CSI exaggerates

One thing that I learned pretty quickly while I was at Jury Duty: CSI exaggerates! And we've all been so used to watching CSI type shows, that we had very high expectations of what evidence *should* be presented.

For example, the Crown was trying to convince us that the gun found at the apartment was owned by the defendant. And we're all asking, 'where's the fingerprint?'. The Defense argued it was owned by a friend who also lived there. Again, 'fingerprint!'. I mean, on CSI, they have a fingerprint for everything.

Lukily, the Crown must have anticipated our expectations, because he called a witness that came on to say that there's less than a 5% success rate of ever getting a fingerprint off a gun. WHAT? Really??!! And just the way the trial went, you could also tell our gov't real CSI office does not have ANY of the fancy toys like on the show. :)
Every they had to show us a photograph, they would place it on a table with a lamp shining on it that projected it on a crappy screen. Not even a projector like the ones in high school, this one was so bad, the Crown needed to use his hands over the light to screen us from the glare on the photo!

Our crime lab needs more money. And we jurors need to stop expecting every CSI guy to be Grissom. :)