Page "CSI effect" Paragraph 7

By 2005, some prosecutors had begun altering their trial preparations and procedures in an attempt to counter the CSI effect.

Some ask questions about forensic television viewership during voir dire to target biased jurors ; others use opening statements and closing arguments to minimize the possible impact of the CSI effect, and instruct jurors to adhere to the court's standards of evidence rather than those seen on television.

Prosecutors have even hired expert witnesses to explain why particular forms of physical evidence are not relevant to their cases.

In one Australian murder case, the defense counsel requested a judge-only trial to avoid having DNA evidence misinterpreted by a jury.

By 2006, the CSI effect had become widely accepted as reality among legal professionals, despite little empirical evidence to validate or disprove it.

A 2008 survey by researcher Monica Robbers showed that roughly 80 percent of all American legal professionals believed they had had decisions affected by forensic television programs.