Shasta Groene and Joseph Duncan: My final media analysis project

In Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, in 2005, Shasta Groene's family was murdered, and she and her brother Dylan were kidnapped and molested by Joseph Duncan. For weeks, this molestation continued, until he killed Dylan, and was apprehended at a Denny's when the workers recognized Shasta from the news. It was later determined that Joseph Duncan had a long rap sheet, including molestation, going back to when he was 15. He is considered a serial killer, and admitted to killing several other people along with Shasta's mother, older brothers, and her mother's boyfriend.

I researched both Shasta Groene and Joseph Duncan to find these news stories, in order to gain a perspective on how the news portrayed both Shasta and Duncan. I wanted to gather information on how the news thought the justice system did, and what they thought about Duncan. Interestingly, whenever Shasta Groene is discussed, it is by her first name, Shasta. Whenever Joseph Duncan is discussed, it is only by his last name, Duncan. I believe this is an intentional way of discussing them, Shasta by her first name, to induce familiarity, and Duncan by his last name, to distance him.

Some key findings I had were that in almost every story, they start by discussing Shasta, familiarizing you with the young, naive, perfect child, and her innocent family. This depicts Surette's view on the ideal victim.

Second, that this trial was covered in every aspect, from Shasta herself, to her testimony, to the waitress that saved her, all the way to Duncan's family. This clearly constitutes a media trail. Lastly, that the media viewed the justice system in a 'Faulty Criminal Justice System' frame (Surette, 2015, p. 38). They always discussed how the justice system failed Shasta and her family by letting Duncan have such a low bail on a previous sexual assault case, only $15,000.

Shasta is always depicted as the ideal victim. I do want to point out that, as an 8 year old child, she is truly an innocent victim here, however, the news coverage that this story received is due to the fact that she fit this bill so perfectly. In almost every news story that I have collected, she is described in enough detail for every reader to feel intense sympathy and outrage for such an 'innocent poor girl'.

For Surette, it is not enough to simply be young, one must also be innocent, naive, and in need of protection (2015, p. 207). Shasta is always described as a young innocent girl whose justice system and family failed to protect. In People's account of how Shasta was doing after her rescue, "The best news of all is that the little brown-haired girl who looked so scared and lost at Denny’s has been coming out of her shell more and more every day. When her grandmother and aunts came to see her, “Shasta just held out her arms to them,” says Sue Torres. “They spent the whole eight minutes just holding and hugging.”" (People, July 18, 2005). Duncan also falls right into the ideal offender, a stranger who had repeatedly raped, and was impossible to rehabilitate. These two phenomena falling together create a news story bound to become viral, an impossible to resist innocent child, and a monster who had already hurt children before.

Although the waitress doesn't seem to display too many characteristics of the ideal hero (Surette, 2015, p. 208), she did have a decent sense of morality, and was smart and brave enough to stall for time until the officers arrived. In CNN's coverage of the rescue of Shasta, they described Deahn's smart time stalling strategy: "We took a little longer than usual to make the shake and made sure to make a large shake instead of a child's shake. We wanted to make sure to take just long enough to where, you know, if it turned out to be nothing, we could just say, "You know, hey, our shake machine's running a little slow. It's an old machine. We didn't want to cause any suspicion, so we made sure to time it just about perfect, so that he didn't think anything of it. And it gave the officer time to arrive." (CNN, July 2, 2005). This, while not the media sensation of someone heroically battling the ideal offender, was enough of a hero that the news stories also latched onto her, providing more information for the all the followers of the story.

Altogether, the innocent victim, Shasta, is the primary focus in these stories, and the general public seemed to latch right on to the ideal victim.

This event clearly turned into a media trial, getting reduced to highlights (Surette, 2015, p. 129) so that the public could quickly hear the juiciest parts of the story, and gossip about them, without having to be in court in person, and without having to hear all of the 'boring' discussions of how evidence was gathered, warrants issued, and the day to day routines of Duncan. Most of the stories I gathered discussed quick bits of the trail, ignored most of the proceedings, and discussed only the most attention gathering bits in more detail. For instance, Seattle Times discussion of the penalty phase was short and to the point, and instead of discussing various aspects about the legal system's penalties, only discussed that the death penalty was a possibility (Seattle Times, December 3, 2007), and that Duncan did not make a plea deal.

Another aspect of media trials is the how the lawyers, police, and witnesses were all "raised to celebrity status" (Surette, 2015, p. 23) for the duration of the trial, and a good while after. Some articles discussed the officers in more detail, such as Fox's coverage of Shasta's description of her ordeal; "Avriett testified Thursday that he turned on his vehicle's dashboard-mounted video camera, with the camera pointed away from Shasta, and recorded her talking about her ordeal" (Fox News, August 15, 2008). The waitress who recognized her was undoubtedly a media celebrity for a while, being the hero that recognized her, she was someone they could latch on to. With the waitress, an adult, they would interview her without worrying about hurting her, like they could the actual victim. This is all very important, because unlike a real trial, the public doesn't understand what work goes into getting the evidence, how Duncan was convicted, if he was fairly convicted, and they don't have a true perspective on how our justice system works.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, the framework through which the news viewed our justice system. According to Surette, the "Faulty Criminal Justice System Frame" "holds that crime results from a lack of "law and order"" (2015, p. 38). Almost every news story I looked at discussed how Duncan was previously convicted of rape, and how he got a low bail of $15,000 set when he molested a 6 year old boy, was able to get the $15,000 from a Fargo businessman who believed him when he claimed he was innocent (Deseret News, July 14, 2005). Duncan had first molested when he was only 16, and continued to do so every time he was released until he was finally put behind bars for good. According to the Seattle Times, "After his parents divorced when he was 16, Joseph Duncan was convicted for raping a 14-year-old boy at gunpoint" (November 4, 2005)

Clearly, Duncan was a prime example of the justice system failing to keep a dangerous predator behind bars, and this was like catnip to most reporters. It is easy to say in hindsight that someone cannot be rehabilitated, but not so easy to condemn a 16 year old boy that you don't know the future of.

Overall, the media coverage of this horrific event was full of Surette's ideas on how media views crime. From the ideal victim, Shasta Groene, to the ideal offender, Joseph Duncan, to the coverage of the trial (or lack thereof, in the case of the more boring parts), to where they laid the blame for such an event occuring. Crime is not just a black and white, easy to figure out, right and wrong thing, although the media always tries to lay it out like that. It is not solely the judge's fault that Shasta was kidnapped, even though he set a rather low bail. It is not solely Duncan's father's fault that he turned out to be a serial killer and rapist, even though he raised him. All of these articles were full of blame, missing details that would have been considered boring to the public, and were short enough that any reader could go through it, feel what they were supposed to feel, share it, and move on. It is clear that in today's day and age, no one wants to read a report on a trial that is hundreds of pages long, full of evidence that is almost unnecessary, details that are, at best, uncomfortable to read, and at worst, traumatizing to read and see pictures of. The media can take advantage of that, and put out a story that omits the parts the reader doesn't want to read or see, but keeps the 'juicy' details that compel them to read it. This keeps the public coming back to that news source, keeping them in business. After all, that is what news is, a business.

Boone, R. (2007, December 3). Suspect pleads guilty to kidnapping Shasta Groene, killing her brother Dylan in 2005. Seattle Times, The. Retrieved from http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/suspect-pleads-guilty-to-kidnapping-shasta-groene-killing-her-brother-dylan-in-2005/

CNN (2005, July 2). Waitress: 'I picked her up and held her'. CNN. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/07/02/deahn/index.html?iref=newssearch

CNN (2005, July 3). Evidence examined in Idaho kidnapping. CNN. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/07/03/idaho.children/

CNN (2005, July 6). Idaho girl told police suspect tied up family. CNN. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/07/05/idaho.children/

Denver Post (2005, July 2). Missing Idaho girl is found alive. Denver Post, The. Retrieved from http://www.denverpost.com/2005/07/02/missing-idaho-girl-is-found-alive/

Fox News (2005, July 6). Shasta: Duncan Molested Dylan and Me. Fox News. Retrieved from http://www.foxnews.com/story/2005/07/06/shasta-duncan-molested-dylan-and-me.html

Fox News (2008, August 15). Girl Describes Abduction, Brother's Murder on Tape in Sentencing for Pedophile. Fox News. Retrieved from http://www.foxnews.com/story/2008/08/15/girl-describes-abduction-brother-murder-on-tape-in-sentencing-for-pedophile.html

Geranios, N. K. (2005, July 14). Shasta Groene says Duncan bragged of killings. Deseret News. Retrieved from http://www.deseretnews.com/article/600148401/Shasta-Groene-says-Duncan-bragged-of-killings.html?pg=all

Kramer, B. (2005, October 22). Transcripts detail murder, kidnapping case. Spokesman-Review, The. Retrieved from http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2005/oct/22/transcripts-detail-murder-kidnapping-case/

NBC News (2005, July 6). Idaho suspect's records show violent history. NBC News. Retrieved from http://www.deseretnews.com/article/600148401/Shasta-Groene-says-Duncan-bragged-of-killings.html?pg=all

NBC News (2008, August 14). Groene shares letters from children; Duncan questions FBI Agent. NBC News. Retrieved from http://www.nbcrightnow.com/story/8841997/groene-shares-letters-from-children-duncan-questions-fbi-agent

NBC News (2008, August 14). Idaho killer's jury hears voice of abducted girl. NBC News. Retrieved from http://www.nbcnews.com/id/26207548/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/t/idaho-killers-jury-hears-voice-abducted-girl/#.WEi-HnUrKHu

Seattle Times (2005, November 4). Brother of molester Duncan speaks for first time. Seattle Times, The. Retrieved from http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/brother-of-molester-duncan-speaks-for-first-time/

Spokesman-Review (2005, October 27). Family wants investigation of Duncan in death. Spokesman-Review, The. Retrieved from http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2005/oct/27/family-wants-investigation-of-duncan-in-death/

Surette, R. (2015). Media, Crime, and Criminal Justice: Images, Realities, and Policies. Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.

Tresniowski, A. (2005, July 18). Midnight Rescue. People. Retrieved from http://people.com/archive/midnight-rescue-vol-64-no-3/

Dexter

I find the show 'Dexter' rather interesting from an educational standpoint, as it is a show depicting a 'good' serial killer. I never really got into the show too much, but I know many people that did.
There were a couple things that stood out to me right away re-watching the first episode: First, that there were three serial killers just in the first episode, indicating that serial killers are highly prominent, and Dexter would have an incredibly large pool to draw from. Second, that they are extremely easy to find, outside of the justice system. This indicates that our laws are holding us back from finding so many serial killers, and indicates that they should be changed to protect us. Thirdly, this show describes a psychopathic serial killer, and later they indicate that the entire reason he is a serial killer is because of the tragic event that happened when he was a toddler. This would indicate that it was never his fault, but rather something that happened to him.
This show tends to show quite a bit of 'would culture' (Schmid, 5), letting us view scenes of violence without having to publicly loiter around a crime scene. As a species, we tend to have a fascination with violence, or violent accidents. Dexter allows one to not only view these scenes without having to be there, it allows us to condemn the person that is being murdered, rather than the murderer. This is part of what leads to Dexter's popularity, allowing us to view such wounds in the privacy of our own home.
As Schmid discusses, we often view serial killers through a gothic lens (Schmid, 6). We have had fairy tales for as long as stories have existed, with monsters that do terrible things. Whether the point of the story is to be careful, to be kind, or to follow instructions, if one doesn't do what they are supposed to, they will be attacked by monsters in a ferocious way. Even Dexter calls himself a monster, acknowledging that he is killing other monsters as well. Being able to create a fairy tale with Dexter as the monster, attacking you if you attack others, creates a story that most people enjoy. It allows us to enter a world where we can do forbidden things, and not only feel good about doing them, but also be able to come back to reality an hour later.
Accoding to Schmid, for most serial killers, they are more infamous than celebrities, indicating that there are requirements for celebrities, but for fame, you just need to be known (Schmid, 9). Obviously, for a TV show, it is both. Dexter the serial killer is infamous, but Dexter the actor is both famous and a celebrity.
Overall, I would say that Schmid would be interested in both Dexter's popularity, and the people who watch it. How did Dexter become so well liked? He allows us to become our own monsters, killing for good, enacting monstrous scenes, and giving us a fairy tale to follow along with. This show tells us that serial killers are extremely common, and that it is relatively easy to spot them. That the law can almost never catch them. That the law even prevents us from catching them, and that one only need search a building without a warrant, see a website, and find a serial rapist and killer by a very unique tattoo that is placed in an easy way to see.

Adam Lanza

It is quite clear from the newspaper articles I read that, just like Frymer, everyone believed Adam to be an alienated youth. Some discuss his transition to and from homeschooling, others his penchant for video games, but almost all discuss how shy, reserved, and bullied he was. According to the New York Times, Adam's mother "frequently moved him in and out of school, and at times home-schooled him" (NYT, March 29, 2013). One thing that was brought up quite a few times was his love of violent video games. It seemed as if, yet again, media was trying to blame one simple thing for this disaster. "Mr. Lanza had spent most of his time in the basement of the home, primarily playing a warfare video game, ''Call of Duty.''" (NYT, March 29, 2013). They talked about how shy he was, especially after his parent's divorce, possibly looking yet again for another simple reason; "He always seemed like a quiet type. He was never really sociable. When you try to communicate with him, he would just kind of like have one- or two-word responses" (The Washington Post, Dec. 15, 2012). Another trait that is extremely common in these articles is the emphasis on the guns in their house. They gave details on exactly how many rounds he had, how many he'd fired, how many guns were in the house, even that a check was given to him by his mother to buy another gun. They discussed how "All three of the guns that Adam Lanza carried into Sandy Hook Elementary were owned and registered by his mother -- a pair of handguns and a .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle, his primary weapon." (Lowell Sun, Dec. 17, 2012). It was quite plain from the articles that not only did Mrs. Lanza own many firearms, so did Adam Lanza, although it is unclear why he only used hers. What is clear is that all of these articles are discussing gun control, when it is a difficult situation to control. In fact, in Frymer's article discussing Columbine, it wasn't the initial plan to shoot anyone, but to blow them up. It wasn't until the bombs failed that they resorted to firearms. What was also discussed was his mental instability. Depending on which articles you read, they may have only discussed how it made it hard for him to make friends, but some discussed how he was odd since he was five, and someone even commented "As horrible as this was, I can't say I am surprised . . . Burn in hell, Adam" (Daily News, Dec. 15, 2012). I do find it interesting that the Daily Mirror was so much more opinionated feeling than the other newspapers. One part that strikes that feeling in me is this, "Wealthy Nancy Lanza, 52, had first considered placing her tormented son, 20, in college and moving to London to escape him. But the gun-hoarding mum is said to have decided he needed to be locked up instead" (DM, Dec. 20, 2012). 

Overall, these clippings do seem to support Frymer's ideas, the media spectacle surrounding this event pushed everyone to believe in their stories, bullies caused it, or violent video games caused it, or having weapons in the house caused it, or mental illness caused it. It is almost never approached as a bigger problem we may never solve, but rather everyone likes to claim they know why, or can at least speculate why. 

I would like to add that everyone likes to claim that they 'saw it coming', or 'knew he was a bad egg', but if someone had asked them about Adam a few days before, they likely would not have thought anything but, at the worst, a little odd. It is easy to predict the past, but actually predicting the future is much tougher, which is ironically what these clippings are trying (and not succeeding) to do.

Frymer, looking at these clippings, would likely draw quite a few similarities between the press' reaction to columbine, and their reaction to Sandy Hook.


http://ida.lib.uidaho.edu:3206/lnacui2api/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T25083887032&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T25083887036&cisb=22_T25083887035&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&selRCNodeID=15&nodeStateId=411en_US,1,15,12&docsInCategory=964&csi=6742&docNo=4

http://ida.lib.uidaho.edu:3206/lnacui2api/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T25083887032&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T25083887036&cisb=22_T25083887035&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&selRCNodeID=15&nodeStateId=411en_US,1,15,12&docsInCategory=964&csi=8075&docNo=7

http://ida.lib.uidaho.edu:3206/lnacui2api/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T25083887032&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T25083887036&cisb=22_T25083887035&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&selRCNodeID=15&nodeStateId=411en_US,1,15,12&docsInCategory=964&csi=151550&docNo=10

http://ida.lib.uidaho.edu:3206/lnacui2api/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T25083887032&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T25083887036&cisb=22_T25083887035&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&selRCNodeID=15&nodeStateId=411en_US,1,15,12&docsInCategory=964&csi=270099&docNo=17

http://ida.lib.uidaho.edu:3206/lnacui2api/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T25083887032&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T25083887036&cisb=22_T25083887035&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&selRCNodeID=15&nodeStateId=411en_US,1,15,12&docsInCategory=964&csi=145254&docNo=20

Casey Anthony

Looking up the Casey Anthony case, it is clear that everyone thinks she literally got away with murder. Every news source calls her a bad mother, Time even has a link to another article, "Moms who kill" right in their story. While CNN seemed to attempt to simply go over the facts, when you got down into it, it still described how Caylee was theoretically killed, taped, and dumped, and then her mom went out partying and participating in a 'hot body' contest. Fox news talks about how she allegedly admitted she killed her child, and paid her lawyer in sex! Every news source also discusses how she lied so many times, and even her attorney called the people in her lies her 'imaginary friends' (CNN). All of this fits right into Whiteley's 'mad' theme, with women who kill fitting into the mad and abnormal theme, versus men who fit into the bad and normal. Evil and demonic are indeed words that many have used regarding Casey Anthony, fitting right into Whiteley's description of how society reacts to a mother who kills her own child. As Whiteley describes, murder challenges the femininity of the subject, as homicide is a 'male' act. Almost every news source describes her, then, as a sexually driven woman who didn't care about her child. Multiple report her having traded sex for her lawyers fees, and going to nightclubs to party. Even a news source discussing the DNA expert the defense used almost immediately puts up a rather unflattering image of Casey Anthony. Other sources, not so much news as sensationalism, discuss that she was a loving mother... to her dog. In all media, Casey Anthony has been turned into a monster, even after her acquittal she is still living in the spotlight. Every happy thing she does is turned into a discussion of what a monster she is, enjoying anything after 'killing' her daughter. Even now, she is still thought of as a murderer, and worse, a killer of her own tiny defenseless child. Overall, Whiteley would say that this is the typical female homicide case, with a mother killing her own daughter, and being labeled both mad, and evil. This case was covered at an astonishing rate, and just like Whiteley discusses, female homicide is a bestseller.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/07/05/florida.casey.anthony.trial/
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/05/25/casey-anthonys-lawyer-admits-killed-daughter-caylee-investigator-says.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/casey-anthony-attorney-denies-trading-sex-for-defense_us_57488919e4b03ede4414bbdf?utm_hp_ref=casey-anthony
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/casey-anthony/os-casey-anthony-dna-expert-rejected-20160906-story.html
http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2077969,00.html
http://www.tmz.com/2016/07/14/casey-anthony-with-a-dog/

48 Hours on Crack Street

It was interesting to watch an episode of 48 hours from so long ago, and still see many of the same arguments there as are being argued today. Chiricos' moral panic was very apparent in this episode, with everyone interviewed stating that there is a very sudden increase in drug use over the past year. While it is not argued that drugs have been in the U.S. for many years, this episode paints a picture that not too long ago, the U.S. was a utopia, a near perfect place where drug use just didn't happen, kids simply went out dancing and drinking soda pop. Chiricos even admits that drug use has been a serious problem, but for many years, not a sudden increase. I find it slightly appalling, at least to my scientific method sense, that they investigated for just two days (I know, the title of the show), dealers they interviewed were almost exclusively black, families were mostly white, and people overdosing were again, almost exclusively black. This seems to coincide with Chiricos' theory about mostly black criminals, and mostly white victims. The black criminal drug dealers seduce their white children into drugs, and they are the victims in this epidemic. These white victims seem to be middle to upper class, discussing how they need to play golf when their children are at school, not after, and how the maids cannot raise their children.
48 Hours quoted numbers that just aren't able to be known, such as exactly how many users there are in the U.S., and how many people have tried drugs. While we can estimate based on population and drug offenders, there is simply too many variables to be known. While they did show some white people who were drug users, most of what they said consisted of how they didn't see it coming, they seemed like good people. I also find it interesting that they interviewed almost no other ethnicities. For Chiricos, they did encourage the thought that cocaine use was spiraling out of control, when it is known that it in fact decreased after 1985 (p. 115). In order to boost their drug usage numbers, they included any type of drug at all, including marijuana, which was what most of the younger population admitted to using, rather than cocaine. 48 Hours used this data to distort the real numbers, exactly what Chiricos described.
48 Hours seems to have manipulated every scene, from the background noise (always an ambulance or cop car with sirens going by), to how many times kids have tried drugs, to empty vials that had crack in them turning up in schoolyards, to the idea that anyone standing on the street is selling. This episode is a prime example of moral panic, right in the years that Chirico discussed.

True Detective

I chose true detective because I had never seen it, or even heard of it before. Looking at a show with fresh eyes seemed like a good idea, and I do have to say that, after watching it, I did think about much of what Surette said quite often. This show, although risque, follows a narrative that Surette already identified. Although a few new points were brought up, most of what this show focuses on is just a more detailed display than what is already out there.
First of all, this show offers an extremely risque, morbid, and nauseating view of crime, the law, and justice in general. While most shows only insinuate the horrifying possibilities, this show features them. Behind the explicitness of the show, however, I do feel that it offers a different view on crime than most shows I've seen. The normal, everyday crimes, along with the somewhat sensational drugs, prostitution, and corruption within law enforcement, are depicted in the first season. While it does focus on the truly sensational aspects of crime that are, in reality, rare, such as rape, torture, serial murderers, satanic worship, etc., it also covers those less sensational crimes.
Although it does offer new views, it also fits into normal genres. Two cops, with more knowledge than even the ME, who work outside the system. When Rust looks at the first body, he notices where the blood settled, what each mark meant, and more, while the ME only states that her body was washed, she'd had sex, and she had drugs in her system. No mention of anything that Rust had noticed, making Rust look smarter and more experienced than the ME. They are also smarter than any other cop or detective, and is able to easily navigate a predominantly black neighborhood, in which almost every resident on that block is running around with guns, and cops are swarming the place. Despite a helicopter and a multitude of cops, no one even spots Rust or the man he kidnapped. Furthermore, they are able to work outside the system, with Rust taking 'personal time', stealing drugs, snorting coke, and going undercover. There, he does more drugs, goes with several other offenders and breaks into a house, and then kidnaps the one they want. After kidnapping him, they beat him until he agrees to a meet with the man that he thinks is behind the murder. There, they falsify more evidence when Marty shoots one of the men in the head, and Rust has to 'make it look right', shooting up the place to pretend that they'd been shot at. All of this fools the rest of the department, yet again, and they are the smartest men there. All of this displays the 'insight' that Surette discusses, "with an almost psychic awareness of what people are thinking" (Surette, 115). Indeed, after Rust and Marty think they've caught their man, Rust goes on to become famous for getting confessions, because he knows what the suspects think. 'Everyday' detectives just aren't good enough to get the confession, so Rust is called in to solve it for them.

These cops are extremely masculine, cursing constantly, drinking, smoking, and having sex as often as possible. They constantly show both men drinking and driving, although especially Marty when he loses his mistress, and then his wife. Through the whole show, it depicts these two men as loner cops, the only ones who can solve it, and it plays right into their masculine depravity. Rather than call any leads in, since they believe it goes high up, they keep all leads to themselves, and are credited with solving it when it breaks. This lets them both be a 'heroic man of action' (Surette, 118).
It indicates that women are sex crazed, and have nothing much else to do with the story. At every turn, each woman in the show is driven by sex, and has little else to do with the story besides being Marty's family. Every episode has some level of nudity, usually with women in strip clubs or trying to have sex with Marty or Rust. This risque level of nudity takes the usual narrative of women being there for sex, and steps it up several notches. The idea, however, of women being sex crazed is not new, Surette discussed it in women in corrections (Surette, 169). It is not discussed, however, in the chapter when Surette talks about the masculinity of rogue cops, but I would suggest that, as part of that masculinity, it must involve sex. Rust asked Marty "You can't spot crazy pussy?" when Marty's mistress followed them to the bar, and Marty went crazy seeing her with another man. It exemplifies the view on women being manipulative, sex crazed, and irrational beings. For Rust, however, he does not usually follow up on the offers, the exception being Marty's wife. Even when a prostitute offers herself, he turns her down, continuing the investigation instead. Although this might seem like it should make him less masculine, it only creates a more mysterious, perhaps more 'good' masculine man.

In episode three, Rust states that "The world needs bad men, we keep the other bad men from the door", perpetuating Surette's discussion of detectives who are also 'rogue cops' (Surette, 100). It plays right into the two competing frames, first being the CSI type shows that display the good cop, working within a decent justice system, and proving the crime doesn't pay. Second, our rogue cop, working in a system that just doesn't work right. In this case, not enough time or other officers to help solve the murder, bosses who tell you to leave the case be, state officials that have corrupt family, and an overall lack of any kind of organization. As discussed above, they work outside the system initially to find the man they thought was solely responsible. Years later, they discover that there were many men involved, and according to the survivor, the worst one is still out there. Since neither of them still works for the state police, they work together outside the system to solve it. They, yet again, commit many crimes to solve it, including kidnapping a sheriff, shooting near him, breaking into houses, and threatening the mentally slow woman. It reinforces the idea that our system is so broken, the only way to solve any crimes is to work completely outside of it, and on the other side, any crime that is worked within the system will not get solved. Indeed, throughout the season, it is the system turning on Rust that is displayed. Rather than believing him, they go after him as the murderer, and attempt to convince his old partner that it was Rust who was behind it all. Rust even states, "I can't decide if it's a coverup or a garden variety incompetence here".
The main criminal in this investigation, the man with the facial scarring, plays right into Surette's 'Predatory Criminal' (Surette, 60). Although he is not of high social status himself, his family is. This is what kept him from being found before, and does play a large role in his life. He is white and middle aged, and he does commit violent senseless crimes. He is the 'Ideal Offender' (Surette, 207), a stranger who seems to lack any essential human quality. Often, he is portrayed as a monster, with the first witness describing him as literally, the spaghetti monster with green ears. As the show moves forward, the most common theme for describing him was his horrific facial scarring. The victims, too, also play right into Surette's 'Ideal Victim' (Surette, 207), children who should have been protected, naive and truly innocent. Instead, they are brutally used and murdered, and the only survivor must keep herself practically catatonic to keep living. Even among the prostitutes, there were some close to the ideal victim, because although no longer innocent, most of them had been abused when they were children, and simply kept playing the ideal victim throughout their lives.

Overall, Rust is played as the misunderstood loner, who seeks justice at all costs. Marty is portrayed, for most of the season, as the cheater drunk who has extremely low morals, but still wants to get justice. It isn't until the very end that they stop displaying Marty's conquests and the consequences of that, and instead show him to have the same need to get justice as Rust. Indeed, Rust is also shown as having no religion, instead believing we live in a never ending, 4th dimension time circle. It isn't until the very end that Rust almost dies, and experiences the love of his dead child, that it seems he may believe in something after all.
This show does offer some new insight, with not all of the corruption being weeded out, the 'bad guy' not being a white collar man, and it offers a more morbid, visually detailed view on crimes. With this morbidly detailed view, it stands itself apart from shows that simply tell you something happened. Despite this, it also falls into many roles, masculine detectives who work outside the system, who are smarter than MEs, street cops, other detectives, and sheriffs, trying to solve a murder by a monster who rapes, kills, and poses women and children. I think that Surette would argue that the risque behavior of this show just attempts to bring more attention to details he already saw in crime shows.

Orange is the New Black

The show starts out with several sex scenes, which encourage Surette's view of the women in the corrections system. Breasts are openly displayed, with women commenting on them, acting as sex crazed beasts.
The show displays the complicated nature of relationships within the prison, with guards that are using their positions, snitches, insults, and race barriers. This does break with some traditional shows, as it actually displays the conflicts within the race lines, even going so far as to show the Hispanic woman who doesn't speak Spanish is excluded.
For Surette, this truly is a lost world, separate from the 'real world', and with it's own rules, actions, and ideas. The prison is harsh, most of the inmates are ugly, cruel, and innately guilty. It does break with this with the main character, an attractive woman who is mostly innocent, guilty only of following her lover 10 years before.
It also reinforces most of Surette's ideas on the correctional officers, who are incompetent, indifferent to her suffering, and using their positions for their own pleasure (sex). There are, however, exceptions to this in the show, with the main character's officer. He seems to understand how the facility can work, and goes so far as to bribe another inmate to get information on what is bothering the main character.
I suppose that although the main character is shown in a sympathetic light, Surette would argue that it would not lead to any changes in correctional facilities.
Overall, this show does break with some of the previous ideas, but it also cannot stray too far without losing public interest, so it does include some of our preconceived notions of what prison is like. It reinforces many prejudices, and while it does help break a few, Surette would likely argue that it keeps within most of the boundaries of prison shows.

Media Trials

While many trials fit the bill for this assignment, my other choice being O.J. Simpson, I decided to go with The Grim Sleeper, because while it wasn't as notorious, it also wasn't as obvious. It did receive quite a bit of attention, as most serial killer trials do, but interestingly, most people don't talk about it now. Unlike Ted Bundy, or Amanda Knoxx, who are still talked about now, The Grim Sleeper was a sudden uproar, followed, for the most part, by almost complete silence.
This serial killer, whose name is Lonnie Franklin Jr., murdered women who were not likely to be missed (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-grim-sleeper-serial-killer-trial-20160216-story.html), women of minority who used drugs, and whom he was able to lure to his car. He killed from the 1980's to 2007, a long career of murder. In that time, however, there were two victims that escaped, Einatra Washington and Laura Moore, both of whom testified at the trial. He was found guilty of 10 counts of murder, and sentenced to death (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-grim-sleeper-sentencing-20160810-snap-story.html)
While there was not much media attention while the murders were happening, the trial brought to light the injustice that had been done to that community, where it was known for years that someone was targeting the women, and no one did anything.
According to Surette, this trial falls into the 'evil strangers, psychotic killer' category, being someone that the victims didn't know, and who was a complete predator, hunting down his victims, and brutally murdering them.
This case brought media attention because of the length of time that Lonnie Franklin Jr. was able to keep murdering women. In the 1980's, police corruption was a real problem, African American women, some of whom were prostitutes, didn't really 'matter' enough to put the effort in to find who killed them. Also to be noted, DNA wasn't available yet, and it took Lonnie's son's DNA in 2010 to find Lonnie. Even now, it would be difficult to find The Grim Sleeper without his son's DNA. This case does portray the criminal justice system as moderately corrupt in past years, discussing the lack of police intervention as the 'only' reason that The Grim Sleeper's reign continued for so long. While it did acknowledge that the victims were prostitutes and drug addicts, the articles don't really portray them negatively, but rather attempting to portray them as innocents. As Surette has discussed before, the truly evil criminal, killing the sweet innocent lamb.
Overall, this media trial event exemplifies the ability of the media to influence how we look at crimes, and criminals. With this 'psychotic killer', it portrays that serial killers are common, strangers are the most dangerous, and the police will hush murders they can't solve.

CSI and Moral Authority

In this episode of CSI: Miami, a man is murdered inside his cabana. Before long, it is discovered that he was a jiggalo. All throughout the episode, they gather evidence, and analyze it in the crime lab, just as Cavender and Deutsch describe. They also use quite a bit of scientific jargon to perpetuate the idea that they know exactly what they are talking about. Every tech on the show knows scientific data that in reality, would require some research. It perpetuates the idea that answers can be and are found for every possible question. The blood spatter on the ceiling was described, with the direction of the tails and the angles, and with that information they were able to tell where the killer was standing without entering any data into a computer. The small particles inside the head wound, along with a fluid, lead them directly to a snow globe. In reality, this is highly unlikely, as even if the particles were found, the most that any forensic scientist could say is that they were particles of PVC, possibly indicative of a snow globe's 'snow'. This would also probably not have been enough for a warrant to search a house, as even if someone did buy a snow globe, it is not enough cause. Any snow globe could have been used, there was nothing unique about the material they found in the wound to indicate it was a snow globe bought in France. Along with these unlikely scientific finds, this episode also perpetuates the idea that business owners care more about the business than they do that someone actually died. Cavender and Deutsch's claims do seem to hold true for this episode, with the scientific jargon, the unrealistic crime labs, and the fact that the women on the show, while useful, are typically helpful in a feminine way.

A Raging Son: An analysis of 48 Hours

In ‘A Raging Son’, 48 Hours ‘shows’ the story of Danielle Thomas and Jason Bohn. With this episode, 48 Hours attempts to show us a crime that occurred between an innocent, naïve successful beauty; and a heinous, ‘supposedly’ mentally ill man. While they talk about his mental illness, it is also torn down at the end. They attempt to show how this murder was so very much worse than so many others, and how little the NYPD did to help. This is the framework that 48 Hours uses to describe this murder.

As with every 48 Hours episode, it starts with seemingly serious music, attempting to illustrate the seriousness and realness of the episode. The show starts out with the detective displaying the apartment where Danielle was murdered, and discussing how this case drove him to retirement. He describes how he realizes that someone tried to manipulate the time of death, by using ice bags to preserve the body, and using a fan to blow the stench of decay out the window. This detective, Dennis Frawley, is told, “You’ve covered thousands of cases”, to which he responds, “Not quite like this, not quite like this”.  In this way, they set very dramatic expectations for the audience, perhaps making us sit up in our seats and pay a little more attention. Somehow, this murder was going to be more gruesome, more horrifying, than any of his other cases. In a morbid sense, the audience likely thinks, “this should be good”.

This detective is the only law enforcement they interview, and the only other evidence that they give about the police response is the 911 calls that no one responded to. In this, they are pointing to the police as the main reason that anything happened, neglecting the side of the officers. It is briefly mentioned that she decided not to press charges, which puts the officers in a difficult position, unable to do anything besides the order of protection. They clearly did not want to have any law enforcement officials besides the detective to give any reasons for not responding. It could have been set as a low priority call, and been too busy to respond. It could have been that someone drove by, and all seemed quiet. None of that matters, however, because in this episode of 48 Hours, they did not interview that side of the story.

They also describe how unusual this crime is, as it is committed by a lawyer, and the victim is a Weight Watchers executive. This clearly shows that the ‘typical’ murder is not someone who has any of these attributes, but someone who is likely poor, and uneducated. They emphasize that she was well educated, kind, adventurous person. While they do mention the fact that Jason is a lawyer multiple times, they do not describe him in a personal way, besides the abuse that he suffered as a child. In this, they are putting the victim on a pedestal, and putting the suspect in a role of mental health issues. They also mostly show Danielle in a positive light, with nice clothes, hair done well, and, again, happy. It is here that they show Jason, in his orange prison clothing, handcuffed to the wall, while talking.

Then, they set the scene for a history of violent outbursts and abuse. The neighbor to Danielle and Jason called 911 about a fight they were having, and how Jason wouldn’t let Danielle leave. This is when they discuss how the police never responded, and it wasn’t for another two weeks that they heard from her, when she went in to the police station. They document her bruises, still there after two weeks. Jason then calls her, and she puts him on speakerphone, where he tells her he’ll hunt her down like a dog. The police arrest Jason, but this is when she refuses to press charges, and all they can do for her is a protection order. This is where the producers begin to blame the NYPD, for not doing more.

  

Once they move past the detective and the police, they go on to Jason, and to Danielle Thomas’ mother and grandmother. They paint a picture of severe abuse and neglectfulness that Jason suffered in childhood, and how his own mother’s abandonment of him left him traumatized, and led to his mental condition of intermittent explosive disorder. They show a few pictures and videos of Jason, little of those are happy. At this time, they also show Danielle in many pictures, all showing her happy, fun, and adventurous side. They also show a serious of pictures, which display a highlighted section of words. This enables them to pick out the most dramatic words from that definition, rather than giving the ‘boring’ full definition. One example is here, when they are showing the definition for intermittent explosive disorder. They highlight words that create the most drama, while editing out the rest.

When, after only five months of dating, Danielle follows Jason to Queens, Danielle’s family wants assurances that Danielle was in good hands. At this point, Danielle schedules a trip for Danielle’s mother and grandmother to meet Jason’s mother. However, this trip is cancelled, seemingly without a reason. They never interview Jason’s mother, perhaps because she didn’t want to be interviewed, or perhaps they didn’t want her side.

At this point, they discuss how Danielle, who had been staying at hotels and friends’ places, had moved back in with Jason. They went out for drinks, and she told one of Jason’s friends that he was abusing her. However, she went back to the apartment, because Jason had threatened her dog. That night, she called 911, and they play a small clip of that, again omitting information that may put a different light on things. They emphasize the NYPD’s ‘neglectfulness’ here, saying “The police failed to respond”, and “That would be the last time the NYPD would have a chance to save Danielle Thomas”.

They use key phrases and video next, discussing how, hours after “brutally beating to death his girlfriend Danielle”, he was buying ice to preserve her body. He also attempted to cover his tracks by responding to texts pretending to be her. All of this, combined with how they have described the abuse she had gone through, her worry for her dog instead of herself, and how the police ‘failed’, creates ill feelings toward Jason, keeping you from truly believing his side of the story. They paint a picture of a saint, a truly innocent naïve girl, brutally tortured by a horrendous villain.

At a certain point, during the discussion of why Jason murdered Danielle, they mention that he thought that she was going to leave him, just like his mother did. This, combined with the emotional turmoil at having his mother back in his life again, supposedly led to his ‘snap’. They point to the psychological disorder as leaving him out of control, which caused him to kill her. The prosecution has a difficult time believing this, at certain points saying things like, “this makes a mockery of the judicial system”, and how ridiculous it is that they are blaming “his mommy” for a murder so many years later. The defense maintains, however, that it was all due to a fit of rage caused by his illness that led to her death. At this point, they bring up the prosecution, who have a key piece of evidence about the murder. It is a recording of the murder, made by an accidental cell phone call which went to voicemail. This voicemail proves that the murder of Danielle took an hour, which one jury member says is what convinced her that Jason wasn’t out of control.

At a point in this episode, they are about to break to commercial, and offer the audience a chance to interact, by asking them if they think that Jason’s childhood should diminish his responsibility for murder.

They also do this at the end, asking the audience if they think he should spend the rest of his life in prison. This allows the almost entirely uninformed audience the chance to give their ‘professional’ opinion, and discuss what is so clearly right and wrong. This episode is only 41 minutes long, and in that time, these people have been able to receive all the necessary information to make such a critical judgement about the crime they have been shown.

            They show quite a few close-ups of Jason during the trial, with almost no expression on his face, perhaps bored. It is not until after he is found guilty, and is at sentencing, that he seems to express any emotion, in this case remorse. Before this phase, Danielle’s mother and grandmother express their faith, and that the bible teaches forgiveness, but that it would be much easier to forgive if he expressed any remorse about murdering Danielle. At sentencing, he tells the family of Danielle that he is sorry for what he’s done, and seems to break down.

           

This entire episode clearly shows how ‘infotainment’ can influence our feelings towards crime, by making us feel that psychological illness is not a reasonable defense, by making us believe that there is always one innocent victim, and one guilty perpetrator, and by making us believe that we cannot count on police to be there when we truly need them. By influencing how we feel about crime, they can influence laws on crime. In truth, there is almost never any crime that is truly about one innocent naïve person, and one heinous one. However, that is how the media would prefer you to see it, to make the crime that much more horrible, and that much more dramatic.