theories such as classical, positivist, individual trait, social disorganization, and many more permit the criminal justice system to classify criminals accordingly. When formulating these theories, I have noticed that the criminologists had the intention of bringing out a better understanding of why certain crimes happen and modes of preventing them. As a matter of fact, my course work has positively and intellectually changed my perspective on crime causation (Kroneberg, Heintze, & Mehlkop 260).

Reasons for committing crimes

It is worth noticing that my course work has changed my basic outlook on the reason why people commit crimes, as I now understand the true intellectual facts about this concept. It is evident that the rate of criminal cases in the United States is increasing each day. As a result, it has been noted that this problem cannot be fixed easily. Consequently, when people experience criminal activities, they usually consult the appropriate law enforcement agencies.

For example, when one is a victim of crime in New York City, it is advisable to seek help from the New York attorneys. The main purpose of an attorney is to assist the victim in dealing with the proceedings in court and other essential legal concepts concerning the crime. Most importantly, crime affects society greatly, and from my criminology course work, I have learned that people get involved in criminal activities for various reasons (Kroneberg et al. 278).

In my course work, I noted that one of the causes of crimes is poor parenting, whereby when children are neglected by their parents, they seem to get involved in crimes in their adulthood. Additionally, poor parenting might involve sexual harassment of the children. As a result, children might develop into sexual predators when they become adults. Moreover, from my course, I managed to realize that peer influence is also a significant reason for one to commit a crime. For example, in schools, students who perform poorly in class might give up on academics and enter into criminal activities.

Consequently, they believe that joining criminal gangs will give them the status and respect they never achieved while in class. Additionally, students from poor backgrounds will also indulge in crime as a way of supplementing what they do not have. This is because they have a notion that when they join criminal gangs, they will achieve material gains so easily (Kubrin, Messner, Deane, McKeever, and Stucky 61).

My course work also enabled me to realize that drugs and substance abuse are also reasons why people commit a crime. It is noteworthy that when an individual is under the influence of drugs and other substances like alcohol, they are most likely to be involved in criminal activities. This is because, under the influence of such substances, an individual might not make the right decisions. Furthermore, those individuals who are addicted to crimes tend to participate in crimes as a way of justifying their criminal activities. It is also essential to note that those individuals under the influence of drugs and other substances are always vulnerable to criminal activities.

The most demining factor is that most crimes in the U.S involve the use of handguns. These handguns are either procured through the black market or stolen. Thus, the easy accessibility of these weapons is also an issue that brings about the occurrence of crime in society (Kubrin et al. 66).

In the research articles that I came across during my course work, I discovered that most of the criminals have a poor educational background. Thus, they are facing poverty and unemployment conditions. Hence, they opt to indulge in criminal activities so as to acquire basic needs. The research also affirmed that even those who are employed do indulge in crimes. This is because the incomes they get from their jobs are not sufficient to cater to their everyday requirements. As a matter of fact, the exposure of children to TV violence is also a reason that makes an individual get involved in criminal activities.

This is because children will tend to emulate what they see on TV. It is also noted biologically by the crime scientists that hot weather results in criminal activities. This is because warm temperatures activate aggression hormones called testosterone and epinephrine. As a result, during hot weather, there are more criminal cases than during cold weather (Kubrin et al. 66).

Criminological theories

The criminological theories that best explain my understanding of crime causation and crime, in general, include the classical theory. This theory was formulated by Beccaria, and it explains that whenever the benefits of crime exceed its costs, crime is most likely to occur. Additionally, it affirms that crimes take place when individuals are seeking self-satisfaction, and at the same time, there is no efficient castigation for the existing offenders.

For example, highway robber might continue to indulge in their crimes in case the police on patrol are not in a position to arrest them. Another criminological theory that I can use to describe my understanding of crime causation is the social disorganization theory. It is evident that this theory was formulated by four theorists who were Shaw Sampson, McKay Sampson, Bursik, and Gasmask.

It affirms that criminal cultures are most likely to emerge in disorganized communities because of the absence of social control, for example, in learning institutions where there is no emphasis on the good discipline of the students as a result of wrangles at the administration level. The students might take that advantage and engage in criminal activities as there will be no one to stop them. The other theory that best explains my understanding of crime causation is the strain theory. It is evident that this theory was formulated by two researchers, namely Cohen Cloward and Ohlin Agnew.

It divulges that in society, whenever individuals fail to meet their goals, there is a likelihood of them responding to this strain by indulging in criminal activities. For example, in normal circumstances, an individual might be striving to own a car. In circumstances where the individual things he cannot afford this car, however much they try, they might result in a robbery so as to earn more money to quickly acquire this car. Thus, his motivation towards the robbery is the urge to accomplish a set goal (Kroneberg et al. 672).

There are a number of theoretical arguments I will use to clarify my perspective to someone holding a different opinion to mine. First of all, with consideration to the classical theory, it is worth noting that human beings are best controlled when strict rules and regulations are put in place. As a matter of fact, when such regulations are not well enforced to the extent that the offenders can go scot-free, it will encourage more people to indulge in crimes.

This is because they will gain more in criminal activities and, at the same time, escape punishment. Similarly, in societies where the laws that govern against crimes are not strict, criminal activity will be encouraged. For example, in communities where those involved in crimes are given lesser sentences in court, the rate of crime will be high as criminals will realize they have more gains than the loss in their activities (Kroneberg et al. 677).

When considering the social disorganization theory, it is essential to note that in any society, there must be order and understanding for people to stay in peace. In societies where there is a lack of organization, criminals are bound to take advantage of the situation to rain havoc on the people. As a result, the motivation factor in such a society is the inadequate social framework to dictate the ways of living. In strain theory, criminals indulge in such activities because they want to achieve a certain goal or status in society. This comes about when the efforts they are putting to enable them to achieve the goal seem not enough.

As a result, they will tend to indulge in crime so as to boost their efforts. This, for example, can be experienced in leadership positions. Whereby, in case an individual wants to occupy a certain leadership position being occupied by another individual, he might end up plotting the murder of the current holder of the position in case he continuously defeats him in the elections (Krubin et al. 2010, p, 79).

Conclusion

Throughout my course work, I have realized that the study of criminology enlightens the student on their previous perception of different concepts concerning the art of crime. These concepts include the reasons why people commit a crime and the different theoretical explanations on the causes of crime. It is worth noting that crime pertains to various actions and the best way to understand it is by using the current criminology theories. Undertaking my course in criminology has enabled me to understand the measures to put in place for purposes of reducing and avoiding crime in society. Furthermore, I have learned how to react to different criminal activities.

Works Cited

Kroneberg, Clemens. Heintze, Isolde & Mehlkop, Guido. “The Interplay of Moral Norms and Instrumental Incentives in Crime Causation.” Criminology 48 (2010): 259–294. Print.

Kubrin, Charis. Messner, Steven. Deane, Glenn. McKeever, Kelly and Stucky, Thomas “Proactive Policing and Robbery Rates across U.S. Cities.” Criminology 48 (2010): 57–97. Print.

Why arson evidence is packaged in metal cans

Forensic investigation into fires is conducted right after the fire brigade has extinguished the fire and the scene has been declared safe for entry. Fires can fall under various categories natural, undetermined, deliberate, or accidental. Deliberate fires, are also referred to as arson and are of the greatest significance to the investigator (Saferstein, 2010). The FBI (Federal Bureau of investigation) has defined arson as, “Any willful or malicious burning to attempt to burn, with or without intent to defraud, a dwelling house, public building, motor vehicle or aircraft, personal property of another, etc” (Reid, 2011). The first stage of an investigation involves finding the cause of the fire and its origin. During the collection of evidence from an arson scene, the evidence is packaged in airtight metal cans (Reid, 2011).

One of the reasons for this is that some of the evidence collected may still be hot. If they are placed in other containers such as plastic or envelope, they might burn the containers and render crucial evidence irrelevant. The melting point of metal cans is high and, therefore, there will ensure there is no spillage if the forensic investigator collects a sample of flammable liquid from the scene. Metal cans are also important in the collection of arson evidence because they do not contaminate the evidence collected. The airtight lid on the metal container will help in preventing further oxidation of the sample as this can destroy evidence (Saferstein, 2010).

The differences between high and low explosives

There are two types of explosives: the high explosives and the low explosive. The high explosives are also referred to as detonating while the low explosives are also known as burning mixtures. The main difference that exists between detonation and burning is that in burning the mixture will burn at a very fast rate and will need to be ignited to produce an explosion. On the other hand, detonation occurs instantly and does not need to be lit to produce an explosion. Chemically, the difference between the two is the proximity of oxidizing and reducing compounds. Detonating mixtures require little external energy to break them apart and cause an explosion. Unlike the burning mixture, they contain molecular bonds that require little energy to break. This is a result of having the oxygen very close to the reducing agent in the detonating mixture and therefore can easily be used. In the low explosives, the bonds are very strong and require a lot of energy to break them. This makes them require external sources of energy to produce an explosion (Siege & Houck, 2010).

High explosives do not need to be confined so that they can explode as is the case with low explosives. High explosives require just a small force to explode that is offered by a detonator or a blasting cap. Low explodes require a lot of force to explode, which is provided by the fire where it is ignited. Both explosives have also different explosion velocities. The high explosives are known to have shattering power, while the low explosives are known for their heaving power (Siege & Houck, 2010).

The high explosives undergo a chemical reaction through the explosive material at very fast speeds, which are higher than that of sound through the same substance. The speed in the low explosives is generally lower than that of sound through the same substance (Siege & Houck, 2010).

References

Reid, S. T. (2011). Criminal Justice Essentials. Chichester, West Sussex ; Malden, MA : Wiley-Blackwell.

Saferstein, R. (2010). Criminalistics: An Introduction to Forensic Science. Upper Saddle River, NJ : Prentice Hall.

Siege, J. A. & Houck, M. M. (2010). Fundamentals of Forensic Science. Burlington, MA : Academic Press.

Classicism and positivism are two trends, schools of thought, which contradict each other in the way they view crime in society. The classical school was the predominant school of seventeenth and eighteenth-century Europe. It is founded on the principle that man is a ‘calculating animal’ and that it interacts with others on the basis of a sort of social contract. This applies to criminal behavior as well. The man had the capacity to distinguish and decide on his own regarding its behavior. It is the calculations he makes that make him act in defiance of the laws or according to them. Thus, this school assumes that man has the free will to decide himself his course of action. They rejected the idea that people were determined by a superior force in what they do. Man is not considered to be determined in his course of actions. Thus he is fully responsible and accountable for everything he, or she does.

This belief of man as a calculating animal assumed that everyone was able to conduct complex rational calculations in his, or her, mind and then decide what was his, or her, best interest in a specific course of action.

“The question for policymakers therefore how to use the institutions of the state to influence citizens to choose not to offend. This theory emerged at the time of the Enlightenment and it contended that it should focus on rationality.” (Vold et al, 1998)

There is also another school that took rationality seriously. The Positivist school of thought was inspired by the positivist ideas that universal laws are governing the course of action of everything in the universe. The duty of science was to discover these laws. Once we discover them, we can make a precise description of what shall happen and, most importantly, why it happened.

According to this school this, was true even for deviant, criminal, behavior. There were laws that governed the conduct and actions of people. If we discover these laws then we can predict why they acted in such way and what to expect from them in the future. These could be biological laws, psychological laws, or social laws that govern people’s conduct. So, this school does not view people as beings who choose by their free will their course of actions. People are determined by these laws to behave in a certain manner. In its most extreme form, this school believed that people could be classified as criminals by checking certain biological features of their bodies. The same could be said for psychological factors. Thus, people were determined to be criminals not by their genes (the biological features) or their psyche (the psychological factors). They may seem to choose freely what to do but they cannot behave differently from these determined characteristics they have. Thus, if we classify people according to these universal principles, laws, then we can distinguish the potential criminals within society.

Compared, the two of these schools are quite opposed in the way they view the role of the human being in society. The classical school assesses the role of the criminal law after someone has done something and insists on the fact that people should be sanctioned at the same token as the crime they committed. Instead, the positivist school believes that we do not have to wait for people to commit something and try to understand why. If we get to know people’s biologic and psychological principles, than we can assess who is a deviant in society and who not. They are induced to perform their deviant actions by these principles, and not by free choice.

References

Vold, G. Bernard, T. and Snipes, J. (1998) Theoretical Criminology. Oxford University Press.

Introduction

At present, lots of people claim that the US judicial system is imperfect. Some state that US prisons are overcrowded and consume a lot of funds. There are those who stress that rehabilitation policies are ineffective. Admittedly, there are issues in all these spheres. However, rehabilitation practices are effective when applied properly. To identify the effectiveness of rehabilitation options, it is necessary to consider the peculiarities of these options.

Definition and Origins of Rehabilitation in Prison

Rehabilitation is a set of practices aimed at “restoring” an offender “to a constructive place in society through some form of training” (Cole & Smith, 2007, p. 261). In the first half of the twentieth century (until the late 1960s), it was believed that people could identify the factors that made the offender commit a crime. The major factors, which were taken into account, were social problems (e.g., poverty, discrimination, unemployment, etc.), psychological or biological issues (e.g., mental disorders).

Thus, it was believed that the offender should not be punished; he/she should be “cured” (Cole & Smith, 2007, p. 261). Therefore, various rehabilitation techniques were used to ‘cure’ the offender. However, in the 1970s, this attitude changed. It is now believed that it is difficult (or even impossible) to identify the reason for committing a crime. Thus, it is impossible to work out the effective rehabilitation technique, and, thus, the entire concept is unsuccessful.

Definition of Parole and How It Differs from Mandatory Release

Parole is the release of an offender who can spend the rest of his sentence out of prison (Alarid & Del Carmen, 2012). Thus, the offender can become a part of society. Lots of people consider this to be the most appropriate type of rehabilitation. The offender should fulfill certain conditions. Otherwise, he/she can be sent back to prison. It is necessary to note that this release mechanism is not available for some offenders. For instance, parole is denied to “recidivists or offenders convicted of violent crimes” (Alarid & Del Carmen, 2012, p. 49).

Mandatory release differs from parole in terms of major concepts. Thus, the mandatory release does not depend on the offender’s behavior or plans. The offender is released when his/her sentence is served (Alarid & Del Carmen, 2012). Many people claim that this release mechanism is inappropriate as offenders are often released irrespective of their readiness to become a part of the society.

Definition of Probation and How It Compares to Other Forms of Sentencing

Probation is a form of sentencing which is based on the concept of rehabilitation. The offender is not sent to prison but remains in the society if he/she manages to fulfill certain conditions (Ismaili, 2010). More so, the offender remains in his/her familiar setting (family, friends, etc.). However, there is certain supervision.

The strictness of the supervision imposed depends on the gravity of the offense. As has been mentioned above, the offender should also satisfy some conditions (he/she is not allowed to own weapons, should be employed, can have to perform community service tasks, etc.). This form of sentencing is one of the mildest as it does not presuppose time spent in prison.

For instance, parole presupposes release from prison after some time spent behind bars. Of course, probation is very different from mandatory sentencing as the offender does not serve a sentence in prison in the former case. It is also necessary to note that probation is different from fining as in the latter case, the offender only pays some money and does not have to fulfill numerous conditions common for probation.

Definition and Options of Community Corrections

Community corrections “refers to any sanctions in which offenders serve all portion of their entire sentence in the community” (Alarid & Del Carmen, 2012). People claim that this form of sentencing is the most appropriate as the offender has the chance to repay to the community. Community corrections can be post- and pre-adjudication. Post-adjudication community corrections are imposed after the defendant has been found guilty (or he/she has pleaded guilty).

Pre-adjudication community corrections are imposed before the offender is found guilty. Pre-adjudication community corrections options are pre-trial release, supervision, house arrest, mediation between the victim and the offender, circle sentencing (Alarid & Del Carmen, 2012). Post-adjudication community corrections are probation supervision, parole.

Critique of the Current Rehabilitation Options

Is There a Better Solution to the Current Parole Process?

The current parole solutions are quite effective. Any offender, who has decided to become an effective member of society and is ready to change, has the chance to be released from prison. Admittedly, prison often negatively affects inmates as they are subjected to the influence of jail subcultures and a variety of dangerous interactions. Thus, offenders can understand the gravity of punishment (being placed behind bars) but are allowed to repay to the community instead of being imprisoned.

Furthermore, those who have committed violent crimes and serious offenses cannot be released, which ensures the security of the community. Of course, parole should not be imposed for those who have committed insignificant offenses as such people do not need to be exposed to the prison environment. Parole can be a good option for those who had had some rehabilitation options (community service, fines, etc.) but committed a new crime.

Is There a Better Solution to the Current Probation System?

A current probation system is a good option for contemporary society. It is based on the principles of rehabilitation, and people can repay their debt to the community and start a new life without crime.

It is necessary to admit that the system often fails due to a variety of reasons, e.g., judicial flaws, imperfections within the society, etc. However, if it operates according to the rules set, it is effective. To make the system work, without failures, it is necessary to address such issues as social problems, financial constraints in the country, discrimination, etc.

Are There Better Solutions than the Current Community Corrections Options?

Another effective system is community corrections service. Community correction options are also effective when imposed properly. They can be especially effective with juvenile offenders. Young people should not be exposed to jail subcultures or violence in prisons. However, they should understand that offenses always lead to certain punishment, which can take different forms. Again, there can be imperfections within the system, but they are caused by imperfections within the society.

Conclusion

To sum up, the contemporary rehabilitation options are based on the principles of assistance and guidance. People believe that the offender should not go to prison if the offense is not violent.

People believe that everyone deserves the second chance, and the community can benefit if the second chance is granted. Admittedly, people still commit crimes, but the crimes are often associated with social and economic constraints within society. Therefore, to make the rehabilitation system more effective, it is essential to address the major issues existing in society.

Reference List

Alarid, L.F., & Del Carmen, R.V. (2012). Community-based corrections. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.

Cole, G.F., & Smith, C.E. (2007). Criminal justice in America. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.

Ismaili, K. (2010). U.S. criminal justice policy: A contemporary reader. Sadbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.

Parents, friends, and neighbors respond to the morally wrong acts which encourage people in developing the “talent” of being a true criminal. The ways of how people react when they discover that a young person has been involving him/herself in such criminal acts are important because they will determine whether a young person may continue engaging in this act or not. This essay intends to address the case that needs a personal application of criminology.

My 16-year-old boy is a soccer freak who plays soccer for his school team. Ever since my son’s team participated in a big tournament at school, our family had to attend it so that each family member could see how good our son was in order to encourage him as he played the game. All soccer players were going to have their families with them for the game; there was no reason for us not to attend this event, and this would give us plenty of family and neighbors time. On this particular day, we decided to go for a picnic. We carried all the stuff we would need; as we were in a hurry, we would get a perfect spot and rush out of the house not forgetting the dog. We also knew that we had forgotten to pack the dog food and water bowl.

We were lucky enough to find a good spot in which we could have our small family picnic site and for refreshments. We hurried over to the arena so that we could be closer to the field and be in full view. When the game was in motion, I had a little disturbance and had to go see what was happening. The dog was not behaving and what better way to calm a dog than give him some food and a bone. Therefore, I rushed to our bags just to find that there was no dog food but there was always a spare bone in the car. I gave it this bone so that it could calm him but I had to rush home to get some water for my wife. I rushed home quickly and found the door to the house ajar and, as far as I could remember, I was the last to leave the house and there was no way that I could leave the door open like that.

Few cases of burglary have already taken place in the neighborhood, and precautionary mechanisms had to work. Our family was to close the door, and we decided to install an alarm system just to be on the safe side. I was still wondering who could be at the house, I walked to the kitchen because some of the dog food was kept there, and surprisingly, I found Austin, my sons’ friend, frantically searching the kitchen drawers. When he discovered that he was not alone now, he looked startled and quickly recovered his composure to hide the guilty look on his face. I asked him what he was doing in the house, and he hastily replied that he was leaving my son a note. On the counter next to him, I noticed that there was a lock pick and some of my wife’s jewelry. I became suspicious; and what was more important, a slight waft of marijuana caught my nose. I asked him to leave the house immediately, and he obeyed. He took the jewelry and the lock pick without knowing that I had already noticed all these details. I thought about what had just happened, and the first thing that came to my mind was to call the police but then again I thought that my son had to be informed about the incident, and it would be a better start-off point. However, the child could throw the way of evidence if I gave him enough time. Though the boy was my son’s friend, it was important to report this case to the police but not to deal with it alone. My decision was based on the idea that this case would be a good lesson for a child, and he would receive proper punishment that would scare him off from this line of crime.

I call the police immediately, give them detailed information about the accident, and add the fact that the boy smelled of marijuana. I also tell them to follow the kid secretly because I just wanted to inform them about the accident. I leave the house with a self-conscious notion in my mind knowing that the neighborhood is not as safe as we usually think it is. When I reach the school, I cannot wait for the game to end so that I can talk to my son and my family and get detailed information about Austin so that he can feel free to tell me more information that he wants to hide from the police. Once the tournament is over, my family gathers at the picnic table. I decide to speak about the boy with my son. I ask him if the boy is doing drugs, and my son indirectly hints at the fact that the boy is doing drugs. It upsets me because the boy has been hanging out with my son and probably my son could be doing the same. As if reading my thoughts, my son blurts out that he is not in the same clique as Austin who is involved in buying and selling drugs. This detailed information helps me to evaluate the situation and make several decisions. I tell him that I found Austin in the house when I had gone to take the dog food. I retell him the whole accident, and he gets upset about it because he cannot believe that Austin could burglarize. As we are in school, visiting the school counselor would yield more information that would enable me to decide if I give the police a go-ahead. The visit to the school counselor sure does give me information. The school counselor tells me that over the past few terms, Austin participated in several meetings with elder boys who sold and used marijuana. There are several attempts to contact his parents to discuss Austin’s behavior. Within a short period, everyone around believed that the boy had stopped. However, the boy found better places where he could meet with the boys and he is now engaging in a burglary. The counselor informs that he has never found my son hanging out with this group, and if he were then they would call us so that we could keep an eye on the activities that the child engaged in. The counselor also tells me that Austin has several bad grades; in comparison to my son, Tyreke, who gets excellent grades, Austin’s achievements are rather poor.

After the tournament is over, we rush back home and I tell everyone to stay in the car because the police are coming over to look for evidence that the house in which the burglar was for some time. I decide to visit Austin’s parents without tagging Tyreke along after the police arrive and take the necessary stuff that is usually under police jurisdiction while investigating. When I arrive at Austin’s home, the parents cannot believe this terrible news about their son. They were perfectly aware that Austin has been hanging with boys elder than him and that he had been using drugs. The parents admit that they have already talked to him and for some time, it seems as though he had broken the habit. When I tell a true story that I found him alone in the house with a lock pick, they become shocked about the idea that their son could do such a thing. I ask them when their son left home. They answer that there was a tournament at school that day and they left home together in the morning and at around noon, he left saying that he was coming back home to take something that he had forgotten to tag along with him. I tell parents that Austin took my wife’s jewelry, and it would be better to rummage his room so that we could find evidence that he had taken things from the house. I was surprised that despite the fact of being shocked because of their son’s behavior, Austin’s parents quickly started searching Austin’s room to provide me with evidence of the crime. I also say that I had already made a report to the police and any kind of evidence would be useful to the police.

Austin’s parents explain to me that they understand that the investigation of this case should ensure that their son is guilty. However, they want to make sure that they have enough guidance to discourage him from continuing this behavior. On my way home from Austin’s, an idea strikes me about having a neighborhood watch program that would ensure that the youths do not involve themselves in such morally wrong behaviors and acts. I remember one television show that I have been keenly watching some time back. There was a discussion about different watch programs and the ways of how effective they are in several neighborhoods; there were also a number of low incidents of crime after people made use of the program (Shuttleworth, 2008). I also remember a certain theory they explained in order to provide some help with the neighborhood watch programs. The routine activity theory supports this neighborhood watch program because an initiated watch program works in a neighborhood and the neighbors become aware of the possibilities of vandalism and burglary in the area and the presence of prowlers who break into homes and cause big or small damages. The neighbors would therefore be on the lookout, and such activity would reduce the number of targets because most people would be observant of the possibilities of such incidences. The residents may also result in safety measures such as the installation of security systems that can alert them to such dangers. It may greatly reduce the incidences of crimes. The reduction of targets is possible in case people make use of such neighborhood watch programs (Felson, 1994).

When I get home, I decide to spend some time on the Internet to get enough information that I need about the ways of how to implement these neighborhood watch programs and interesting facts about the details which are important. After reading available information about neighborhood watch programs, I realize that this program may be the best means to be used in this neighborhood because it would ensure everybody about the necessity to watch out for any suspicious detail in order to report to the police as soon as possible and inform the youth about dangers and temptation around (Pridemore, 2000).

I make a call at Austin’s home in order to ask his father if he agrees to discuss the idea to introduce this neighborhood watch program in our neighborhood with other people because it is a good move for the neighborhood’s safety and for our children. I call some friends who live in this neighborhood in order to ask them what they think about such a neighborhood watch program. Almost all of them admit that it is a good idea, and when I ask them if they may come to a meeting with police in order to address the issue to everyone. Fortunately, all of them agree. I also call the police and discuss the same issue. They agree to the program and to the meeting because the cases of burglary have become common. As for Austin’s case, the investigation should be done on him in order to represent a kind of lesson for other young people so that they can be counseled to avoid such accidents and think about the outcomes of their actions.

Reference List

Felson, M. (1994). Crime and Everyday Life. Insight and Implications for Society, Thousands Oaks : Pine Forge Press.

Pridemore, W. (2000). Review of When Push Comes to Shove: A Routine Conflict Approach to Violence. Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Behavior, 7, 125-128.

Shuttleworth, M. (2008). Survey Research Design. Web.

Any person at the mercy of others is quite defenseless, and people in prison are as vulnerable as any person can be. Prisons are closed to public scrutiny, and prisoners have to spend their sentence usually enduring the abuse, and harsh treatment meted out by their captors.

Even if they are not abused or subjected to harsh treatment, prison conditions are not conducive to the mental or physical health of prisoners because of prisons being overcrowded, the occurrence of violence, drug usage, and prisons’, poor living and health conditions (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 2013).

However, there are prisoners with special needs and problems who are more vulnerable than other normal prisoners. These are individuals with mental or physical deficiencies and disabilities.

Such prisoners are badly treated by the prison staff and other prisoners mainly because of the discriminatory attitudes that are deeply rooted in society and are more evident in the restricted environment of prisons. Those on the death row are in an altogether separate category because of the stress they undergo for their sentences, and they also need special attention (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 2013).

Special needs and mentally ill prisoners cost the state and federation more money to incarcerate than those who are not mentally ill. The major cost in this pertains to staffing requirements because mentally ill patients require more attention as they are slow to communicate their needs, which are not easily understood.

This requires extra staff or overtime from the regular staff. The example is given of Broward County, Florida where the cost of regular housing prisoners is around $80 per day, but for the special prisoners this cost escalates to $130 per day because of the need for psychiatric medications and examinations which increases costs significantly (Torrey & Kennard, 2010)

Another factor is that mentally ill inmates spend more time in prison than normal inmates. It has been recorded at Florida’s Orange County Jail inmates without any health issues stay for an average period of 26 days while on the other hand inmates having mental issues have an average stay period of 56 days. This indicates that inmates with mental and psychological issues stay for a much longer period, which adds to costs.

This difference is due to the problems that such inmates face understanding the rule of prisons and following them. Moreover, delays often take place as inmates with psychological problems have to wait due to limited bed space in psychiatric hospitals. Mentally ill patients are also more suicidal, and 50 percent of all prisoners who commit suicide are mentally ill (Allen, 2008).

If these prisoners were not given proper care, they run greater risks of harm from other inmates and themselves, which in turn increases suicide incidences. Another disturbing factor is that if not cared for properly, they find it difficult to adjust under normal circumstances and are more likely to break the law against and be sent back to the prison, thereby, increasing the prison population and adding to costs.

Their time in prison would be unnecessarily increased because of them breaking prison rules, and they are usually detained for longer periods due to limited space in psychiatric hospitals. Besides increasing the cost of their imprisonment, they add to the Medicare costs for the government when they are released from the prison (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 2013).

The Office of Community Programs in the State of New Jersey makes efforts to implement programs that help offenders become useful and productive members of the society upon their release to decrease their chances of committing more offenses and returning to the prison. For this, the office agrees with NGO’s which provide a community to the released offenders and also makes it compulsory for these agencies to monitor and oversee various rehabilitation programs.

These include diversified assessment and counseling services and also medication and jobs to make it possible for the released offenders to adjust to the normal community life. Out of 10 such programs, one is implemented before the person is released, and nine programs are especially for the mentally ill and those who indulge in substance abuse. The program also provides internal mental fitness for those prisoners who have special needs.

These are very well organized and effective programs which provide wide-ranging contacts with the released offenders, impose curfew timings for parolees and carry out urine tests for drug use. A member of the NJDOC is also included in the panel which endorsees applicants for participation in the program for judges who sentence or resentence these offenders. The NJDOC has also set an “Office of Drug Programs” for offenders both in and out of prisons.

The task of this office is to address “Addiction Assessment and Treatment Referrals” for assessing the seriousness of drug abuse, initiation of treatment, and corrective measures for these drug addicts. Treatment commences after assessing the level of drug and related causes. The overall objective is to try and turn offenders into law-abiding and productive citizens so that they can contribute effectively to the society and not commit offenses or be sent back to the prison repeatedly (State of New Jersey: Department of Corrections, 2013).

Reference List

Allen, S. (2008). Mental Health Treatment and the Criminal Justice System. Journal of Health & Biomedical Law, IV, (1), 153-191.

State of New Jersey: Department of Corrections. (2013). Divison of Programs and Community Service. Web.

Torrey, E. F., & Kennard, S. A. (2010). More Mentally Ill Persons Are in Jails and Prisons:A Survey of the States.

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2013). Prisoners with special needs.

Investigators are people whose career is specialised around the domain of crime; he therefore assembles data and relevant information about a specific crime in order to determine the accuracy and truth behind the information after which the analyzed information is forwarded to the judicial system, individuals or businesses. Thus they can work in a wide range of fields ranging from legal, financial to matters that are personal in nature. Therefore apart from criminal investigations they can also investigate civil matters for instance, insurance and fraud matters. For one to become an investigator, there are several requirement that he/ she must have. First of all, there are no formal education requirements for a majority of the investigator jobs but all should possess a post high school degree in addition due to the diverse demands of the work it is usually advisable for one to have undertaken classes in criminal justice and relevant criminology studies however it is not mandatory (Cranston 1995).

From the above mentioned qualifications of an investigator there are several qualifications that should be cross checked with what qualifies as a profession. However there are some criteria that are stipulated down which provides the guideline on what constitutes a profession or not. For a career or any job to become a professional it must be vocational and requires specialised training and education to the people involved. Traditionally, people have considered a profession to be any career that requires a person to have a degree in the relevant field. In addition one has to have adequate practical and literary proficiency in addition to the academic qualifications (Desty 1887).

In addition the job should not be general or cover a wide range of divergent services but should be highly specialized making the professionals experts in their field that the practice. The work should also consist of high morals, motivation and ethics by a person towards the professional while putting the interests of the people or clients first while at their service, therefore there should be no bias or malice while serving the community. It is therefore vital that one has accredited academic qualifications which are highly specialised for instance doctors attend medical schools and attain a degree in medicine and so they become professionals in the medical field, the same case applies to lawyers who attend law school to specialise in law thus becoming professional lawyers (Hazard & Dondi 2005).

Additionally, there are stipulated codes of conducts that are laid down by various professional bodies that govern how the professionals who practice under it must behave in their line of business as well as the repercussions a member of the professional body who breaks the code of ethics has to face which may include penalties such as suspensions, fines or even complete expulsion from practicing the profession in future. These professional bodies govern how a specific profession will be carried and constantly make new laws and regulations which make it mandatory for the members to adhere to. Hence professions have a lifetime body that works towards improving the profession unlike other careers whereby regulations stops with the attainment of academic qualifications. Thus profession careers should be carried out with due diligence owing the duty of care to the clients or public in order to avoid mishaps that occur due to negligence (Peppet 2008).

Also apart from adhering to the laws of the professional body, members are also required to adhere to the natural law of the land as any criminal conducts by the professionals attracts stiff penalties or taints the public reputation of the given profession. Whereby the public views professionals as people of high esteem, accomplished, earn high salaries, are autonomous and proud of their work and thus trust them with their various interactions with them. In addition professional expertise matures with the amount of time one puts into the practice, hence apart from the academic work, practical’s are essential in the specialised field (Won-je 2010).

Hence as depicted above, the criteria of an investigator does not fully qualify as a profession. The academic qualifications for an investigator are not stringent as that of a career profession. For one to become a certified profession, one should posses an accredited degree in a given discipline while on the other hand, it is not mandatory for investigators to have college/ university degrees but only high school degrees (Internal Revenue Service 1972).

However apart from the academic qualifications, the other criteria’s for making an investigators work a profession are quite similar. First a profession is a field that requires one to be specialized in a particular field. Investigators are usually specialized in various disciplines of investigation as investigators are trained to carry out different types of surveillance and investigations. There investigators specialized in computer forensics who deal in cyber crimes, legal investigators who deal with matters of the legal fraternity, corporate investigators who deal with internal investigations of a corporate entity (Madinger 2006).

Investigative work can sometimes be risky and taxing. This is because it is mostly based on “work alone” theory, which sometimes involves direct confrontation, though in some cases especially on surveillance or when following a subject others might be involved. This with no doubt adds a requirement in investigator’s work: self defence. Unlike other career whose professionalization is entirely formal based, most of investigator’s qualification requirements such as self-defence mechanisms are not necessarily formal. Nevertheless, just like the duties of a profession is determined by the needs of a client, so are the duties of an investigator whereby a clients requirement may be long term (insurance investigations) just like the relationship of a lawyer and his client be

Investigative work entails a lot of research and compiling of data on a given subject. (Hess & Orthmann 2009) notes that “this requires the investigators to spend much of his time outside their offices doing surveillance or conducting interviews.” Nevertheless, it sometimes calls for the investigator to gather and compile their information from the office through phone calls and computer researches. This means that the investigative work is characterised by environmental divergence calling for a “know how” approach from the investigator. (Sonne 2006) notes that “when dealing with a certain case for instance, the investigators may be confronted with an environment ranging from plush boardrooms to seedy bars; requiring concrete intelligence to distinguish which part of the case requires what type of environment.

It is important to note that training and education constitutes a significant segment of studies in investigators. Private investigators for instance need training in police science and criminal justice courses despite the fact that there are other related experiences that are vital in requirement. In this field, police investigation experience is considered appropriate to term one as a profession in private investigation field. In addition, private investigators need to posses experience in other fields. Their profession is mostly based on their experience from previous work in other fields according to Sonne (2006), “many investigators enter the field after serving in law enforcement, the military, government auditing and investigative positions, or Federal intelligence jobs.” For example, private investigators are mostly in their second career, after having retired from such fields as law enforcement officers, accounting, investigative reporting and government agencies among others. Their experience from their previous work regarded with importance in conducting their investigative works (Brian & McNeil 2003).

On the other hand, it calls for bachelor’s degrees mostly in related felids such as business as well as law or business administration and a master’s degree to qualify on as a corporate investigator profession. This is because their role is significantly extensive which according to Turvey (2008) include “internal investigations such as drug usage in the workplace, ensure that expenses are not abused, determine whether the employees are stealing the assets, merchandise or information; and external investigations which attempt to thwart criminal schemes from outside the corporation, such as fraudulent billing by suppliers”

Siegel (2008) notes “investigators professionalization in computer forensic work requires at least a degree in accounting or computer science which in these field are considered to be of greater help that a degree in criminal justice.” These degrees however do not complete the profession qualification in this field, but rather just provide a foundation whose complete construction relies with investigative techniques learned in the job thereafter, hence just like other professions, experience is vital. Despite the fact that formal education is vital; it only acts as a starting point after which experience and adherence to stipulated professional guidelines gradually bring about the profession. Most of investigators learn their role while working for their enforcement agency. New investigators despite their formal qualification will first be initiated to database usage in information gathering depending on the type of the firm entitled. This will for example constitute observing senior investigators performance, learning to recognise computer fraud, as well as ‘learning in doing’, where through practice in real operations they get equipped. Gradually they gain skills which qualify them as professions in private investigation field (Turvey 2008).

Just like many other career professions, investigator profession will require a license to operate. Most nations’ legal systems call for licensing of investigators since they are involved with activities that involve private and public issues. Some of the licensing requirements in profession establishment for investigators are; the investigator should be 18 years and above, have a combination in formal education criminal related fields and most probably a significant period of experience. These are requirements like just any other profession careers and that gives it the professionalism it deserves. In addition, licensing for investigators may require a credit in criminal history background to the investigator involved. This is a proof of the investigators cleanliness in terms of moral conduct and respect of the law.

Just like the requirement of other career professions which requires respect to their associated fields’ rules and regulation, investigators career is as well attributed to respect of the law. Being entrusted with confidential matters and investigation of law-breakers, they themselves should show a higher degree of adherence to the law. Determination of their ability to respect the law is based from their criminal history background where cases of conviction may disqualify one as a profession through denial of licenses. They also receive a crediting based on qualifying score from written examination that covers laws and regulations which tests their conversancy with the existing laws (Won-je, 2010).

In other cases, investigators acquire official recognition from professional departments to exhibit proficiency in their field just like other professions have bodies that govern their practice. According to Hess & Orthmann (2009), “the National Association of Legal Investigators confers the Certified Legal Investigator designation upon licensing investigators who devote a majority of their practice to negligence or criminal defence investigations.” These and other requirements make investigation a professional.

Hess & Orthmann (2009) notes “professional Certified Investigator certification is also provided by security industry trade organization known as ASIS International.” To qualify as a profession in this field, ASIS International recognizes only those with high school diploma or other equivalent, experience in investigation of at least 5 years, management of investigation for a period of 2 years and must pass a written test. Regardless of the field of investigation, the investigators should hold a clean record of national law compliance. Also he/she should have a high degree of conversancy of his/her field regulations and law as well as a faithful disciple of the same.

The screening process of prospective investigators can therefore be attributed to his criminal history background. It is through this knowledge where one will be deemed as a qualified investigator. This is because the investigators’ career is highly based on his ingenuity, persistence, and assertiveness. In addition, other major characteristics that make a profession are attained through research and investigations in a particular field, so do investigators work whereby there also acquire traits through investigations and research in a given area, such traits include; boldness during a confrontation, ability to think critically and quickly, as well as communication skills (Turvey 2008).

Morals, integrity and ethics just like in professions dictate how investigators will conduct themselves during an investigation which provides a guideline to the investigator on how to behave and uphold the professionalism of his work. Respect to others rights and beliefs is an aspect embraced in interrogation and dialogue which are vital since the facts presented before jury are the bases through which the judge will base his judgement. Any altered or assumed information will significantly affect positive outcome. As a result, investigators’ ability of “bias avoidance” and effective investigation constitutes their profession (Sonne 2006).

As mentioned in several cases, professionalism in the investigative field is enhanced through post-degree learning. Profession is mostly attained through ‘Professional training’ an ‘on-the-job’ training. Professional training, which is according to Internal Revenue Service (1972), “an accredited training as contributing towards a university qualification, or formal training courses provided or funded by the agency” can range from one-day information sessions or seminars to learning from fellow workers termed as ‘learn as you go.’ As mentioned in several cases, professionalism in investigative field is enhanced through post-degree learning. Profession is mostly attained through ‘Professional training’ an ‘on-the-job’ training. Professional training, which is according to Madinger (2006) “an accredited training as contributing towards a university qualification, or formal training courses provided or funded by the agency” can range from one-day information sessions or seminars to learning from fellow workers termed as ‘learn as you go.’ Integrity agencies are one of the major providers of high-quality informal training. This provides the investigators with good foundational information pertaining “the all about” investigation hence asserting that investigators too are professions. Professional training therefore gives rise to investigation staffs that are professionally qualified. Professional training brings about transformation of staff from ‘prior taking up their current role’ to ‘once taking up their current role’, a transformation that converts formal trained investigators to professions investigators.

Just like any other professions, investigators can be considered profession through the process of learning (both formal and informal) they undergo.

Criminal field is a wide area with segmented sub-fields. Through specialization in specific field such as, professionalism is acquired. Thus, through specialization in their field as investigators they can be considered as profession. In addition, just like any other career profession, whose professionalism is dictated by their professional conduct and duty of care, investigators acquire profession through the same. Like other professions, they are provided with guidelines on how they should conduct themselves and their operations with limitations and rights (Brian & McNeil 2003).

Thus apart from university degrees which is a criteria for a job to be considered as a profession and the self defence skills an investigator has to possess, as depicted, investigators should be classified to as a profession as they meet all the other criteria that constitute a profession.

Reference list

Brian, B & McNeil, B. (2003). Internal corporate investigations. Washington, DC: American Bar Association.

Cranston, R. (1995). Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Desty, R. (1887). The Supreme Court Reporter, Volume 7. Washington DC: West Pub. Co.

Hazard, G. & Dondi, A. (2005). Legal Ethics: A Comparative Study. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

Hess, K & Orthmann, C. (2009). Criminal investigation. New York: Cengage Learning.

Internal Revenue Service. (1972). Criminal investigators. New York: U.S.G.P.O.

Madinger, J. (2006). Money laundering: a guide for criminal investigators. Clermont: CRC Press.

Peppet, S. R. (2008). The ethics of collaborative law. Journal of Dispute Resolution, Forthcoming, Vol 7, 1-31.

Sonne, W. (2006). Criminal Investigation for the Professional Investigator. Clermont: CRC Press.

Siegel, L. (2008). Essentials of Criminal Justice. New York: Cengage Learning.

Turvey, B. (2008). Criminal profiling: an introduction to behavioral evidence analysis. Durham: Academic Press.

Won-je, S. (2010). Prosecutors launch investigation into illegal surveillance. The Hankyoreh, Vol 5, pp.12.

In the discipline of criminal profiling, the term signature is used in the description of the distinctive conducts committed by a lawbreaker that serve his/her mental and emotional desires. On this basis, through examining and interpreting a meticulous lawbreaker’s signature conducts in a crime scene; together with other elements like modus operandi (OP), criminal profilers behaviorally connect cases and develop sympathy towards a lawbreaker’s intentions. In this case, the understanding of desires and inspirations through lawbreaker signature; involves an approval of both psychology and physical evidence and it is found most frequently in the exploratory use of lawbreaker inspirational typologies (Turvey, 1999).

From these explanations, offender signature can be defined as any distinctive conduct committed by a lawbreaker further than that which is essential to effectively complete a crime. In this relation, there are two different but dependant parts that form the notion of signature which include the signature aspect of a crime and the signature behaviors. First, the general signature aspect of a crime denotes the emotional or mental idea that the lawbreaker gratifies by engaging in certain groups of crime-related conducts. On the other hand, signature behaviors are the actions themselves that include crime-related deeds that are essential in carrying out an offense effectively (Bull et al, 2009).

A point worth noting is that, signature as a term was first used by John Douglas who was an American criminal profiler. In connection to this, Douglas developed this term in order o assist those investigators engaging in criminal profiling to distinguish lawbreaker’s behaviors; that suggest mental desires from offender conducts that are part and parcel of MO. As stated by John Money an American psychologist, what brings about this distinctive behavior is the fact that; lawbreakers have in their brain a pattern of particular conducts and successive linked feelings that are referred to as ‘love map’ (Esherick, 2005).

In this relation, the term ‘love map’ describes a romanticized sight, an individual or a program of activities that gratifies the specific mental and psychological desires of a lawbreaker. Additionally, love maps desires or dreams are developed in all human beings as part of innate process of human growth; and can consequently be influenced by both genetic and ecological factors. According to Money, criminal conducts are as a result of derailing of the human developmental process which makes an individual capable of engaging in gratifying activities which are aggressive or unlawful activities (Bull et al, 2009).

Generally, case linkage is the process of linking different crimes committed by the same lawbreaker so that it can help in police investigation and prosecution. On this basis, case linkage is the process of identifying some evidence that satisfy the investigators of a particular case that the offender committed the crime. From this it can be argued that, case linkage is a broad procedure of representing separate linkages between two or more formerly unconnected cases (Turvey, 1999).

In this relation, case linkage can be determined by examining the number of fired ammunitions that were recovered from the body of the casualty or from the crime prospect. In this case, this case linkage can be used where a firearm was not found or linked to the proof collected at the crime prospect. From this example it can be revealed that, case linkage helps the investigators or police investigating a particular case in coming up with adequate evidence that a certain offender committed the crime at hand. It should be noted that, advanced technology in computer tools have been used in laboratories for screening of firearms-related proof items for possible linkages of occurrences. In most cases, case linkage is used in murder or rape cases in order to provide the investigators with adequate evidence (Esherick, 2005).

On the other hand, probative link is a term used to denote a link between one or more solved or unsolved cases that are essentially separate; but support the evidence that the same individual committed them all. In this relation, probative linkage is adequately unique to help the investigators to be more probative than detrimental. On this basis, probative link as a method of operation assists the police investigating a particular case with adequate evidence that a particular offender had committed two different crimes separately (Turvey, 1999).

A good example of a probative linkage is in a case whereby a girl was murdered when she was being raped. In this case, if an offender is suspected as the one who raped this girl; it will be doubtless that he is responsible for her death. In this connection therefore, investigators investigating the case of the death of this girl; will find it more likely that the offender who was accused of raping her, murdered her. On the basis of probative linkage one can give examples like; positive fingerprints, eyewitness IDs and bite mark comparison results (Bull et al, 2009).

Lastly, the term investigative linkage connects one or more answered or unsolved cases; that provide information on the distribution of resources towards the investigation of truth. On this basis, investigative linkage is used where conduct, wide-ranging or opportunistic situations of the crime provide general similarities on the methods of operation. On this basis, examples can be provided to support the investigative linkage like; consistent signature conduct, location selection and witness descriptions like voice and clothing (Turvey, 1999).

To wind up, offender signature as a term denotes distinctive conduct committed by a lawbreaker further than that which is essential to effectively complete a crime. On the other hand, the case, probative and investigative linkages are very essential to the investigators as they help in easing their investigation work.

Reference list

Turvey, B. (1999). Criminal Profiling: An Introduction to Behavior Evidence Analysis, 1^st edition. London: Academic Press.

Bull, R., Bilby, C. & Cook, C. (2009). Criminal Psychology: A Beginner’s Guide, 2^nd edition. Oxford: One-world Publications.

Esherick, J. (2005). Criminal Psychology and Personality Profiling. Broomall: Mason Crest Publishers.

Media coverage portraying the effect of CSI is a phenomena that has been well documented, this means that the actual evidence of the effect of programs, such as CSI is difficult to access. The accounts presented in the media are depend on the conclusory statements and anecdotes given by actors in the criminal justice system, and there is little reference to empirical data.

The socio-legal literature reviews shows something different. According to scholars, CSI effect strongly affects prosecutor’s effect leading to wrongful acquittals. Its effect on defendant’s effect is also plausible.

According to the data provided by the socio-legal scholars, a number of discussions on the litigation bursts, that are regularly provided by the media, are dependant on horror stories on unthinking civil actions. Analysis of these stories has revealed that the expected outcomes were less egregious compared to the reports. The CSI effect covered in the media also depends on anecdotes.

Findings in this survey have little supporting evidence on prosecutor’s effect; however, this is what people think when CSI effect is mentioned. This survey is focused on the effects on actor’s behavior. The survey does not focus on the effects on juror’s behavior, although they seek to determine jurors’ behavior.

The survey is aimed at determining whether the juror was affected by CSI. There is a claim of legal actors talking to jurors, but despite this, the measure is still poor because the measure is not direct, the legal actors hardly perceive the juror’s behavior in a biased manner.

According to the results of juror’s survey, the individuals who are very interested in CSI share different attitudes to the evidences provided by forensic scientists than those who are less interested in CSI and thus, have less exposure to it. A psychological testing is carried out to determine if there is any difference in behavior between high-exposure individuals and low exposure individuals.

To determine the CSI effect, a number of studies were carried out between a group of individuals watching CSI and the group that does not watch it. In this survey, psychological tests were also carried using college students as jurors, the college student do not represent the actual pool of jury but are used for experimental purposes.

In the previous research, there was examination of the prosecutor’s effect on the juror’s decision of acquitting defendants; this might be because of their highest expectations in forensic science. Sometimes, when the juror acquits a case even with forensic science, there is an accusation on mishandling of evidence because of the high expectations for cases with forensic evidence.

In such cases, the prosecution is expected to win, and if the otherwise happens, then the ruling is not considered to be fare. This study focuses on determining the CSI effect, the prosecutor’s effect on the jury’s verdict and the prosecutor’s effect on the juror’s behavior. There is also the issue of how the media covers CSI effect, does it affect the people’s perception on CSI effect.

Intellectuals and social scientists have different views on civil litigation reform on the coverage of CSI effect in the media; intellectuals support tort reforms while social scientists support the civil litigation system. The tort reformers depend on resonant anecdote for evidence while social scientists depend on statistical evidence.

According to the analysis, media use is broad in terms of CSI effect; media is used to convey different ideas that might sometimes be incompatible, in this research CSI effect is assumed to strongly affect the prosecution side which might affect the jury’s behavior during acquittal.

This research tends to make people believe that CSI has an impact on juror behavior, and this makes it difficult during conviction. Media discussions on CSI effect gives a suggestion that CSI effect could seriously ramify justice systems, however, there is no evidence to support the claim.

Another effect of media coverage is one on the jury; there is a believe that lawsuits affect the United States both socially and economically, therefore, plaintiffs that would always win the law suits is a perspective that is considered as sympathetic on the side of juror. The jury’s decision might be affected by previous decisions that were made through the media; therefore, the jury ends up in making wrong decisions concerning the current case.

This argument might also be applied to the case of CSI effect. In this case, jurors who are consumers of media, might be tempted to believe that prosecutors have limitations in handling criminal trials.

This makes them believe that prosecutors cannot achieve conviction despite the presence of forensic evidence, and because of this perception, the juror might view prosecutors as underdogs and act out of sympathy towards their presentation in court. A strong prosecutor effect might be described as a self-fulfilling prophecy, which is turned into a self-denying prophecy by the jury. This might prevent the occurrence of strong prosecution.

CSI effect on the juror’s decision has been purported by the media coverage and anecdotal evidence. This study’s focus is skewed towards investigating the CSI effect together with NC and its role as a moderator in criminal trial verdicts. CSI effect has been accused of influencing decisions made by investigators, forensic scientists, court judges and prosecutors as well as juror.

Judges have been accused of making decision based on what they had watched on the television earlier; they relate the evidence presented to them to that presented in CSI. Decisions made under such circumstances are wrong and without use of evidence presented in the court.

Jurors who have a high viewership of criminal television series are also have a tendency of using the opinions presented in CSI programs to decide on the verdict or acquittal of criminal suspects. The public is worried about such cases because they can lead to acquittal of people who are guilty thus threatening the security as whole. If the trend continues the justice system would fall apart.

This research determines the relationship between CSI and NC and relates it to the findings in the previous studies. According to the previous study, this relationship is more complex because there is a point where the two need each other’s cooperation, and there is a point that each of them has to be independent.

Therefore, this study will seek to find if there is another factor that relates the two with any complexity. In this study the factors that determine verdict are explored, as well as question of consultations between these factors is discussed. This study utilizes questionnaires and video recordings as materials, where participants are asked to watch the video and fill the questionnaires. The data are analyzed to determine the CSI effect and need for recognition, as well as their relationship in a criminal trial.

The participants were allowed to view a video from trials; the video presented to the participants the reasons for verdict together with preferences. They were also subjected to fiction of forensic science together with documentaries on the same.

The findings were partly replicated in the earlier research findings, where viewership was known to influence greater expectations of evidence from the prosecution; however, it did not influence the verdict. This is an indication that CSI effect does not influence juror’s perceptions on the evidence present in the court by the prosecution. However, this study does not give evidence on the effect of heavy viewing on the prosecutor that can lead him or her to wrongfully acquitting defendants.

The findings give predictions of negative scores with high NC; this is an indication of high sensitivity verdict scale acquittals. However, this does not mean that viewership or dichotomous verdict can be moderated. NC also predicts moderated viewership through prediction of the reason for the verdict. This evidence reminds that of McAuliff and Kovera provided in 2008. In that case, the participants of the process were found to be more exposed to the soundness of the facts provided in the court.

The findings in this study raise several questions; where heavy viewing carried biased attitudes, which is seen in the dissatisfaction with pro-prosecution evidence as compared to light viewers. Heavy viewers, also had the likelihood of identifying potential mishandlings of evidence as the reason for the verdict, and had an indication of a higher standard of certainty that is required when determining the innocence of the defendant.

In this study, viewership did not influence verdicts; this is because verdict is influenced by many other factors and scientific evidence is only one of them. The issue of using only NC in order to predict verdict scores has raised a number of questions. The use of moderated viewership, in this case, in order to predict mishandling of evidence in the ruling was the issue of discussion.

According to research done in earlier years, individuals who have high NC tend to process information more actively, they are able to develop opinions at early stage and support evidence that is considered to be ambiguous than those individuals who have low NC. The current research presents a greater threshold of finding the defendant guilty when compared to light viewers; therefore, using positive correlation, it is reasonable to relate acquittals to heavy viewing and high-NC individuals than to other groups.

According to the current results, forensic television viewership, together with NC, may work together when evaluating certain types of evidence; however, the two do not work together during verdict formation. The findings in the research done by other researchers reveal that the relationship between NC and CSI effect is complex.

There is a third factor that moderates NC and viewership; this is evidence strength; this is because according to the previous research, high-NC individuals are sensitive to strong evidence, and NC moderates viewership in instances where evidence is very strong or very weak. Therefore, this two have a likelihood of convicting in cases of strong evidence. This study is unique in the sense that it has used video recorded stimulus as opposed to the past studies that used written stimuli. This study also used NC as a moderating factor.

According to the National Research Council, DNA evidence is increasingly being used in America; the criminal justice system use forensic DNA testing to work out its criminal cases. By November 2008, 79,300 investigations had been solved using the National DNA Index. Additionally, Forensic DNA testing has been useful in acquitting individuals who had been wrongly convicted. The use of forensic is not only supported by the criminal justice system, but also by the U.S. public; the public supports the collection of DNA information.

DNA testing faced challenges when Ryan brought up a debate on the use evidence from DNA testing; he stopped executions in the United States following the use of DNA evidence to acquit death row inmates.

The public had to be educated on the use of DNA testing and evidence further; this took a place in the media as an entertainment program where a team of forensic scientists solve criminal problems using DNA evidence; this program was among the popular program and it is still is. This brings out the question of whether the media perception of DNA influences the public view.

According to research on the influence of media on public perception, particularly on science and technology, television viewing cultivates reservations and beliefs in science and technology. However, heavy television viewers have more reservations as compared to light viewers. Viewing television has been accused of displacing learning opportunities on science and technology; however, according to research, viewing television programs of specific genres shape the perception of the viewers about science and technology.

The use of news media also has an influence on how the public perceives science and technology, according to research, reading newspapers can lead to generalized perceptions and support of science and technology. Scholars have also realized that reading newspapers, the reader’s general knowledge, as well as knowledge on specific areas of science and technology rises. However, previous research has not shown much about the use of local television and its impact on public perceptions on the same.

DNA evidence is a part of science and technology which perceptions have been influenced by media; the crime dramas in television, such as CSI, together with its clones are the main focus. According to Anecdotal and qualitative, these programs present evidence that is reliable; when the first six seasons were analyzed, it was found that CSI provided evidence to support its claims, and this evidence was systematic. The analysis also realized that there was no mistake in using the evidence.

Exposure to such programs shape how one perceives forensic evidence, particularly DNA evidence. According to some researchers, such exposure raises one’s expectations when forensic evidence is presented to him or her by the prosecution; this makes it difficult for prosecutors during convictions. Other researchers argue that exposure to crime dramas enhance confidence in evidence presented in forensic form, making it easier for prosecution during conviction.

The present research is focusing on influence of television viewing, as well as news media on public perception of forensic evidence. This research provides tests on psychological processes that underlie media influence on perceptions of science and technology. The study points out a number of relationships between the public perceptions and media use of DNA evidence.

Television viewing is heavily dependant upon public perceptions that the DNA evidences are the most reliable, and thus, there is a great support for the need of a national DNA databank and that the weight of a jury’s decision when DNA evidence is not attached. The study also found out that viewing television can lead to displacement of learning opportunities as seen in the previous studies by Nisbet and colleagues.

The findings in this study also shed light on the issue of CSI effect. Crime dramas shape jurors’ reaction towards forensic evidence. There was no evidence to show that viewing crime programs predicts the weight attached to the jury’s decision when DNA evidence is present or absent.

This finding casts doubt on previous research about CSI effect; however, the debate should be shift the focus on public understanding and confidence in forensic evidence. According to the findings in this study, television predict the public self-perceived understanding of DNA, as well as belief in DNA evidence reliability; this finding relates to the former studies.

The study also confirms the argument that when studying media has a great effect on public perceptions, and news media should also be included; this is because both television viewing and reading newspaper predict the public support for a DNA databank. DNA databank may be used to reflect crime coverage and such information can be used by crime fighting institutions to fight crime. This finding backs up the opinion that media use can shape and produce learning on science and technology.

The analysis in this research had several limitations; the study focused more on television viewing rather than on particular shows that capture the exposure to the genre under study. This study focuses only on the United States of America and yet the DNA testing and forensic science are technologies that used globally and the future researchers should take care of the limitations.

“The results indicate that, independent of criminal justice experiences, sociademographics, and other background characteristics, crimes show viewing habits affect potential jurors’ pretrial attitudes and predispositions regarding scientific evidence and various forms of testimony” (Baskin and Somers 99).

This quote indicates there are many factors which affect the attitudes of the pretrial jury in the justice system. The most influential factor in this era is the rate at which crime related television programs are watched.

From the quote, it is clear that the author(s) of this article are in agreement with the allegations that programs such as CSI have a negative effect on the process of administering justice. More evidence in support of this indicates that such programs have led to the exposure of the procedures used in detecting and investigating crimes.

“The impact of the presumed CSI effect has reverberated throughout various sectors of society, with attorneys reporting changes in trial strategies so as to counteract it” (Baskin and Somers 100).

This quote indicates the attorneys came to the realization that their system of carrying out investigations and presenting the evidence is no longer effective owing to the public interception in these processes. This is why they suggest of changes in the strategies used in trials. This will ensure the public are blocked from the new strategies hence being unable to interrupt the justice system.

This is a clear indication of the effect of the penetration of crime shows in the judicial process. The effect is definitely negative due to the fact that the advocates seek to implement some major changes. To maintain the new system however, regulations should be instituted to ensure the system is guarded against media interception.

“In other words, jurors do not anticipate the same types or levels of evidence so often portrayed in crime and justice television shows; they can distinguish between the “fictionalized” accounts presented by the media with the “reality” of the courtroom” (Baskin and Somers 102).

This quote makes illustrates that jurors have accepted the fact that the media has eroded the criminal justice system through the crime shows. At the same time, they state that they have the capacity to distinguish between what is fiction and what is real. This is something most of the other people are not able to tell.

This often leads them to believe that what they see on their screens is the real procedure for carrying out criminal investigations. However, despite these differences, these shows still give the public a clue of the investigation procedures. However, any person with a special intention might use it as a lead.

“Those who watched more crime shows were actually more skeptical of the hair evidence and had more confidence in their verdicts, but were no more likely to convict the defendant than non viewers” (Baskin and Somers 105).

This quote explains the research findings among law students. It reveals that those who watch these crime shows are more confident than their counterparts. This is an indication that they believe what they see on the television and it indeed affects their judgment of the evidence collected.

Supposing these students go to the field and realize the procedures from the shows are the same ones being used, then it will be hard to convince them there are some fictitious procedures on the show. This explains why the jury selection system need to be changed so that it is completely different from what is displayed in the crime shows.

“Yet recent research suggests that experiences and attitudes strongly influence all aspects of decision making, including how closely a juror will follow instructions through the actual choice of a verdict” (Baskin and Somers 106).

This quote explains the effects of people’s attitudes and their experience in all aspects of decision making. In other words, it means the things people come across in their day to day lives affect their judgment. The media is one of the most influential tools in the lives of many people. In anything, a big percentage of people live their lives in relation to the most recent trends as portrayed by the media.

This rule also applies to the criminal justice system in relation to the crime shows being aired on the televisions. The jurors’ judgments and attitudes have been eroded and diluted by these shows. This suggests that most of them are no longer able to make sound decisions. Media influence has largely affected their decision making capacity of most people. The situation can only be reversed by making alterations in the system to differ completely from what is displayed by the media.

“Although this study does not set out to examine whether crime show viewing habits are related to jury decision making, it shares with other research on the CSI effect an inability to parse out, with any precision, the wide range of factors that may impact attitudes that criminal justice actors bring to the courtroom and how they may influence verdicts” (Baskin and Somers 107).

This statement suggests that it has been difficult to analyze the exact CSI effect in the courtroom. There are many factors that may have an impact on the criminal justice system besides the CSI effect. Despite the fact that the investigations could be fictitious, the crimes being investigated are real crimes committed on a daily basis. These crimes include; murder, manslaughter and high degree robberies. There is therefore no enough evidence to discredit the CSI effect in the courtroom.

“Based on available research related to the CSI effect and to Jury decision making, it is clear that future research must take into consideration an even wider array of dynamics and processes, across broader swaths of sociocultural and psychological terrains, if they are to understand the public’s attitudes toward and expectations regarding the use of scientific evidence in criminal trials” (Baskin and Somers 109).

There is a wide range of reasons behind people’s reactions and this means that any type of research on these factors should be carried out with regards to other sources of human behavior influences. These include socio-cultural effects and psychological considerations, since these are some of the most influential factors to people’s attitudes. Scientific evidence, as used in most of the CSI shows are said to have a positive impact on research since it enhances the viability of the evidence collected.

The implication of this statement of the research question is the processes used in the CSI shows are mostly real though presented with a fictitious situation. Therefore, the CSI effect is something that should not be neglected; instead the criminal justice system should be transformed such that the effects are minimized if not eliminated.

‘Objection, your honor! Television is not the relevant authority.’ Crime drama portrayals of eyewitness issues” Many scholars have discussed options for improving juror knowledge or protecting against the adverse effects of mistaken juror’s beliefs, with some suggesting that in certain cases expert testimony could improve juror decision making” (Desmaraias et al 226).

This statement illustrates that the beliefs of the juror has been altered by the type of testimony from most eye witnesses. The presentation of the witnesses in most cases is guided by the previous knowledge of witnessing obtained from the CSI programs. This means, most people coming to court as witnesses already have a predetermined way presenting their evidence and this in a way alters the validity of the evidence.

As a result of this, there is a need to improve on the knowledge of the juror so that they are able to tell when a witness is being genuine and when they are providing the information based on what they saw in the television program. These are some of the changes that should be implemented in the criminal justice system to counter the CSI effect.

“Some researchers suggest that knowledge about eye witness issues has been influenced by recent media’s fascination with ‘hot’ forensic psychological topics including the recovered and false memory debate, childhood abuse, and wrongful convictions” (Desmaraias et al 228).

This statement illustrates the role of the media in alternating the criminal justice system. Most witnesses in real crimes have been brainwashed by what they see in the crime shows. They are therefore unable to present their evidence in a non biased way. The topics crimes covered in these programs are real and this explains why most people believe that the shows are real.

What they do not realize is that they are using real life experiences to make the programs more appealing, while most of the procedures they use to solve these crimes are fictitious and nonexistent. This therefore explains why the jury selection needs to be changed so that it is completely detached from the systems used in the programs.

“In recent years, there has been considerable interest in the effects of media exposure on public perceptions and beliefs more generally” (Desmaraias et al 229).

This is a general comment indicating the extent over which the media affects the perception of the public. Information relayed through media especially electronic media has played a major role in the development of the modern culture. It is therefore not logical to assume that shows such as CSI could not have any effect thereof.

These crime investigation shows are the most famous in this era and their effect has been strongly felt in the judicial system. From this, we can make a conclusion that the judicial system should undergo major changes to ensure that the loopholes created by these programs are sealed completely.

“The results of these studies point to the media’s ability to educate and influence public perceptions” (Desmaraias et al 229).

The studies that have been conducted to determine the extent of the CSI effect in the criminal justice system brings out the influential nature of the media. The findings indicate that media are the most educative tool. At the same time, this same media have the other side which is destructive to some extent.

Considering these factors, it is possible to tell the challenges faced by the criminal justice system as a result of the CSI effect. This has influenced the public to believe what they see on their screens and attempt to put it into practice. Some of the jurors have even gone to the extent of making their judgments after consulting the cases in these programs.

“The CSI effect describes the potential impact television has on today’s real jurors such that they may now have expectations about the type and quality of evidence that should be presented during the course of a trial” (Desmaraias et al 231).

This explains further how the criminal justice system has been hampered by the CSI effect. These programs have created a standard for the jurors in the eyes of the public. The quality of evidence they provide is judged in relation to what is seen in the media. They are therefore forced to go out of their way and measure up to the standard. The only remedy to this is to upgrade the court system and ensure that the investigation procedures remain a top secret in the concerned organization.

“Evidence that does not meet the high standards may be judged to be insufficient, resulting in increasing acquittal rates” (Desmaraias et al 233).

This is another quote from the article that describes how the jurors’ decisions have been influenced by the CSI effect. Standards are set based on these programs despite the fact that the biggest percentage of the events is fictitious. The criminal justice system is therefore compelled to lift their standards while at the same time compromising the truth they are sure of.

The public is the main determinant of their success and they would never want to lose their credibility. Diversions from what most people know to be the truth renders them incompetent and insufficient in the eyes of the public. This explains why they need to change the system and make it known to the public that they have upgraded it beyond what the media depicts.

“With respect to pretrial publicity, research demonstrates that news coverage can contribute to bias in jury decision making, generally increasing the likelihood of guilty decisions” (Desmaraias et al 235).

Many decisions in the justice system have been made based on information obtained from the media. As a result of this, the decisions made are most of the times guilty ones. This means that most of the suspects are convicted of being guilty despite there not being sufficient evidence to incriminate them.

The media is to be blamed for this since they portray a certain section of the community as being guilty of crimes. The truth however eventually comes out and this means that members of the public are gradually losing faith in the criminal justice system. To save this situation, there is need to make major reforms in this system.

“Importantly, following confessions by true perpetrators, DNA exonerations, and other independent sources of evidence, we now know that wrongful convictions do occur and at alarming rates” (Desmaraias et al 236).

From the television shows such as CSI and the likes, there are some investigation procedures that are displayed as perfect. This however has proved not true in real life as these methods have not shown that much credibility.

This includes the commonly used DNA exoneration method which was nullified by the confession of the true criminals. This means that the people who had been convicted were not the criminals as shown by the investigations. The changes to be implemented in the justice system should therefore include scrapping of such procedures.

“In terms of individual eyewitness issues presented at least once per episode, the memory for specific details of normal events and memory for specific details of traumatic events issues were presented in the greatest number of episodes overall” (Desmaraias et al 238).

From this section, it is evident that the memories of the events from the programs stick in the minds of the viewers. Such people who already have a premonition of crimes cannot make effective witnesses. This is irrespective of whether they were eyewitnesses to the crime or not. Their judgment will always be affected by what is already in their minds regarding crimes.

This makes them ineffective in their witnessing and in case the jurors are not aware of this factor, then they end up being misled by the evidence provided by the witness. This can be eliminated by setting up a system that can detect whether a person is basing their evidence of the current event or some past event.

“Recognizing the role of media, and television in particular, as public educator, the goal of the present work was to increase our understanding of the sources of juror knowledge about eye witness issues” (Desmaraias et al 239).

This is a conclusive quote which shows the role of the media as a source of education. This education can however be negative as is the case of the eye witness dilution. It brings to the readers’ attention that the juror is aware of these issues related to the witnesses. This suggests that they know the challenges they are face. This is an assurance that they will do something about it if they want to regain the confidence of the public.

Forensic science international: crime scene investigation (as seen on TV)

“With this new style of infotainment comes an increasingly blurred line between the hard facts of reality and soft, quick solutions of entertainment” (Durnal 2).

The word infotainment has been used to describe the main idea behind CSI TV shows. The idea is; they entertain as well as provide information. The entertainment part can be credited but there are some doubts when it comes to the information. This information is mostly exaggerated such that people are not able to distinguish between what is real and not.

In most cases, the information is diluted by fiction, obvious to the viewers who tend to believe the media more than anything else. This explains why the CSI effect cannot be stopped from penetrating the justice system, unless the system is changed such that it cannot accommodate the CSI effect.

“Crime remains an unfortunate, yet integrated part of the American culture, not as hopelessly interwoven as the media would have us believe, but regardless, a part of life (or at least the evening news)” (Durnal 2).

This quote brings out the fact that the media have played a major role in making people believe that crimes are a part of their life. An example is that of the CSI like programs where different crimes are being solved every day. Viewers tend to believe that these crimes are happening somewhere in reality.

They might therefore tend to discredit the judicial system indicating that they are not active in detecting and solving crimes. To eliminate this problem from the system, they should come up with ways of educating the public on the real judicial systems as opposed to the fictitious ones created in the media.

“The media today has influenced and interacted with crime, criminals and the criminal justice system in a manner that is so complex that entire careers are spent trying to separate and identify which breeds which” (Durnal 3).

The way in which the media presents crimes to the people in form entertainment has had a negative effect in the justice system. It is almost difficult to tell the difference between real crimes and acted ones. This has led to an establishment of a special body whose function is to try and separate reality from the shows and this has proved very difficult owing to the high level of media influence.

People have had to take studies in forensic science so as to assist the justice system in identifying what is real crime and what is not. The justice system will then be expected to make relevant changes in this regard so as to protect the public from crimes perpetrated under the cover of entertainment.

“The media would also have us believe that with technology currently available, most crimes can be easily solved” (Durnal 3).

One of the greatest effects under the CSI effect is the fact that most people have come to believe that major crimes can be solved in a short time. As a result, the justice system is considered incompetent if they take a long time to solve the cases. The public fails to understand that the technology displayed in the TV shows is not real.

This is in fact misleading since the result of it is people not having faith in the judicial system. To avert this effect, the best action is to make technological changes that will bring the system closer to the expectation of the public while at the same time making them understand that the fictitious part of the show cannot be brought to reality.

“Numerous instances of the CSI effect regarding jury members have been identified in courtrooms across the nation” (Durnal 3).

Since the increase in the rate at which the crime investigation programs are being watched, there have been a lot of changes observed in the court rooms. These include the judgments made by the jury members most of whom are great fans of these programs. This effect has been realized across the country, calling an attention to the issue. To prevent further corruption of the judicial system, some changes need to be put in place so as to create a divide between the real judicial processes and the acted ones in the TV programs.

“Prosecutor’s tactics, approaches and entire cases have been altered by this kind of phenomena” (Durnal 3).

The CSI effect has greatly affected the prosecution procedures in the courts. The tactics ones used by the prosecutors in real cases are now being used in TV dramas. The prosecutors no longer have a unique approach to the cases as this has been eroded. They are therefore required to go back to the drawing table and come up with new approaches to their procedures. This will restore the confidence of the public after realizing that the reality is what happens in the courtrooms while the TV programs are meant just to entertain.

“Prosecutors are faced with questioning witnesses and convincing newly informed jurors of the appropriate applications of the techniques and methods of identification they have come to see so often as their favorite shows” (Durnal 4).

The other major challenge faced by the prosecutors is that of trying to convince the jury to distinguish between reality and fiction. Research shows that a majority of the people in the jury considers these shows as their favorite since they believe it provides them with relevant knowledge.

Most of them prepare their testimonies based on what they see in the programs hence not providing the prosecution with accurate information. This means that the effect of these programs is evident in both the jury and the witnesses, complicating the judicial process even more.

“Even with the often times unrealistic and stretched technology, most of the science in these shows is at least based on a real technique that has worked or could work in the future” (Durnal 4).

The implication created in these shows indicates that the ideas presented in these programs are not entirely fiction. This actually creates further confusion because it brings about an illusion that the occurrences in these shows could be real. In fact this is what has made members of the jury who are well knowledgeable to fall in this trap.

Care needs to be taken to ensure that the illusion created does not eventually incline the justice system towards the CSI effects. The people involved in the justice system should come up with relevant changes that will tell the two apart.

“Undue expectations have been placed on police, investigators and laboratory workers” (Durnal 4).

From what is seen in the CSI type of programs, the fictional solutions to crimes have resulted in unrealistic expectations among members of the public towards the police, laboratory technicians and the investigators. They always believe that the reason why investigations do not end up in real life as they do in the shows is because of the failure of one of these parties.

It is either that that the police or investigators did not carry out the investigations effectively or the laboratory workers are not competent enough. These notions can only be done away with if the judicial system is transformed in a way that will tell it part form the fictional views presented in the shows.

“It has been documented that as a result of CSI – type shows, the number of students interested in forensic science has greatly increased” (Durnal 5).

These shows have created an immense interest to study forensic science in most people. Their intention of doing this is however not so clear since in most cases is driven by curiosity. The problem with this is that these people expect to come across the procedures from the shows yet they are not aware that these procedures are not real. If the judicial system changes in a way that will detach it from what is shown in the shows, the people will be able to tell the difference between facts and fiction.

The perceived Impact of crime scene investigation shows on the administration of justice

“Some authorities even maintained that such shows may impact the operation of the civil justice system” (Hughes 261).

It has come to the attention of the authorities that the CSI effect is a real phenomenon. They also realized that this might have an effect in the operation of the justice system. This in itself is an indication that something needs to be done to the system to shelter it from this effect. Changes need to be made in a way that will ensure the justice system is sheltered from this effect. This means that it has to be upgraded to a level than only law experts can understand.

“The popular media have long found criminal justice issues a fertile area for episodic stories. Is has also been asserted in the past that media representations have impacted the criminal justice system” (Hughes 263).

The media people have realized that CSI related programs are the catch. This explains why these programs are increasing on the TV screens by the day. Each show comes up with new techniques and technologies. As a result of this, people’s ideas tend to be edited each day. What has brought about this whole idea of the CSI effect is the effect that the media has on the public, such that they are not able to tell what is true and what is just meant to entertain them.

“The concern here is that the portrayal of forensic science in criminal investigations creates expectations regarding the necessity and infallibility of science in solving crime” (Hughes 264).

One of the most dangerous outcomes of the CSI is the fact that it has led the public to believe that some tactics used in solving crimes can never go wrong. Scientific methods to be specific have been given unrealistic credit. This is a negative effect because what the media portrays as perfect could be the most flawed procedures. Some of these scientific procedures do not even exist in reality. This calls for a course of action whereby the justice a system should be separated from the illusion created by the media.

“CSI and similar shows provide unrealistic examples regarding the speed with which forensic results are obtained” (Hughes 266).

This is another major problem brought about by the CSI effect. These shows last for only 45 minutes on the higher side. Yet by the end of that time, a crime has been discovered, investigated and the concerned people prosecuted. The public has been made to think that these procedures are real, hence creating a mindset that the scientific investigations are that fast. The only way to deal with this kind of thinking is to ensure that the procedures used in real life are different from the ones portrayed in the shows.

“Some police and prosecutors have asserted that they must change the way they investigate and present their cases due to the impact of shows like CSI” (Hughes 267).

It has come to the attention of prosecutors and the police that the methods they have been using in investigations are no longer valid. This is as a result of the CSI effect which to some extent has exposed some of their procedures. The validity of their evidence is questioned especially when it is different from something that was seen in the TV. They have therefore been forced to change their way of doing things so that they can separate themselves completely from the CSI effect.

“Citizens may demand higher end forensic tools, investigation and techniques for common crimes” (Hughes 268).

The investigation techniques used in CSI like shows are high tech and even some are not real. However, members of the public are not aware of this since they judge the credibility of the justice system by CSI standards. At the end of the day, they tend to demand that the tools used in investigating crimes be upgraded. What they fail to realize is that these tools and techniques are fictitious. As for some techniques, they can be achieved over time.

“Researcher have contended that the media is the primary method by which the average person learns about the criminal justice system” (Hughes 270).

This assertion made in this statement imply that most common people could never have an idea of the operations of the criminal justice system had it not been for the media. The problem with this is that the ideas portrayed in these shows are mostly fiction. People therefore get informed in the wrong way hence misjudging the real procedures. Due to the media effect, people tend to believe what they get from the media more. This is why the justice system needs to be changed so that it is different from what is displayed on the screens.

“These results indicate that judges do believe that shows like CSI impact their criminal justice system” (Hughes 270).

The results of research conducted to determine the extent of the CSI effect indicate that that most of the judges blame this to the incredibility of the justice system. Most of them believe that this effect has taken hold of the judicial system. If action is not taken promptly, they might be forced to adhere to the procedures presented in these shows. This will mean greater compromise in the justice system. The best way to deal with this therefore is to create the difference between the two.

“Judges appear to see an increased desire for forensic evidence on the part of the fact finders” (Hughes 271).

It has come to the attention of the judges that most fact finders prefer forensic evidence. The CSI effect has made many people believe that this is the most accurate investigation tool. In fact, it does not present any of the shortcomings related to these procedures. Fact finders therefore get trapped in trying to emulate these procedures. They are determined to perform these procedures hence spending a lot of time and eventually they never get the desired results.

“The respondents did perceive that these television shows created unrealistic representations as to the state of the forensic art in their jurisdiction, as well as to the speed of forensic testing” (Hughes 272).

The respondent to the research conducted on the CSI effect in relation to the justice system indicates that the public is aware that most of these programs are unrealistic. This however does not stop them from trying to relate these ideas to the real situations. They in fact believe that the forensic science used is not real, and so is the speed for conducting the forensic tests. Despite this, the shows still have an impact on their judgment.

Evaluating the effectiveness of the source

Crime Show Viewing Habits and Public Attitudes towards Forensic Evidence: The “CSI Effect” Revisited.

The author of this article has been trying to bring out the effects that CSI like shows have on investigations. People are no longer able to tell fiction from the truth and hence creating an unrealistic demand on the jurors, scientists and law enforcement agencies.

This article brings out a positive correlation between the demand for forensic science to be used in investigations and the increase in the viewing rate of CSI like shows. This explains why most people would believe a DNA test more than any other evidence. They are however oblivious of the fact that DNA samples are the easiest to distort and do away with. This article is relevant to the research question in that it explains why the criminal justice system needs to be altered.

Objection, your honor! Television is not the relevant authority.’ Crime drama portrayals of eyewitness issues.

This article brings out the shortcomings of the investigation methods depicted in the CSI programs. The study that creates a focus in this article was carried out with these programs in mind. It was meant to establish the extent over which these programs have affected the public’s knowledge of the criminal justice system.

People seem not to be aware that these procedures do not exist, or even if they do, they are not as accurate as they are made to appear. The experts however discredit these procedures terming them as insufficient and indicating that they often result in wrong judgment. This article can therefore be considered effective in bringing out the need for change in the criminal justice system.

The Impact of Crime Scene Investigation Shows on Administration of Justice.

Thomas Hughes examines that the influence of CSI related shows in the justice administration process. The judges who were examined admitted that these programs have a high effect on the justice system in the courtrooms today.

It has been established that the views of most people in relation to these crime programs has changed their entire thinking of the criminal justice system. In reality, these shows do not even grip the advancement of forensic analysis. Thomas Hughes goes ahead to explain how the distortion created by these shows has affected the judgment of the scientists.

Forensic science international: crime scene investigation (as seen on TV).

This article tries to bring out CSI effect different ways related to the justice system. The CSI effect has not only affected the court proceedings but also the criminal activities. This article explains how this impacts the crime processes, from the time the crime is committed to the time the criminal is prosecuted. The author here agrees with the existence of the CSI effect as well as the effects it has on the entire justice system. From this article therefore, the need for change in the criminal justice system is evident.