>"[Juries] are even willing to go a step further and say, 'We'll convict on the basis of DNA, even in the face of evidence — non-DNA evidence — that this isn't

>"[Juries] are even willing to go a step further and say, 'We'll convict on the basis of DNA, even in the face of evidence — non-DNA evidence — that this isn't the perpetrator," Murphy says. Juries are largely representative of the general population. As such, most have been conditioned by television crime dramas such as Law & Order, CSI and NCIS to view DNA evidence as infallible techno-wizardry that always catches the bad guys. Ever see a mainstream crime drama end with the arrest and conviction of someone totally innocent, the credits roll, and that's it? Neither have I. Instead, we have the stereotype of law enforcement being completely incorruptible, with the evidence technicians themselves cast as well-meaning nerds who are equally infallible, because gosh, they're just super geeky scientists who are super smart. "When you go into court you are putting your fate into the hands of twelve people who weren't smart enough to get out of jury duty." - Norm Crosby Sadly that quote is even more relevant today.