The "CSI" Factor

Just a thought ,hence why I posted it in skunkworks.
TV shows like CSI, Law and Order, Criminal Minds and various real life cop shows..etc. ....
Are they helping to create smarter criminals?
I'm not arguing about lesser crimes, I mean murders.
Is it possible that potential criminals are watching these shows so as to learn NOT to get caught?
Inside the criminal mind...
www.enotalone.com...

To some, criminals may be the lesser on the scale of intelligence. But some are outright genius. Not in their acts , of course, but the thought process, the ways to evade being caught as they play games with police.
Is it possible they are learning to be more creative because of what's on TV?
Are we contributing to more crime by enthusiastically watching these shows?

The problem lies, not just with criminals themselves.

Shows such as CSI are affecting action in courthouses across the USA by, among other things, raising jurors' expectations of what prosecutors should produce at trial.

Prosecutors, defense lawyers and judges call it "the CSI effect," after the crime-scene shows that are among the hottest attractions on television. The shows —CSI and CSI: Miami, in particular — feature high-tech labs and glib and gorgeous techies.

The programs also foster what analysts say is the mistaken notion that criminal science is fast and infallible and always gets its man. That's affecting the way lawyers prepare their cases, as well as the expectations that police and the public place on real crime labs. Real crime-scene investigators say that because of the programs, people often have unrealistic ideas of what criminal science can deliver.

Link to full article..
www.usatoday.com...

Then of course there is the stories like this one, of a man who got caught, and claimed he learned a few tricks from CSI..

They're actually educating these potential killers even more," said Capt. Ray Peavy, also of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department and head of the homicide division. "Sometimes I believe it may even encourage them when they see how simple it is to get away with on television."

Jermaine "Maniac" McKinney, 25, allegedly broke into a house, killed a mother and daughter and used bleach to remove their blood from his hands, prosecutors said. He also covered the interior of a getaway car with blankets to avoid transferring blood.

Link to full article..
www.tvsnob.com...

Yes..he got caught. But what about the crimes that go unsolved? What if those criminals are using what they have seen on TV to avoid getting caught?
Very easy to argue both sides of the coin here, unless you have a criminal mind.

CSI, Law and Order, and other true crime and fictional crime shows are nothing new. It's just that CSI is so popular. But there is enough information on the net that criminals can access to help them plan their perfect crime. The influence shows like CSI has on jurors can be good as more will want phsical evidence. The down side is that the juror's expectations may be unrealistic. People have to keep in mind that it is just TV. It's for entertainment.

Originally posted by darkelf
CSI, Law and Order, and other true crime and fictional crime shows are nothing new. It's just that CSI is so popular. But there is enough information on the net that criminals can access to help them plan their perfect crime. The influence shows like CSI has on jurors can be good as more will want phsical evidence. The down side is that the juror's expectations may be unrealistic. People have to keep in mind that it is just TV. It's for entertainment.

True, but computer history and activity has ways of being monitored.
TV watching habits, not so easily.
True, potential jurors need to remember that TV ( I hesitate to use the word "Entertainment", is not reality) but it is put forth as very realistic and believable.
And a potential criminal, with murderous thoughts, could easily apply what is learned from these shows to be evasive, and avoid detection.
I'm not condoning it..just stating it as a possibility.The thing is..if the crime remains unsolved, no suspect, perhaps it's working.
There really is no way to tell for sure.
The point is..putting it out there, in any form, the forensic techniques that are used at crime scenes..must be aiding criminals in some way.


[edit on 24-7-2008 by AccessDenied]

Where i live just got a brand spanking new crime lab.
now it looks like im going to have to start wiping my fingerprints after a murder.

Originally posted by baconvein
Where i live just got a brand spanking new crime lab.
now it looks like im going to have to start wiping my fingerprints after a murder.

There's a lot more to it than just wiping fingerprints.
Bleach DOES not clean up blood.
Trace fibers and hair can be found.
Shoe prints.
Many more cameras nowadays to deal with.

According to this chart..the annual crime rate has gone down.
www.fbi.gov...

But there are many Murders unsolved, and the list of cold cases grows every year.
ask.yahoo.com...

Not just a speculative theory any more..
REALITY.

"The evidence we used to see left behind at scenes isn't there as much anymore, and some of these suspects will tell you that they figured out how to avoid mistakes because of what they saw on television," McComb said. "They're covering their tracks, largely due to what Hollywood shows them.

Source
www.pittsburghlive.com...

According to the FBI, police nationwide cracked 41.3 percent of rape cases in 2005, down from 46.9 percent in 2000, the year of CSI's debut on CBS, and 51.3 percent a decade ago.

If you try to cover up a crime with products those products can be traced and matched if residue is left on you, in your car, in where you hung out, or in your home. If you try to wash off at your home, then traces can be found in your tub.

If you make it look too cleaned up instead make it seem like someone else, you're trying too hard and might make mistakes.

The thing those shows teach is what will be looked at/for in a crime scene. Knowing if half the battle so you know what not to do and how not to do and where and when not to do. Best thing to do is cause reasonable boudt and conflict in what the investigators would try to present to the DA or grand jury if you know they gonna label you a suspect. So best way to do a crime is to make yourself look a suspect so you can inject the reasonable boudt and conflict you're actually behind.

If you gather dirt on law enforcement before hand you can use that as leverage also.

Then they would try not to get you knowing what else would be brought into question about them.

Then they lose wholely and wont like investigating you fully cause of what it leads to. Yea, you could have em caught in a maze.

Mabus..sounds like you are a CSI fan.
I suppose it depends on how calculated the criminal is.
It appears the more intelligent they are, the better the plan is laid out.
There are many, it seems, who are doing their homework, and getting away with murder..literally.
If you know the system..you can beat it.

Crimes go unsolved due to lack of manpower and over abudnce of crime. You can never be sure that you've removed all of the evidence. Twenty years ago, DNA was not as well known or understood as it is today. What will we uncover in the next 20 that will solve today's cold case.

I know of a murder that took place in the late 80s that was solved when the guy was caught on the other side of the country.

U Tube Unsolved Mystery
U Tube part 2
Mystery Solved?

A TV program that concerns me more is the BBC program The Real Hustle. I educates people on scams. BUT not everyone gets to see the program, and it's a great way for con-artists to learn new tricks. They show exactly how people can be scammed out of their money - and in most cases it's shockingly easy... I would like to know how many people got scammed because thieves learned new scams from the program, versus people that recognized a scam because of the program...

[edit on 29-7-2008 by Gemwolf]

reply to post by AccessDenied


I think it would be disturbing if law enforcement was really being hindered by a TV show. It would reflect more on poor quality policing than the TV show, which, is entertainment. Watching a medical drama doesn’t make you a doctor! And ‘24 ‘gets loads of silly flak for encouraging terrorists. It would be better to deal with the root of the crime and improve crime detection rather than allow lazy inefficient policing to be excused by a TV show.

There is a rumour in the UK that during 'The Bill' crime increases as all the 'bobbies' are sat with their mugs of tea in front of the TV.

Originally posted by Gemwolf
A TV program that concerns me more is the BBC program The Real Hustle. I educates people on scams. … They show exactly how people can be scammed out of their money - and in most cases it's shockingly easy... I would like to know how many people got scammed because thieves learned new scams from the program, versus people that recognized a scam because of the program...

[edit on 29-7-2008 by Gemwolf]

If the scamming is as easy as you say then they don't really need the TV show to educate themselves in scams do they? It could be argued that scams would exist anyway and that the nominal amount of people who may have learned how to scam from the programme is worth the large number of honest people who would never have dreamed of those scams but now know about them and how to avoid them.

reply to post by UFOpsychiczebra


I'm sure this is true for "professional scam artists"... But say someone is in a bit of a financial pickle and has no previous "experience" in scamming - then this program could be very educational for said person, to make a quick buck or two...