I know it is crime fiction, could they not be accurate for once

[mapuc]

I watch either CSI-Miami or CSI-New-York.

I know it's fiction, but could they not try to somehow accurate

In yesterdays episode the first people to enter a ongoing crime scene was the people from CSI-No they don't

The first to enter such scene are the police or the SWAT-team and when the crime scene is(forgot the word) then the paramedics enter the scene, to take care of wounded people and to see who's dead, then and first then the people from CSI are allowed to enter the crime area.

Have seen some of these CSI and, OK I don't know how CSI people work in the states, but here, we have expert i ballistics, fire a.s.o

I see the same guy investigate a bullet, then a crime scene where there has been a fire, then the teeth of a dead person.

I love CSI-but could their not for once be accurate

Or is the CSI people educated to do several things ?

Markus

[Oberon]

I think a lot of crime shows have to take some licence when dealing with realism, because giving too much information on how police work to the public might not be a fantastic idea. It might be better to let people think the police can do some of the stuff they can in CSI, so that they don't commit a crime thinking that they'll get caught when in fact they might not.

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by Oberon

I think a lot of crime shows have to take some licence when dealing with realism, because giving too much information on how police work to the public might not be a fantastic idea. It might be better to let people think the police can do some of the stuff they can in CSI, so that they don't commit a crime thinking that they'll get caught when in fact they might not.

True- But as mention in the start of my post-Let the police/SWAT go in first then paramedics then SCI

And let a few more actors/actress be on the series let them be "expert" on a given thing e.g ballistics or teeth.

People don't have to see how the police enter a ongoing crime-scene

Markus

[Platapus]

In a TV program it is important to have a limited number of "major" roles. In a real crime investigation there may be dozens of people working the case and then not work together for many cases.

So they combine stuff and make the stars the .. uh.. well.. stars of the investigation.

I would imagine that actual CSI operations are rather boring with a cubic buttload of paperwork but that does not make for exciting TV.

I think that any one actually working in an industry portrayed on TV/movies is shaking their heads ruefully. I know in my job if I could do what they do on TV/movies, my job would be a snap.

See the Wikipedia article on the CSI effect. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSI_effect The dubious science, along with much else puts unrealistic expectations in the minds of jurors who have to deal with real court cases involving real evidence.

[Red October1984]

Hard to find good crime fiction IMHO.

Never was into CSI, NCIS, Law and Order, etc.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by AndyJWest

See the Wikipedia article on the CSI effect. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSI_effect The dubious science, along with much else puts unrealistic expectations in the minds of jurors who have to deal with real court cases involving real evidence.

True that. In the case I was on, the police ran into a hitch when the defendants solicitor produced betting slips which were used to explain the money he was found with about a month or so after the defendant was arrested. The police went to the betting shops but found that the tapes were only kept on a weekly basis and were overwritten after that. They'd have never had that problem in CSI.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by AndyJWest

See the Wikipedia article on the CSI effect. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSI_effect The dubious science, along with much else puts unrealistic expectations in the minds of jurors who have to deal with real court cases involving real evidence.

Not just juries. Ask anyone working in the Intelligence business. Even members of congress are getting the "CSI effect"

[NeonSamurai]

That series of shows was always a mix of a tiny bit of real investigative methods, and a whole load of umm well you know. For me it was the constant use of magic lights and lasers and other utter nonsense that made me turn the show off. That and David Caruso and his utterly moronic puns and one liners

But I guess the show would do poorly in the ratings if it didn't have its nonsense action, utter lack of police procedure (which lets face it in reality would be tedious as heck to watch real CSI secure and investigate a crime scene). I didn't mind the first series though, at least the characters were a bit interesting.

Originally Posted by Oberon

I think a lot of crime shows have to take some licence when dealing with realism, because giving too much information on how police work to the public might not be a fantastic idea. It might be better to let people think the police can do some of the stuff they can in CSI, so that they don't commit a crime thinking that they'll get caught when in fact they might not.

I think its more so they don't bore the viewers to the point of changing channels. It is not like the methodology or techniques used are at all secret, and most smart career criminals are already aware of most of it. Also if you look at the crime murderporn shows, they get it mostly right, but then its a case of actual crimes and investigations vs dramatized fiction.