But this effect is not just caused by watching certain TV shows; it could come from any media that mentions the criminal justice system. According to the Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine by Errikson, D, Gailes, B and Horseman G, the effect is “this phenomenon that now extends beyond crime-based television programs. for example, literature, video games, and the media via news articles, may also play a role in this effect” (Errickson, Gailes, and Horseman, 2019). So overall, the CSI effect is the influence that viewing different types of media related to the criminal justice system or forensics will have on setting up unrealistic expectations that impact the court.

Also, from the Canadian Journal of Criminology, Corbett noted that “as a result of unrealistic depictions of forensic evidence on crime television shows, jurors may be overly influenced by forensic evidence in the courtroom, leading to two possibilities: 1) when no forensic evidence is presented, jurors will acquit, and 2) when forensic evidence is presented jurors will convict, even if it’s flawed” (Corbett, 2015). Even though there are other people like police officers, lawyers, and community members, the jurors are the most affected.

One of them was from Stanford Law Review, called Investigating the “CSI effect” effect: media and litigation crisis in criminal law, by Cole, S and Dioso-Villa, R., who found that when surveying the legal actors, “79% reported some specific instance in which they felt juries’ decisions were influenced by forensic programs, in these cases they cited jury preference for forensic evidence was 50%, the jury discounting the eyewitnesses was 53%, and an increased use of negative evidence witnesses was 28%” ( Cole and Dioso-Villa, 2009, p.1335-1373. 38).

However, another survey reports that the legal actors themselves were once influenced by forensic TV. They also did psychological experiments and a study on jurors. The most important result from this is that it proves that this effect can influence not only jurors but also the legal actors. This also relates to my thesis: "People who enjoy any type of media that involves the criminal justice system are more likely to have a false belief/narrative of how the criminal justice system impacts their decision in the courtroom”( Cole and Dioso-Villa 2009, p.1335-1373. 38).

Using the results from the surveys they had conducted further supports my thesis because they provide evidence that jurors were influenced by CSI TV shows and had certain things that influenced them, whether from wanting more forensic evidence or having a negative perception towards a witness. They also stated that it could affect anyone who has watched any CSI, including some legal actors.

This supports my thesis because it shows how the “CSI effect” could influence the juror. After all, some jurors, in this case, had seen that police could have the dirt found on the victim tested to see if it matched the dirt from the crime scene, which is just the jury wanting more forensic evidence when there was plenty of evidence that was already presented that shows the man was guilty.

Cole, S. A. and Dioso-Villa, R. (April 2009). Investigating the “CSI effect” effect: media and litigation crisis in criminal law. Stanford Law Review. Vol.61 (6), p.1335-1373. 38

Corbett, R. (January 1, 2015). Beyond frequency: perceived realism and the CSI effect. Canadian Journal of Criminology. Vol.57(1), .83-114. 31

For the Case Study:

Hedgepeth, M. (2012, May 26). The thirteenth juror: the “CSI effect”. Campell Law Observer. http://campbelllawobserver.com/the-thirteenth-juror-the-csi-effect/