Transcript

MARK COLVIN: A senior US legal expert says crime fiction on television is having an impact on real life criminal prosecutions.

Robert Power, a former public corruption prosecutor, is in Sydney talking about the relationship between crime, crime fiction and the law.

And as Jo Jarvis reports he says the popularity of Law and Order-type TV programs is leading to a more sophisticated understanding of criminal proceedings among the community, and therefore juries.

(sound of CSI program theme)

JO JARVIS: Establishing the "who did it" in any crime is the difficulty. Programs like CSI use the difficulty to create dramatic tension.

(CSI program excerpt)

CHARACTER 1: Blood swirl on the wall, you thinking Colt? Manson?

CHARACTER 2: Somebody left a message.

(end CSI program excerpt)

JO JARVIS: These programs are now so popular, they're affecting real life, as acknowledged here by CSI series creator Anthony Zuiker.

ANTHONY ZUIKER: I think the one thing that CSI has done that's alerted the world is really to communicate that the body is a perfect specimen, in the respect that skin and blood and hair and sirology and biology – everything on the human body is designed to give clues and speak to the crime scene investigator as to what happened to the specimen of the body, without it being alive to tell you.

And I think that's fascinating, and I'm not sure that the world ever viewed the body in that way until CSI and these type of shows came out.

JO JARVIS: CSI series creator Anthony Zuiker talking to Radio National's Background Briefing program.

In 50 minutes of tightly scripted, often witty dialogue, the programs such as CSI traverse the high and lows of investigations, leading inevitably to concrete answers, and always a conviction.

But of course it's not like that in reality. And some who've worked in the criminal justice field, like Robert Power, say these easy resolutions are having an impact on the court system.

ROBERT POWER: In the United States we go through a fairly lengthy process of selecting jurors, asking them to what extent they enjoy crime fiction. That's a regular question now when selecting a jury.

And the reason is to see if it appears that the person has a predisposition one way or the other.

JO JARVIS: So is there a feeling in the United States among prosecutors and among the legal fraternity that crime television is affecting how they run cases?

ROBERT POWER: Yes it is, very much.

I think people will tell you that they think juries are now much more sophisticated in many respects, and this is because the television shows now, and also movies and books, are more realistic, at least with respect to courtroom procedures and legal issues such as search and seizure or the like – much more knowledgeable about that than they were 15 or 20 years ago.

The other aspect, I think, though, is that people may be more sophisticated about what they know, but there will still be major inaccuracies in what they know. And the jurors may not be as sensitive to the fact that they have major inaccuracies in their understanding.

And so that's what lawyers have to work on.

JO JARVIS: Which side of the equation is benefiting from these crime television programs? The criminals or the prosecutors?

ROBERT POWER: You know, it's probably even. If you take the Law and Order-type shows, which are pretty much pro-prosecution, and balance them with CSI, which turn out to be pro-defence in the sense of making unrealistic expectations on prosecutors, it probably balances out pretty evenly in the end.

MARK COLVIN: Former US organised crime and public corruption prosecutor Robert C. Power, talking to Jo Jarvis.