Download Download
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Chapter 1 The Complexity of Forensic Science in Criminal Investigations: Is there a Gold Standard? Athaliah Biju, Kate Hambly, Avani Joshi "The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, it is the Illusion of Knowledge” (Stephen Hawking, 2001) The evolution of forensic science means that the gold standard in forensic science is always changing. The problem that ensues is that the general public, jury, lawyers and judges are unaware of such evolution and they often misunderstand error rates, or the frequency of errors, in forensic sciences (Innocence Canada, 2021). Media is considered the primary source of information for depicting criminal investigations, and often misinforms the public about the fundamentals of forensic science, thus distorting the perceptions of the general public. This lack of knowledge and awareness leads to misconceptions that cause miscarriages of justice, unfair trials and an over-reliance on forensic evidence in criminal proceedings. The first crime lab in the United States of America was made in 1923, when forensic evidence was first used to aid in criminal investigations (Saferstein, 2018). Through technological advances in science there has been an increase in dependency on forensic evidence (Garrett et al., 2021). The demand for standards and regulations have also increased due to an improved understanding by the forensic community in error rates and potential biases (Garrett et al., 2021). Research indicates that the majority of current court cases introduce forensic science as evidence (Garrett et al., 2021). Due to the fact that the majority of current court cases are publicly available and often dramatized in entertainment media, the public perception of forensic science can be misunderstood further causing the ‘CSI effect’. The ‘CSI effect’ occurs when forensic evidence is embellished in television 7 Are We There Yet? The Golden Standards of Forensic Science shows and various forms of media that causes an unrealistic expectation, such that forensic evidence is needed for every criminal case (Saferstein, 2018). This further indicates the need to understand the impact of the ‘CSI effect’ and media on public perceptions, the consequences for misunderstanding forensic evidence by the jury and the lack of knowledge by legal professionals in forensic science. The Making a Murderer / Serial Effect The ‘CSI effect’ is a topic that has been extensively explored in the field of forensic science. There are legitimate concerns over the impact of fictionalized media on the perception of forensic evidence and techniques. It has been found that television shows in the crime genre have resulted in distorted perceptions of criminal investigations, thereby affecting the juries’ behaviour (Hayes & Levett, 2013). The ‘CSI effect’ is based on the cultivation theory, which proposes that “the more one sees certain ideas, images or values, the more they become incorporated on one’s reality” (Vicary & Zaikman, 2017, p. 52). The first installment of the CSI franchise, CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, completed its 15-season run on September 27, 2015, with 12.2 million viewers tuning in for the series finale (Collins, 2015). Just four months later, the true-crime world catapulted to mainstream popularity in the form of Netflix’s Making a Murderer. The case of Steven Avery, depicted in Making a Murderer, saw a renewed interest in true-crime and highlighted the misuse of forensic evidence. Rather than an “old-style crime coverage”, viewers are presented with an in-depth exploration of the Steven Avery case with the intention of exposing the flaws of the criminal justice system such as the tunnel-vision exhibited by law enforcement (Banks-Anderson, 2016; Golob, 2018). Old-style crime coverage would include shows like Forensic Files, Dateline and 20/20, which focus on a new case every week. Jeremy Gans, a law professor at the University of Melbourne, “believes that the monopoly that courts have on information is being lost due to the transformative effect of new media” (Banks-Anderson, 2016). True crime’s resurgence cannot be fully attributed to Making a Murderer. In 2014, the 1999 murder of Hae Min Lee was covered by the podcast Serial, captivating millions of people and has since been cited as the most popular podcast of all time (Gross, 2014; Sherrill, 2020). The show follows the arrest, conviction and sentencing of Lee’s ex-boyfriend, Adnan Syed. The show’s host and creator, 8 The Complexity of Forensic Science: Is There a Gold Standard? Sarah Koenig, conducted her own investigation and raised doubts regarding the handling of Syed’s case. Koenig stated that her intention with Serial was to “report, not exonerate” (Gross, 2014). Mainstream coverage of this case, however, has been sympathetic towards Syed. There is no doubt that Serial sparked a widespread debate “about whether or not the state had met the burden of proof for a conviction” (Krieger, 2019). While certain points were raised in the podcast that warranted a retrial, it was not enough to prove his innocence and his conviction was restored (Fenton & Prudente, 2019). The HBO documentary series The Case Against Adnan Syed promised new DNA test results that could help Syed’s case but ultimately it was not enough to exonerate him (Considine, 2019; Romano, 2019). The Impact of True Crime Media on the Criminal Justice System True crime podcasts have been described as a mix of journalism and entertainment (Boling, 2019). Streaming services and the binge-era are also huge reasons for the explosion in popularity of the genre. Netflix’s formula of releasing all the episodes at once as opposed to a weekly release has been integral to its success. This is attributed to the human nature of craving instant gratification (Statarosa & Izydorczyk, 2020). Original series such as Tiger King, The Staircase, Don’t F*ck with Cats: Hunting an Internet Killer, Night Stalker, The Trials of Gabriel Fernandez, The Disappearance of Madeleine McCann and Murder to Mercy: The Cyntoia Brown Story are all examples of shows that generated social media buzz. The popularity of these shows can be attributed to the binging culture as well as the desire to fix a broken criminal justice system (Chan, 2020). Since podcasts and documentaries usually tend to have an agenda, viewers often do not have their own objective opinions about the case (Golob, 2018). In the case of Making a Murderer, even the title insinuates that the documentary is about an individual who is framed by law enforcement for a murder. The same can be seen with Serial and The Case Against Adnan Syed. Raising public awareness can often work in favour of the incarcerated. For example, after the release of Making a Murderer, Brendan Dassey’s conviction was overturned based on points raised in the documentary (Dassey v. Dittmann, 2016). Boling (2019) also points out that new media has made other positive impacts, such as an uptick in donations for organizations like the Innocence Project, outpouring support for defendants at courthouses, and the willingness from podcast listeners and docuseries viewers to 9 Are We There Yet? The Golden Standards of Forensic Science contribute to investigations of the cases covered. This increase in awareness, however, can also affect the right to a fair trial, especially in cold cases and wrongful convictions. Their popularity can make it difficult to find objective jurors who have no prior knowledge about the case. As Bruzzi (2016, p. 280) points out, “the [true crime] genre raises significant issues about the representation of the law in the digital era, perceptions of justice, narrative and evidence, the increased ‘jurification’ of audiences and the instability of truth”. The Rise of Internet Sleuthing The new format of true crime documentaries often entices people to research cases themselves. Internet sleuthing can be explained as “crowdsourcing for justice where justice-seeking civilians collectively pool their expertise in response to real and perceived societal wrongs” (Yardley, 2016, p. 3). One of the most popular social media platforms for discussion is Reddit, which houses various “subreddits”. Subreddits are forums dedicated to facilitating discussions on a certain topic of interest. As aforementioned, there is no longer an information barrier for people who are interested in seeking out primary sources pertaining to a case they are invested in. Serial, for example, went so far as to uploading documents such as police reports, interrogation transcripts, court transcripts and photographs on their website (Serial, 2014). The armchair detectives featured in Don’t F*ck with Cats followed suit, successfully using the tools at their disposal such as Facebook groups and YouTube, to determine the identity of the “cat killer”. As public interest in high-profile criminal cases continues to grow, the trauma experienced by the families of the victims is often ignored. Those close to the victim are forced to relive the trauma of losing their loved ones through constant exposure. Hae Min Lee’s brother, Young Lee, made a post (brother_of_hae, 2014) on the subreddit for Serial to address the renewed interest in his sister’s murder, writing: TO ME ITS [sic] REAL LIFE. To you listeners, its [sic] another murder mystery, crime drama, another episode of CSI. You weren't there to see your mom crying every night, having a heartattck [sic] when she got the new [sic] that the body was found, and going to court almost everyday for a year seeing your mom weeping,crying [sic] and 10 The Complexity of Forensic Science: Is There a Gold Standard? fainting. You don't know what we went through. Especially to those who are demanding our family response and having a meetup... you guys are disgusting. SHame [sic] on you. I pray that you don't have to go through what we went through and have your story blasted to 5mil [sic] listeners. Young Lee’s post demonstrates the profound impact that rehashing Hae’s murder has had on their family.