Fans of the popular CSI franchise are going to hate me, but I've contributed a piece to Comment about my antipathy toward the forensic thriller. Here's a taste:
While science fiction these days offers one dystopian vision after another, forensic science fiction posits a world of certainty, where reasonable doubt is banished by means of Luminol and DNA swabs. Perhaps the appeal to the reader is the same as the appeal to the juror. It isn't a religious certainty he's after, not these days, but a scientific one. When the hidden blood patterns glow under black light or the tell-tale DNA markers match up, we are suffused by a frisson of objectivity. Thanks to science, here's one thing we can know. If true, this might explain the sterility of the form—it's been morally neutered. Test results might bring closure to a victim's suffering loved ones, but there is no larger order to re-establish. Evil doesn't disrupt the scientific order. It doesn't even register.
You can read the entire article here: "Of Deerstalkers and Labcoats." Enjoy!
Luminol is a great tool, partnered with an IR light, to spot hidden bloodstains. Nonetheless, unlike in CSI, luminol alone will not solve a crime. A good lawyer can contest circumstantial evidence and some physical evidence as well, including luminol findings. DNA, however, can make or break a case. To get a successful conviction, you need a combination of both physical and circumstantial evidence. Lack of either one can cause reasonable doubt.
Posted by: George Melcher | October 18, 2011 at 11:20 AM