(See related pages)
|
|
|
| Marg Helgenberger and William Petersen of the hit drama CSI. LAS VEGAS, NV—Picture this: An elderly couple from Buffalo checks into one of the city's overdone strip hotels, looking forward to a week of relaxation, dining out, and a little gambling. Tired from their long plane flight, they head to the bar to unwind with a few martinis. As they toast their long-awaited vacation, the woman screams with horror. There is an object in her drink, and it is looking back at her—not a stuffed Spanish olive, but a real human eye! Minutes later, the forensic experts arrive. DNA is taken from the eye; fingerprints are found on the glass; the eyeless head of a young woman is found in a dumpster behind the strip club next door; other body parts are located under a car in the hotel parking lot; a bloody paring knife is retrieved from a restaurant potato bin; and fibers, fingerprints, and even more DNA are linked to a suspect. Within just a few hours, an arrest is made and the case is wrapped up and turned over to the county prosecutor's office. The tangled web of evidence unraveled by the forensic sleuths apparently led to an Iowa beet farmer who had been jilted by the victim a month earlier. She had mistakenly taken a liking to an itinerant vacuum cleaner salesman and ran away with him to Vegas. At trial, the state attorney presents the case—fibers, fingerprints, DNA, a weapon—evidence so complete and convincing that the jury is certain beyond a reasonable doubt. Guilty! The jilted beet farmer is toast! It could be an episode of CSI: Crime Scene Investigation or one of the CSI spin-offs. But is the evidence presented at criminal trials always this complete? Do jury members always see compelling evidence gleaned from a high-tech crime lab? More importantly, are criminal trials just about evidence? If not, what kinds of things really happen at criminal trials? What is the whole trial process really all about? |