Criminal Minds

[AlanRay]

Did anyone else see CM tonight? It was interesting, the whole FFT thing, a bit extreme but HUAR-esque all the same.

[the big lebowski]

i can't keep up w/ all of these criminal shows. there are way too many of them. CSI, CSI: miami, CSI: newyork, numb3rs, bones, forensic files, law and oder, law and order SVU, law and order criminal intent, cold case, NCIS (naval criminal investigative service), criminal minds, without a trace, prison break, the wire, the list goes on and on. it's amazing that w/ all these shows we don't hear of more unsolved cases.

[ElleJ]

Originally Posted by the big lebowski

it's amazing that w/ all these shows we don't hear of more unsolved cases.

My boyfriend was a criminal justice major back in college, and he would hear from his professors and the guest speakers that these shows are causing a problem for them, not so much with collecting evidence or determining the who/what/where but when the case actually got to trial. Jurors are expecting to see all these forensics tests that fully prove guilt, because they've seen them a million times on t.v. What they don't understand is that these tests are costly and time consuming and not used in the majority of cases where other more traditional police methods can be used. I know we have a couple of cops who listen to the show, it'd be interesting to hear their take on this, and if this is something they've also experienced.

[the big lebowski]

hmmm...i never thought about it that way, but i can see where that'd be a problem. that'd be a good defense though:

"ladies and gentleman of the jury. don't let the prosecution insult your intelligence. thanks to 'criminal minds' (wednesdays on CBS), we know the way they should have conducted an investigation. sure they have a bloody knife with my clients fingerprints on it. but did they run it through the thing with bright flashing lights that we see on 'bones' (FOX wednesdays)? i think not. and for shame!"

[AlanRay]

these shows aren't the problem, the problem is the general public being idiots. it's their own damn fault if they think everything on these shows is how things are done in ever case. personally i don't watch many of them, just the ones that have a story that is intriguing to me. oh and btw, prison break is a totally different type of show, it's a drama, not a crime/cop show.

[the big lebowski]

Originally Posted by AlanRay

these shows aren't the problem, the problem is the general public being idiots. it's their own damn fault if they think everything on these shows is how things are done in ever case.

if there's anything i've learned as an american citizen, is that it's never my fault.

oh and btw, prison break is a totally different type of show, it's a drama, not a crime/cop show.

i had to throw it out there. it was in the "crime" section. plus i had to make the list longer.

[the big lebowski]

Originally Posted by Ichabod

Lebowski is right.

woohoo! can i be the resident "layman expert" now?

I had a case where a man found a burglar in his home, caught him, and sat on him until the police arrived. The cops took no prints because identity was not an issue.... they found the skinny guy under the fat guy easily enough.

But at trial, the defense was that burglar knew the man and there was a drug dispute. A juror asked me, after acquiting, why prints were not taken.

doubt casts a long shaddow

"Son, you brought a knife to a gun fight."

what the hell kind of asshole remark is that?

[Pintman]

Originally Posted by Ichabod

I experienced this as a former DA.... Lebowski is right. It's a great defense. When you have no defense, argue that all the tests that could have been done, weren't. People see in the media all the time what DNA testing is doing to exonnerate 'innocent' people on death row. Closing arguments in otherwise straightforward drug cases focus on whether fingerprints were taken from plastic bags... surfaces that rarely support a good print.

A jury will often kick a case they want to kick, and convict when they want to convict... but hang their hat on some kooky reason. I had a case where a man found a burglar in his home, caught him, and sat on him until the police arrived. The cops took no prints because identity was not an issue.... they found the skinny guy under the fat guy easily enough.

But at trial, the defense was that burglar knew the man and there was a drug dispute. A juror asked me, after acquiting, why prints were not taken. He said, "Son, you brought a knife to a gun fight."

But I have also had more than enough lazy cops who don't want to wait for crime scene to show up. In court, when asking an officer about an assault, he reported "There was blood everywhere!" I asked where the photos were. "Pictures? We don't need pictures. I saw it!"

Dear Colleague:

Prosecutors are the world's biggest whiners. 9 out of 10 jurors come into court with the attitude "if he's here in court, he must have done something wrong." They see you as the good guy.

Show me a lawyer who thinks jurors are stupid, and I'll show you an unsuccessful lawyer. If you can't show them why CSI isn't the real world, you don't belong in a courtroom. Go write wills.

[the big lebowski]

uh oh! looks like we've got some new teams forming... team prosecute vs. team cochran. let's get it on!

[Pintman]

Originally Posted by Ichabod

... What line of work are you in? ...

I represent knuckleheads and fight with prosecutors for a living. The CSI excuse seems to be real popular nowadays.

And that tirade wasn't directed at you, personally. Sorry. I think we basically agree. Juries are right an amazingly high percentage of the time, but occasionally go bonkers.

Knockin' off early today and getting a few pints. Probably with a prosecutor or two.