CSI, CSI Miami, and CSI New York are consistently three of the most watched shows on television. In a recent Nielsen ratings period, both CSI and CSI: Miami finished in the top ten. NCIS, The Mentalist and Criminal Minds also finished in the top ten. Clearly, viewers are fascinated with crime shows, particularly those dealing with forensic science and how it is used to conclusively solve crimes.
But last February, the National Academy of Sciences released a comprehensive report citing “serious problems” in the scientific evidence being presented every day in courtrooms around the country. The academy found “no forensic method has been rigorously shown able to consistently, and with a high degree of certainty, demonstrate a connection between evidence and a specific individual or source.”
And the Supreme Court recently ruled that crime lab reports may be introduced as evidence in court only if defense attorneys can cross-examine the persons who prepared them. The 5-4 decision involved a cocaine trafficking conviction that was based, in part, on evidence obtained from plastic bags found in a car in which the defendant was riding.
Defense attorneys wanted to interview the forensic analyst about how the evidence was collected and tested, but a Massachusetts court turned down their request. Later, the National Innocence Network argued that the testimony was vital because of errors in crime labs across the country.
I’ve written in the past about DNA evidence and how it has been used to free the wrongly convicted. But often DNA and other evidence such as hair, bite-mark comparisons, fingerprints, firearms, tool marks and shoe prints are used to convict individuals in real life, just as in those highly rated, fictional television crime shows.
Take the case of Philip Scott Cannon, a convicted murderer serving three life sentences in an Oregon prison for a 1998 triple homicide. A former Oregon State University researcher in the university’s Radiation Center testified that tests showed bullets found at the crime scene matched those found in Cannon’s garage. He told jurors there was only a 1 in 64 million chance of getting that match. Cannon was convicted primarily on bullet lead analysis. However, the FBI no longer uses bullet lead analysis and considers it unreliable. Cannon’s defense lawyers are challenging the accuracy of his conviction in a hearing scheduled for July 7th.
It’s anyone’s guess as to how many cases or convictions have resulted from flawed forensic science. The Innocence Project reported that approximately 50 percent of the wrongful convictions overturned with DNA involved invalidated or improper forensic science.
It’s unlikely CSI will offer episodes in which their forensic scientists make mistakes and convict an innocent individual. But viewers who believe that CSI shows are gospel better think again. It’s apparent that the criminal justice system is just beginning to face the fact that many of those sitting in prison today, may have been convicted using discredited forensic science.