CSI SHOWS ‘CONDEMN INNOCENT’
Juries influenced by TV
JURORS are finding innocent people guilty because they watch too many crime dramas, a forensic expert reckons.
Ruth Morgan said the “CSI effect” meant panels trying real criminal cases were likely to be unduly influenced by forensic evidence.
And she claimed lawyers were taking advantage of jurors’ telly habits by misrepresenting such evidence in court.
Prof Morgan, of the Jill Dando Institute at University College London, found misleading criminal evidence had been a factor in 22% of wrongful convictions.
She blamed underfunding for creating pressure to over-emphasise the scientific findings.
The professor, who analysed successful Court of Appeal cases over seven years, said there was a need to be “honest” about the limitations of forensic science.
In many successful appeals she studied, the flawed presentation of evidence alone had been enough to overturn convictions. She said: “What’s telling is that in 76% of cases where there was misrepresentation of evidence there was no new evidence presented at appeal. “That gives an indication as to how much this really is the tip of the iceberg. It’s very concerning. “We shouldn’t be in a position where an entire verdict comes down to a DNA profile.”
In the US, lawyers quiz potential jurors on their TV viewing habits to eliminate CSI fans from panels.