WRITING FOR ENTERTAINMENT & EDUCATING THE READER

I'm a member of several national writers organizations that specialize in the mystery genre. Of course many of the members write related genres - thrillers, suspense and sometimes even romance - because every life needs a little romance. These organizations regularly put out newsletters which is wonderful because they contain valuable information in articles containing information that often helps us write better or overcome obstacles in this business.

Several years ago, one of these organizations - I think it was Sisters in Crime (primarily women writers of crime-related books) - had an article in one of their newsletters regarding the responsibility writers have in writing stories that solve the crime in a factually correct manner - meaning the writer doesn't use some kind of hocus pocus that couldn't really work. Now if the book is some kind of science fiction set in the year 2100, who knows - maybe hocus pocus will work. But if the setting is 1980, the writer has to use a method that would have been available at that time and since DNA wasn't.... Another example is to understand that not all law enforcement departments have all the whiz-bang, high-tech equipment. Sometimes a microscope and a scapel are the basic forensic tools. Understand what I'm saying here?

An example was offered of a real life trial where the case involved a man being tried for homicide - the killing of another. The prosecutor had extensive evidence to prove the case against the defendant - the gun, the bullet from the body matched the gun owned by the defendant, the gun was found at the murder scene, the defendant's fingerprints were on the gun and at the murder scene, the victim's blood was found on some of the defendant's clothing, the defendant had both a motive and an opportunity.

But the jury's verdict came back 11-1 with 11 voting Guilty and one lone hold-out for Not Guilty. When the lone hold-out was finally asked Why she refused to vote Guilty, her answer was - "They didn't find the defendant's fingerprint on the bullet" meaning the bullet inside the victim. When she was pressed as to why she expected a fingerprint to have been found on that particular bullet, she is reported to have said she had seen it on the television program, CSI. Unreal. And I do mean - Un-Real.

Television is NOT real life. Television is "entertainment." Where else is a crime committed, discovered, investigated and solved and sometimes ("Law and Order") prosecuted and a verdict received in 40 minutes or less - because we do have to allow plenty of time for the never-ending commercials. The answer is NoWhere.

Writers have a far more responsible job to the public. We write to entertain, of course. Otherwise we would never get published. Heck, sometimes we entertain and still don't get published. But nonetheless, we have the responsibility to try to educate our readers to what the "reality" of the "system" is. Otherwise there won't be any system and far less chance of justice if one of our readers ever has the privilege of becoming a Juror some day. (And I have.) For the sake of what we call the Justice System, we have to try to ensure those who do sit on juries in this country are at least not expecting to be "entertained.