Forensic science

From KYNNpedia
"Forensics" redirects here. For the fields of speech and debate, see Public speaking and Debate.
"Crime scene investigator" redirects here. For similar topics, see crime scene investigation (disambiguation).
"Forensic" redirects here. For other uses, see Forensic (disambiguation).

Part of a series on
Forensic science
Physiological
Social
Criminalistics
Digital forensics
Related disciplines
Related articles

Forensic science, also known as criminalistics,<ref>"Criminology Vs. Criminalistics: What's the Difference?". Study.com. Criminalistics, also known as forensic science, is the application of scientific principles to provide evidence in criminal cases.</ref> is the application of science principles and methods to support legal decision-making in matters of criminal and civil law.

During criminal investigation in particular, it is governed by the legal standards of admissible evidence and criminal procedure. It is a broad field utilizing numerous practices such as the analysis of DNA, fingerprints, bloodstain patterns, firearms, ballistics, toxicology, and fire debris analysis.

Forensic scientists collect, preserve, and analyze evidence during the course of an investigation. While some forensic scientists travel to the scene of the crime to collect the evidence themselves, others occupy a laboratory role, performing analysis on objects brought to them by other individuals.<ref name="job desc">"Job Description for Forensic Laboratory Scientists". Crime Scene Investigator EDU. 12 November 2013. Archived from the original on 6 September 2015. Retrieved 28 August 2015.</ref> Others are involved in analysis of financial, banking, or other numerical data for use in financial crime investigation, and can be employed as consultants from private firms, academia, or as government employees.<ref>"Prosecutors just got millions of pages of Trump documents. His taxes are only the beginning". NBC News. 25 February 2021. Retrieved 27 February 2021.</ref>

In addition to their laboratory role, forensic scientists testify as expert witnesses in both criminal and civil cases and can work for either the prosecution or the defense. While any field could technically be forensic, certain sections have developed over time to encompass the majority of forensically related cases.<ref name="aafs sections">"Sections". American Academy of Forensic Sciences. 27 August 2015. Archived from the original on 30 August 2015. Retrieved 28 August 2015.</ref>

Etymology

The term forensic stems from the Latin word, forēnsis (3rd declension, adjective), meaning "of a forum, place of assembly".<ref>"forensic (adj.)". Online Etymology Dictionary. Retrieved 5 June 2023.</ref> The history of the term originates in Roman times, when a criminal charge meant presenting the case before a group of public individuals in the forum. Both the person accused of the crime and the accuser would give speeches based on their sides of the story. The case would be decided in favor of the individual with the best argument and delivery. This origin is the source of the two modern usages of the word forensic—as a form of legal evidence; and as a category of public presentation.<ref>"Forensic Science". study.com. Retrieved 8 June 2023.</ref>

In modern use, the term forensics is often used in place of "forensic science."

The word "science", is derived from the Latin word for 'knowledge' and is today closely tied to the scientific method, a systematic way of acquiring knowledge. Taken together, forensic science means the use of scientific methods and processes for crime solving.

History

Origins of forensic science and early methods

Main article: Forensics in antiquity

The ancient world lacked standardized forensic practices, which enabled criminals to escape punishment. Criminal investigations and trials relied heavily on forced confessions and witness testimony. However, ancient sources do contain several accounts of techniques that foreshadow concepts in forensic science developed centuries later.<ref>Schafer, Elizabeth D. (2008). "Ancient science and forensics". In Ayn Embar-seddon; Allan D. Pass (eds.). Forensic Science. Salem Press. p. 40. ISBN 978-1587654237.</ref>

The first written account of using medicine and entomology to solve criminal cases is attributed to the book of Xi Yuan Lu (translated as Washing Away of Wrongs<ref>"Forensics Timeline". Cbsnews.com. Archived from the original on 29 June 2011. Retrieved 20 December 2011.</ref><ref>A Brief Background of Forensic Science Archived 16 December 2009 at the Wayback Machine</ref>), written in China in 1248 by Song Ci (宋慈, 1186–1249), a director of justice, jail and supervision,<ref name="FOOTNOTESongMcKnight3">Song & McKnight, p. 3.</ref> during the Song dynasty.

Song Ci introduced regulations concerning autopsy reports to court,<ref name="FOOTNOTESongMcKnight161">Song & McKnight, p. 161.</ref> how to protect the evidence in the examining process, and explained why forensic workers must demonstrate impartiality to the public.<ref name="FOOTNOTESongMcKnight76–82">Song & McKnight, pp. 76–82.</ref> He devised methods for making antiseptic and for promoting the reappearance of hidden injuries to dead bodies and bones (using sunlight and vinegar under a red-oil umbrella);<ref name="FOOTNOTESongMcKnight95">Song & McKnight, p. 95.</ref> for calculating the time of death (allowing for weather and insect activity);<ref name="FOOTNOTESongMcKnight86">Song & McKnight, p. 86.</ref> described how to wash and examine the dead body to ascertain the reason for death.<ref name="FOOTNOTESongMcKnight87">Song & McKnight, p. 87.</ref> At that time the book had described methods for distinguishing between suicide and faked suicide.<ref name="FOOTNOTESongMcKnight79–85">Song & McKnight, p. 79–85.</ref> He wrote the book on forensics stating that all wounds or dead bodies should be examined, not avoided. The book became the first form of literature to help determine the cause of death.<ref>Iorliam, Aamo (2018). "History of Forensic Science". Fundamental Computing Forensics for Africa. SpringerBriefs in Computer Science. pp. 3–16. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-94499-9_2. ISBN 978-3-319-94498-2.</ref>

In one of Song Ci's accounts (Washing Away of Wrongs), the case of a person murdered with a sickle was solved by an investigator who instructed each suspect to bring his sickle to one location. (He realized it was a sickle by testing various blades on an animal carcass and comparing the wounds.) Flies, attracted by the smell of blood, eventually gathered on a single sickle. In light of this, the owner of that sickle confessed to the murder. The book also described how to distinguish between a drowning (water in the lungs) and strangulation (broken neck cartilage), and described evidence from examining corpses to determine if a death was caused by murder, suicide or accident.<ref name="FOOTNOTESongMcKnight">Song & McKnight.</ref>

Methods from around the world involved saliva and examination of the mouth and tongue to determine innocence or guilt, as a precursor to the Polygraph test. In ancient India,<ref name=EDodD>Parmeshwaranand, Swami (2003). Encyclopaedic Dictionary of the Dharmaśāstra, Volume 1. New Delhi: Sarup & Sons. p. 499. ISBN 8176253650.</ref> some suspects were made to fill their mouths with dried rice and spit it back out. Similarly, in ancient China, those accused of a crime would have rice powder placed in their mouths.<ref>McCrie, Robert D. "General Managerial Fundamentals and Competencies". Security Operations Management. 1st ed. Amsterdam: Butterworth-Heinemann/Elsevier, 2007. 93. Print.</ref> In ancient middle-eastern cultures, the accused were made to lick hot metal rods briefly. It is thought that these tests had some validity<ref>"The History of Forensic Science and it's evolution". IFF Lab. 29 December 2017.[permanent dead link]</ref> since a guilty person would produce less saliva and thus have a drier mouth;<ref>"Licking hot metal spoons to expose lies: Egypt's oldest tribal judicial system". Al Arabiya English. 24 September 2018. Retrieved 6 May 2021.</ref> the accused would be considered guilty if rice was sticking to their mouths in abundance or if their tongues were severely burned due to lack of shielding from saliva.[citation needed]

Development of forensic science

Ambroise Paré's surgical work laid the groundwork for the development of forensic techniques in the following centuries.

In 16th-century Europe, medical practitioners in army and university settings began to gather information on the cause and manner of death. Ambroise Paré, a French army surgeon, systematically studied the effects of violent death on internal organs.<ref name=GAB>Kelly, Jack (27 April 2009). Gunpowder: Alchemy, Bombards, and Pyrotechnics: The History of the Explosive ... New York: Basic Books. p. 79. ISBN 978-0465037186. Archived from the original on 23 July 2016.</ref><ref>Porter, Roy; Lorraine Daston; Katharine Park. The Cambridge History of Science: Volume 3, Early Modern Science. p. 805.</ref> Two Italian surgeons, Fortunato Fidelis and Paolo Zacchia, laid the foundation of modern pathology by studying changes that occurred in the structure of the body as the result of disease.<ref name=THSC>Suter, Patricia; Russell D. Earnest; Corinne P. Earnest (2010). The Hanging of Susanna Cox: The True Story of Pennsylvania's Most Notorious Infanticide and the Legend that Kept it Alive. Mechanicsburg: Stackpole Books. p. 20. ISBN 978-0811705608.</ref> In the late 18th century, writings on these topics began to appear. These included A Treatise on Forensic Medicine and Public Health by the French physician Francois Immanuele Fodéré<ref name=HoFM>Madea, Burkhard (4 March 2014). Handbook of Forensic Medicine. Sussex: Wiley Blackwell. p. 10. ISBN 978-0470979990. Archived from the original on 5 May 2016.</ref> and The Complete System of Police Medicine by the German medical expert Johann Peter Frank.<ref name=MaSiEM>Lindemann, Mary (28 October 1999). Medicine and Society in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge: University of Cambridge. p. 135. ISBN 0521412544.</ref>

As the rational values of the Enlightenment era increasingly permeated society in the 18th century, criminal investigation became a more evidence-based, rational procedure − the use of torture to force confessions was curtailed, and belief in witchcraft and other powers of the occult largely ceased to influence the court's decisions. Two examples of English forensic science in individual legal proceedings demonstrate the increasing use of logic and procedure in criminal investigations at the time. In 1784, in Lancaster, John Toms was tried and convicted for murdering Edward Culshaw with a pistol. When the dead body of Culshaw was examined, a pistol wad (crushed paper used to secure powder and balls in the muzzle) found in his head wound matched perfectly with a torn newspaper found in Toms's pocket, leading to the conviction.<ref name=SW>McCrery, Nigel (29 August 2013). Silent Witnesses. London: Random House Books. p. 51. ISBN 978-1847946836. Archived from the original on 13 May 2016.</ref>

This is an example and explanation of extractor/ejector marks on casings.

In Warwick 1816, a farm laborer was tried and convicted of the murder of a young maidservant. She had been drowned in a shallow pool and bore the marks of violent assault. The police found footprints and an impression from corduroy cloth with a sewn patch in the damp earth near the pool. There were also scattered grains of wheat and chaff. The breeches of a farm labourer who had been threshing wheat nearby were examined and corresponded exactly to the impression in the earth near the pool.<ref>Kind S, Overman M (1972). Science Against Crime. New York: Doubleday. pp. 12–13. ISBN 0385092490.</ref>

An article appearing in Scientific American in 1885 describes the use of microscopy to distinguish between the blood of two persons in a criminal case in Chicago.<ref>Scientific American. Munn & Company. 26 September 1885. p. 200.</ref>

Chromatography

Chromatography is a common technique used in the field of Forensic Science. Chromatography is a method of separating the components of a mixture from a mobile phase.<ref>"Chromatography | Definition, Types, & Facts | Britannica". www.britannica.com. Retrieved 30 March 2023.</ref> Chromatography is an essential tool used in forensic science, helping analysts identify and compare trace amounts of samples including ignitable liquids, drugs, and biological samples. Many laboratories utilize gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) to examine these kinds of samples; this analysis provides rapid and reliant data to identify samples in question.<ref>Shipman, Robert; Conti, Trisha; Tighe, Tara; Buel, Eric (June 2013). "Forensic Drug Identification by Gas Chromatography – Infrared Spectroscopy" (PDF). Retrieved 23 September 2023.</ref>

Toxicology

A method for detecting arsenious oxide, simple arsenic, in corpses was devised in 1773 by the Swedish chemist, Carl Wilhelm Scheele.<ref name=DPaC>Bell, Suzanne (October 2008). Drugs, Poisons, and Chemistry. New York: Facts on File. p. 8. ISBN 978-0816055104. Archived from the original on 27 April 2016.</ref> His work was expanded upon, in 1806, by German chemist Valentin Ross, who learned to detect the poison in the walls of a victim's stomach.<ref>Parker, RJ (2015). Forensic Analysis and DNA in Criminal Investigations: Including Cold Cases Solved. RJ Parker Publishing. p. 66. ISBN 978-1514348369.</ref>

Apparatus for the arsenic test, devised by James Marsh

James Marsh was the first to apply this new science to the art of forensics. He was called by the prosecution in a murder trial to give evidence as a chemist in 1832. The defendant, John Bodle, was accused of poisoning his grandfather with arsenic-laced coffee. Marsh performed the standard test by mixing a suspected sample with hydrogen sulfide and hydrochloric acid. While he was able to detect arsenic as yellow arsenic trisulfide, when it was shown to the jury it had deteriorated, allowing the suspect to be acquitted due to reasonable doubt.<ref>"Visible Proofs: Forensic Views of the Body: Galleries: Technologies: The Marsh test". Archived from the original on 7 October 2015. Retrieved 4 November 2015.</ref>

Annoyed by that, Marsh developed a much better test. He combined a sample containing arsenic with sulfuric acid and arsenic-free zinc, resulting in arsine gas. The gas was ignited, and it decomposed to pure metallic arsenic, which, when passed to a cold surface, would appear as a silvery-black deposit.<ref>McMuigan, Hugh (1921). An Introduction to Chemical Pharmacology. Philadelphia: P. Blakiston's Son & Co. pp. 396–397. Retrieved 16 December 2007.</ref> So sensitive was the test, known formally as the Marsh test, that it could detect as little as one-fiftieth of a milligram of arsenic. He first described this test in The Edinburgh Philosophical Journal in 1836.<ref>James Marsh (1836). "Account of a method of separating small quantities of arsenic from substances with which it may be mixed". Edinburgh New Philosophical Journal. A. and C. Black. 21: 229–236. Archived from the original on 4 September 2015.</ref>

Ballistics and firearms

Main article: Forensic firearm examination

Ballistics is "the science of the motion of projectiles in flight".<ref>"Definition of BALLISTICS". www.merriam-webster.com. Retrieved 24 September 2023.</ref> In forensic science, analysts examine the patterns left on bullets and cartridge casings after being ejected from a weapon. When fired, a bullet is left with indentations and markings that are unique to the barrel and firing pin of the firearm that ejected the bullet. This examination can help scientists identify possible makes and models of weapons connected to a crime.

Henry Goddard at Scotland Yard pioneered the use of bullet comparison in 1835. He noticed a flaw in the bullet that killed the victim and was able to trace this back to the mold that was used in the manufacturing process.<ref>"Ballistics". Archived from the original on 17 October 2014. Retrieved 15 January 2014.</ref>

Entry/exit wounds based on the distance the firearm was discharged

Anthropometry

Frontispiece from Bertillon's Identification anthropométrique (1893), demonstrating the measurements needed for his anthropometric identification system

The French police officer Alphonse Bertillon was the first to apply the anthropological technique of anthropometry to law enforcement, thereby creating an identification system based on physical measurements. Before that time, criminals could be identified only by name or photograph.<ref>As reported in, "A Fingerprint Fable: The Will and William West Case". "SCAFO Online Articles". Archived from the original on 10 November 2005. Retrieved 19 December 2005.</ref><ref name="Thompson 2007">Kirsten Moana Thompson, Crime Films: Investigating the Scene. London: Wallflower Press (2007): 10</ref> Dissatisfied with the ad hoc methods used to identify captured criminals in France in the 1870s, he began his work on developing a reliable system of anthropometrics for human classification.<ref>Ginzburg, Carlo (1984). "Morelli, Freud, and Sherlock Holmes: Clues and Scientific Method". In Eco, Umberto; Sebeok, Thomas (eds.). The Sign of Three: Dupin, Holmes, Peirce. Bloomington, IN: History Workshop, Indiana University Press. p. 105. ISBN 978-0253352354. LCCN 82049207. OCLC 9412985.</ref>

Bertillon created many other forensics techniques, including forensic document examination, the use of galvanoplastic compounds to preserve footprints, ballistics, and the dynamometer, used to determine the degree of force used in breaking and entering. Although his central methods were soon to be supplanted by fingerprinting, "his other contributions like the mug shot and the systematization of crime-scene photography remain in place to this day."<ref name="Thompson 2007"/>

Fingerprints

Sir William Herschel was one of the first to advocate the use of fingerprinting in the identification of criminal suspects. While working for the Indian Civil Service, he began to use thumbprints on documents as a security measure to prevent the then-rampant repudiation of signatures in 1858.<ref name="Herschel1916">Herschel, William J (1916). The Origin of Finger-Printing (PDF). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-1104662257. Archived from the original (PDF) on 25 July 2011. Retrieved 15 January 2014.</ref>

Fingerprints taken by William Herschel 1859/60

In 1877 at Hooghly (near Kolkata), Herschel instituted the use of fingerprints on contracts and deeds, and he registered government pensioners' fingerprints to prevent the collection of money by relatives after a pensioner's death.<ref>Herschel, William James (25 November 1880). "Skin furrows of the hand" (PDF). Nature. 23 (578): 76. Bibcode:1880Natur..23...76H. doi:10.1038/023076b0. S2CID 4068612. Archived from the original (PDF) on 15 June 2011. Retrieved 15 January 2014.</ref>

In 1880, Henry Faulds, a Scottish surgeon in a Tokyo hospital, published his first paper on the subject in the scientific journal Nature, discussing the usefulness of fingerprints for identification and proposing a method to record them with printing ink. He established their first classification and was also the first to identify fingerprints left on a vial.<ref name=faulds1>Faulds, Henry (28 October 1880). "On the skin-furrows of the hand" (PDF). Nature. 22 (574): 605. Bibcode:1880Natur..22..605F. doi:10.1038/022605a0. S2CID 4117214. Archived from the original (PDF) on 12 September 2008. Retrieved 15 January 2014.</ref> Returning to the UK in 1886, he offered the concept to the Metropolitan Police in London, but it was dismissed at that time.<ref name=reid1>Reid, Donald L. (2003). "Dr. Henry Faulds – Beith Commemorative Society". Journal of Forensic Identification. 53 (2). See also this on-line article on Henry Faulds: Tredoux, Gavan (December 2003). "Henry Faulds: the Invention of a Fingerprinter". galton.org. Archived from the original on 2 June 2013. Retrieved 15 January 2014.</ref>

Faulds wrote to Charles Darwin with a description of his method, but, too old and ill to work on it, Darwin gave the information to his cousin, Francis Galton, who was interested in anthropology. Having been thus inspired to study fingerprints for ten years, Galton published a detailed statistical model of fingerprint analysis and identification and encouraged its use in forensic science in his book Finger Prints. He had calculated that the chance of a "false positive" (two different individuals having the same fingerprints) was about 1 in 64 billion.<ref name=galtonfps>Galton, Francis (1892). "Finger Prints" (PDF). London: MacMillan and Co. Archived from the original (PDF) on 12 October 2006.</ref>

Women clerical employees of the LA Police Department getting fingerprinted and photographed in 1928

Juan Vucetich, an Argentine chief police officer, created the first method of recording the fingerprints of individuals on file. In 1892, after studying Galton's pattern types, Vucetich set up the world's first fingerprint bureau. In that same year, Francisca Rojas of Necochea was found in a house with neck injuries whilst her two sons were found dead with their throats cut. Rojas accused a neighbour, but despite brutal interrogation, this neighbour would not confess to the crimes. Inspector Alvarez, a colleague of Vucetich, went to the scene and found a bloody thumb mark on a door. When it was compared with Rojas' prints, it was found to be identical with her right thumb. She then confessed to the murder of her sons.

A Fingerprint Bureau was established in Calcutta (Kolkata), India, in 1897, after the Council of the Governor General approved a committee report that fingerprints should be used for the classification of criminal records. Working in the Calcutta Anthropometric Bureau, before it became the Fingerprint Bureau, were Azizul Haque and Hem Chandra Bose. Haque and Bose were Indian fingerprint experts who have been credited with the primary development of a fingerprint classification system eventually named after their supervisor, Sir Edward Richard Henry.<ref>Tewari, RK; Ravikumar, KV (2000). "History and development of forensic science in India". J Postgrad Med. 46 (46): 303–308. PMID 11435664.</ref><ref>Sodhi, J.S.; Kaur, asjeed (2005). "The forgotten Indian pioneers of finger print science" (PDF). Current Science. 88 (1): 185–191. Archived from the original (PDF) on 8 February 2005.</ref> The Henry Classification System, co-devised by Haque and Bose, was accepted in England and Wales when the first United Kingdom Fingerprint Bureau was founded in Scotland Yard, the Metropolitan Police headquarters, London, in 1901. Sir Edward Richard Henry subsequently achieved improvements in dactyloscopy.<ref>Armstrong, Benjamin. "The Fingerprint Sourcebook" (PDF). Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice. Retrieved 30 November 2023.</ref>

In the United States, Henry P. DeForrest used fingerprinting in the New York Civil Service in 1902, and by December 1905, New York City Police Department Deputy Commissioner Joseph A. Faurot, an expert in the Bertillon system and a fingerprint advocate at Police Headquarters, introduced the fingerprinting of criminals to the United States.<ref>Introduction to U.S. 23 Dec 1905 New York – The City Record Volume 33</ref>

Uhlenhuth test

The Uhlenhuth test, or the antigen–antibody precipitin test for species, was invented by Paul Uhlenhuth in 1901 and could distinguish human blood from animal blood, based on the discovery that the blood of different species had one or more characteristic proteins. The test represented a major breakthrough and came to have tremendous importance in forensic science.<ref>Michael Kurland, Irrefutable Evidence: A History of Forensic Science (p. 200), Dee, 2009, ISBN 978-1461662396</ref> The test was further refined for forensic use by the Swiss chemist Maurice Müller in the year 1960s.<ref>Keith Inman, Norah Rudin, Principles and Practice of Criminalistics: The Profession of Forensic Science (p. 32), CRC Press, 2000</ref>

DNA

Forensic DNA analysis was first used in 1984. It was developed by Sir Alec Jeffreys, who realized that variation in the genetic sequence could be used to identify individuals and to tell individuals apart from one another. The first application of DNA profiles was used by Jeffreys in a double murder mystery in the small English town of Narborough, Leicestershire, in 1985. A 15-year-old school girl by the name of Lynda Mann was raped and murdered in Carlton Hayes psychiatric hospital. The police did not find a suspect but were able to obtain a semen sample.

In 1986, Dawn Ashworth, 15 years old, was also raped and strangled in the nearby village of Enderby. Forensic evidence showed that both killers had the same blood type. Richard Buckland became the suspect because he worked at Carlton Hayes psychiatric hospital, had been spotted near Dawn Ashworth's murder scene and knew unreleased details about the body. He later confessed to Dawn's murder but not Lynda's. Jefferys was brought into the case to analyze the semen samples. He concluded that there was no match between the samples and Buckland, who became the first person to be exonerated using DNA. Jefferys confirmed that the DNA profiles were identical for the two murder semen samples. To find the perpetrator, DNA samples from the entire male population, more than 4,000 aged from 17 to 34, of the town were collected. They all were compared to semen samples from the crime. A friend of Colin Pitchfork was heard saying that he had given his sample to the police claiming to be Colin. Colin Pitchfork was arrested in 1987 and it was found that his DNA profile matched the semen samples from the murder.

Because of this case, DNA databases were developed. There is the national (FBI) and international databases as well as the European countries (ENFSI: European Network of Forensic Science Institutes). These searchable databases are used to match crime scene DNA profiles to those already in a database.<ref>"Forensic Cases: Colin Pitchfork, First Exoneration Through DNA". exploreforensics.co.uk.[permanent dead link]</ref>

Maturation

Cartoon of a man holding a bloody knife looking contemptuously at a display of half-a-dozen supposed and dissimilar likenesses
Police brought to bear the latest techniques of forensic science in their attempts to identify and capture the serial killer Jack the Ripper.

By the turn of the 20th century, the science of forensics had become largely established in the sphere of criminal investigation. Scientific and surgical investigation was widely employed by the Metropolitan Police during their pursuit of the mysterious Jack the Ripper, who had killed a number of women in the 1880s. This case is a watershed in the application of forensic science. Large teams of policemen conducted house-to-house inquiries throughout Whitechapel. Forensic material was collected and examined. Suspects were identified, traced and either examined more closely or eliminated from the inquiry. Police work follows the same pattern today.<ref name=canter12>Canter, David (1994), Criminal Shadows: Inside the Mind of the Serial Killer, London: HarperCollins, pp. 12–13, ISBN 0002552159</ref> Over 2000 people were interviewed, "upwards of 300" people were investigated, and 80 people were detained.<ref>Inspector Donald Swanson's report to the Home Office, 19 October 1888, HO 144/221/A49301C, quoted in Begg, Jack the Ripper: The Definitive History, p. 205; Evans and Rumbelow, p. 113; Evans and Skinner, The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Sourcebook, p. 125</ref>

The investigation was initially conducted by the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), headed by Detective Inspector Edmund Reid. Later, Detective Inspectors Frederick Abberline, Henry Moore, and Walter Andrews were sent from Central Office at Scotland Yard to assist. Initially, butchers, surgeons and physicians were suspected because of the manner of the mutilations. The alibis of local butchers and slaughterers were investigated, with the result that they were eliminated from the inquiry.<ref>Inspector Donald Swanson's report to the Home Office, 19 October 1888, HO 144/221/A49301C, quoted in Begg, Jack the Ripper: The Definitive History, p. 206 and Evans and Skinner, The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Sourcebook, p. 125</ref> Some contemporary figures thought the pattern of the murders indicated that the culprit was a butcher or cattle drover on one of the cattle boats that plied between London and mainland Europe. Whitechapel was close to the London Docks,<ref>Marriott, John, "The Imaginative Geography of the Whitechapel murders", in Werner, p. 48</ref> and usually such boats docked on Thursday or Friday and departed on Saturday or Sunday.<ref>Rumbelow, p. 93; The Daily Telegraph, 10 November 1888, quoted in Evans and Skinner, The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Sourcebook, p. 341</ref> The cattle boats were examined, but the dates of the murders did not coincide with a single boat's movements, and the transfer of a crewman between boats was also ruled out.<ref>Robert Anderson to Home Office, 10 January 1889, 144/221/A49301C ff. 235–236, quoted in Evans and Skinner, The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Sourcebook, p. 399</ref>

At the end of October, Robert Anderson asked police surgeon Thomas Bond to give his opinion on the extent of the murderer's surgical skill and knowledge.<ref>Evans and Rumbelow, pp. 186–187; Evans and Skinner, The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Sourcebook, pp. 359–360</ref> The opinion offered by Bond on the character of the "Whitechapel murderer" is the earliest surviving offender profile.<ref name=canter5>Canter, pp. 5–6</ref> Bond's assessment was based on his own examination of the most extensively mutilated victim and the post mortem notes from the four previous canonical murders.<ref name=bond>Letter from Thomas Bond to Robert Anderson, 10 November 1888, HO 144/221/A49301C, quoted in Evans and Skinner, The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Sourcebook, pp. 360–362 and Rumbelow, pp. 145–147</ref> In his opinion the killer must have been a man of solitary habits, subject to "periodical attacks of homicidal and erotic mania", with the character of the mutilations possibly indicating "satyriasis".<ref name=bond/> Bond also stated that "the homicidal impulse may have developed from a revengeful or brooding condition of the mind, or that religious mania may have been the original disease but I do not think either hypothesis is likely".<ref name=bond/>

The popular fictional character Sherlock Holmes was in many ways ahead of his time in his use of forensic analysis.

Handbook for Coroners, police officials, military policemen was written by the Austrian criminal jurist Hans Gross in 1893, and is generally acknowledged as the birth of the field of criminalistics. The work combined in one system fields of knowledge that had not been previously integrated, such as psychology and physical science, and which could be successfully used against crime. Gross adapted some fields to the needs of criminal investigation, such as crime scene photography. He went on to found the Institute of Criminalistics in 1912, as part of the University of Graz' Law School. This Institute was followed by many similar institutes all over the world.<ref>Green, Martin (1999). Otto Gross, Freudian Psychoanalyst, 1877–1920. Lewiston, New York: Edwin Mellen Press. ISBN 0773481648.</ref>

In 1909, Archibald Reiss founded the Institut de police scientifique of the University of Lausanne (UNIL), the first school of forensic science in the world. Dr. Edmond Locard, became known as the "Sherlock Holmes of France". He formulated the basic principle of forensic science: "Every contact leaves a trace", which became known as Locard's exchange principle. In 1910, he founded what may have been the first criminal laboratory in the world, after persuading the Police Department of Lyon (France) to give him two attic rooms and two assistants.<ref>[1] Archived 6 February 2007 at the Wayback Machine</ref>

Symbolic of the newfound prestige of forensics and the use of reasoning in detective work was the popularity of the fictional character Sherlock Holmes, written by Arthur Conan Doyle in the late 19th century. He remains a great inspiration for forensic science, especially for the way his acute study of a crime scene yielded small clues as to the precise sequence of events. He made great use of trace evidence such as shoe and tire impressions, as well as fingerprints, ballistics and handwriting analysis, now known as questioned document examination.<ref>Alexander Bird (2006). "Abductive Knowledge and Holmesian Inference". In Tamar Szabo Gendler; John Hawthorne (eds.). Oxford studies in epistemology. OUP Oxford. p. 11. ISBN 978-0199285907.</ref> Such evidence is used to test theories conceived by the police, for example, or by the investigator himself.<ref>Matthew Bunson (1994). Encyclopedia Sherlockiana. Macmillan. p. 50. ISBN 978-0671798260.</ref> All of the techniques advocated by Holmes later became reality, but were generally in their infancy at the time Conan Doyle was writing. In many of his reported cases, Holmes frequently complains of the way the crime scene has been contaminated by others, especially by the police, emphasising the critical importance of maintaining its integrity, a now well-known feature of crime scene examination. He used analytical chemistry for blood residue analysis as well as toxicology examination and determination for poisons. He used ballistics by measuring bullet calibres and matching them with a suspected murder weapon.<ref>Jonathan Smith (1994). Fact and feeling: Baconian science and the nineteenth-Century literary imagination. Univ of Wisconsin Press. p. 214. ISBN 978-0299143541.</ref>

Late 19th – early 20th century figures

Shoeprints have long been used to match a pair of shoes to a crime scene.

Hans Gross applied scientific methods to crime scenes and was responsible for the birth of criminalistics.

Edmond Locard expanded on Gross' work with Locard's Exchange Principle which stated "whenever two objects come into contact with one another, materials are exchanged between them". This means that every contact by a criminal leaves a trace.

Alexander Lacassagne, who taught Locard, produced autopsy standards on actual forensic cases.

Alphonse Bertillon was a French criminologist and founder of Anthropometry (scientific study of measurements and proportions of the human body). He used anthropometry for identification, stating that, since each individual is unique, by measuring aspects of physical difference there could be a personal identification system. He created the Bertillon System around 1879, a way of identifying criminals and citizens by measuring 20 parts of the body. In 1884, over 240 repeat offenders were caught using the Bertillon system, but the system was largely superseded by fingerprinting.

Frances Glessner Lee, known as "the mother of forensic science",<ref>"Murder is Her Hobby: Frances Glessner Lee and the Nutshell Studies of Unexplained Death".</ref> was instrumental in the development of forensic science in the US. She lobbied to have coroners replaced by medical professionals, endowed the Harvard Associates in Police Science, and conducted many seminars to educate homicide investigators. She also created the Nutshell Studies of Unexplained Death, intricate crime scene dioramas used to train investigators, which are still in use today.

20th century

Alec Jeffreys invented the DNA profiling technique in 1984.

Later in the 20th century several British pathologists, Mikey Rochman, Francis Camps, Sydney Smith and Keith Simpson pioneered new forensic science methods. Alec Jeffreys pioneered the use of DNA profiling in forensic science in 1984. He realized the scope of DNA fingerprinting, which uses variations in the genetic code to identify individuals. The method has since become important in forensic science to assist police detective work, and it has also proved useful in resolving paternity and immigration disputes.<ref name="welcome 2004">Newton, Giles (4 February 2004). "Discovering DNA fingerprinting: Sir Alec Jeffreys describes its development". Wellcome Trust. Archived from the original on 5 March 2010. Retrieved 23 December 2007.</ref> DNA fingerprinting was first used as a police forensic test to identify the rapist and killer of two teenagers, Lynda Mann and Dawn Ashworth, who were both murdered in Narborough, Leicestershire, in 1983 and 1986 respectively. Colin Pitchfork was identified and convicted of murder after samples taken from him matched semen samples taken from the two dead girls.

Forensic science has been fostered by a number of national and international forensic science learned bodies including the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (founded 1948), publishers of the Journal of Forensic Sciences;<ref>"Journal of Forensic Sciences | American Academy of Forensic Sciences". www.aafs.org. Archived from the original on 23 November 2010.</ref> the Canadian Society of Forensic Science (founded 1953), publishers of the Journal of the Canadian Society of Forensic Science; the Chartered Society of Forensic Sciences,<ref>"Chartered Society of Forensic Sciences | Recognised Professional Body". The Chartered Society of Forensic Sciences. Archived from the original on 9 June 2016.</ref> (founded 1959), then known as the Forensic Science Society, publisher of Science & Justice;<ref>"Chartered Society of Forensic Sciences Publications". Archived from the original on 15 June 2016. Retrieved 3 June 2016.</ref> the British Academy of Forensic Sciences<ref>"The British Academy of Forensic Sciences". Archived from the original on 27 June 2015. Retrieved 26 June 2015.</ref> (founded 1960), publishers of Medicine, Science and the Law;<ref>"Medicine, Science and the Law". Archived from the original on 27 June 2015. Retrieved 26 June 2015.</ref> the Australian Academy of Forensic Sciences (founded 1967), publishers of the Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences; and the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (founded 1995).

21st century

In the past decade, documenting forensics scenes has become more efficient. Forensic scientists have started using laser scanners, drones and photogrammetry to obtain 3D point clouds of accidents or crime scenes. Reconstruction of an accident scene on a highway using drones involves data acquisition time of only 10–20 minutes and can be performed without shutting down traffic. The results are not just accurate, in centimeters, for measurement to be presented in court but also easy to digitally preserve in the long term.<ref>Hawkins, Stuart (November 2016). "Using a Drone and Photogrammetry Software to Create Orthomosaic Images and 3D Models of Aircraft Accident Sites" (PDF). UK AAIB. Archived from the original (PDF) on 13 January 2017. Retrieved 4 February 2017 – via International Society of Air Safety Investigators.</ref> Now, in the 21st century, much of forensic science's future is up for discussion. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has offered the community some guidelines upon which the science should build. NIST recommends that forensic science rethinks its system.[citation needed] If local laboratories abide by these guidelines, 21st century forensics will be dramatically different from what it has been up to now. One of the more recent additions by NIST is a document called NISTIR-7941, titled "Forensic Science Laboratories: Handbook for Facility Planning, Design, Construction, and Relocation". The handbook provides a clear blueprint for approaching forensic science. The details even include what type of staff should be hired for certain positions.<ref>"National Institute of Standards and Technology" group="Scientist in Practice">Aguilar, James. "Forensic Science Laboratories: Handbook for Facility Planning, Design, Construction, and Relocation" (PDF). nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2013/NIST.IR.7941.pdf. National Institute of Standards and Technology. Retrieved 15 April 2019.</ref>

Subdivisions

Agents of the United States Army Criminal Investigation Division investigate a crime scene.
Police forensic investigation in Ashton-under-Lyne, England, using a tent to protect the crime scene

Questionable techniques

Some forensic techniques, believed to be scientifically sound at the time they were used, have turned out later to have much less scientific merit or none.<ref>Saks, Michael J.; Faigman, David L. (2008). "Failed forensics: how forensic science lost its way and how it might yet find it". Annual Review of Law and Social Science. 4: 149–171. doi:10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.4.110707.172303.</ref> Some such techniques include:

  • Comparative bullet-lead analysis was used by the FBI for over four decades, starting with the John F. Kennedy assassination in 1963. The theory was that each batch of ammunition possessed a chemical makeup so distinct that a bullet could be traced back to a particular batch or even a specific box. Internal studies and an outside study by the National Academy of Sciences found that the technique was unreliable due to improper interpretation, and the FBI abandoned the test in 2005.<ref>Solomon, John (18 November 2007). "FBI's Forensic Test Full of Holes". The Washington Post. p. A1. Archived from the original on 25 July 2008. Retrieved 5 March 2008.</ref>
  • Forensic dentistry has come under fire: in at least three cases bite-mark evidence has been used to convict people of murder who were later freed by DNA evidence.<ref>Ross Williams, Roger (Director) (15 April 2020). The Innocence Files (television show). Netflix.</ref> A 1999 study by a member of the American Board of Forensic Odontology found a 63 percent rate of false identifications and is commonly referenced within online news stories and conspiracy websites.<ref>Santos, Fernanda (28 January 2007). "Evidence From Bite Marks, It Turns Out, Is Not So Elementary". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 10 April 2011. Retrieved 5 March 2008.</ref><ref>McRoberts, Flynn (29 November 2004). "Bite-mark verdict faces new scrutiny". Chicago Tribune. Retrieved 5 March 2008.</ref> The study was based on an informal workshop during an ABFO meeting, which many members did not consider a valid scientific setting.<ref>McRoberts, Flynn (19 October 2004). "From the start, a faulty science". Chicago Tribune. Archived from the original on 10 December 2015. Retrieved 26 August 2014.</ref> The theory is that each person has a unique and distinctive set of teeth, which leave a pattern after biting someone. They analyze the dental characteristics such as size, shape, and arch form. <ref>"Bite Mark Analysis | NC PRO". ncpro.sog.unc.edu. Retrieved 6 December 2023.</ref>
  • In 2009, scientists were able to show that it is possible to fabricate DNA evidence, thus "undermining the credibility of what has been considered the gold standard of proof in criminal cases".<ref name=Pollack>Pollack, Andrew (17 August 2009). " DNA Evidence Can Be Fabricated, Scientists Show" Archived 6 February 2017 at the Wayback Machine. The New York Times.</ref>
  • Police Access to Genetic Genealogy Databases: There are privacy concerns with the police being able to access personal genetic data that is on genealogy services.<ref name=":0">Guerrini, Christi; Robinson, Jill; Petersen, Devan; McGuire, Amy (1 October 2018). "Should Police have Access to Genetic Genealogy Databases? Capturing the Golden State Killer and other Criminals Using a Controversial New Forensic Technique". PLOS Biology. 16 (10): e2006906. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.2006906. PMC 6168121. PMID 30278047.</ref> Individuals can become criminal informants to their own families or to themselves simply by participating in genetic genealogy databases. The Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) is a database that the FBI uses to hold genetic profiles of all known felons, misdemeanants, and arrestees.<ref name=":0" /> Some people argue that individuals who are using genealogy databases should have an expectation of privacy in their data that is or may be violated by genetic searches by law enforcement.<ref name=":0" /> These different services have warning signs about potential third parties using their information, but most individuals do not read the agreement thoroughly. According to a study by Christi Guerrini, Jill Robinson, Devan Petersen, and Amy McGuire, they found that the majority of the people who took the survey support police searches of genetic websites that identify genetic relatives.<ref name=":0" /> People who responded to the survey are more supportive of police activities using genetic genealogy when it is for the purpose of identifying offenders of violent crimes, suspects of crimes against children or missing people. The data from the surveys that were given show that individuals are not concerned about police searches using personal genetic data if it is justified. It was found in this study that offenders are disproportionally low-income and black and the average person of genetic testing is wealthy and white. The results from the study had different results.<ref name=":0" /> In 2016, there was a survey called the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) that was provided by the US Bureau of Justice Statistics. In that survey, it was found that 1.3% of people aged 12 or older were victims of violent crimes, and 8.85 of households were victims of property crimes.<ref name=":0" /> There were some issues with this survey though. The NCVS produces only the annual estimates of victimization. The survey that Christi Guerrini, Jill Robinson, Devan Petersen, and Amy McGuire produced asked the participants about the incidents of victimization over one's lifetime.<ref name=":0" /> Their survey also did not restrict other family members to one household.<ref name=":0" /> Around 25% of people who responded to the survey said that they have had family members that have been employed by law enforcement which includes security guards and bailiffs.<ref name=":0" /> Throughout these surveys, it has been found that there is public support for law enforcement to access genetic genealogy databases.

Litigation science

"Litigation science" describes analysis or data developed or produced expressly for use in a trial versus those produced in the course of independent research. This distinction was made by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals when evaluating the admissibility of experts.<ref>Raloff, Janet (19 January 2008). "Judging Science". Science News. p. 42 (Vol. 173, No. 3). Archived from the original on 28 February 2008. Retrieved 5 March 2008.</ref>

This uses demonstrative evidence, which is evidence created in preparation of trial by attorneys or paralegals.

Demographics

In the United States there are over 17,200 forensic science technicians as of 2019.<ref>"Forensic Science." U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 22 February 2021. Web.</ref>

Media impact

Real-life crime scene investigators and forensic scientists warn that popular television shows do not give a realistic picture of the work, often wildly distorting its nature, and exaggerating the ease, speed, effectiveness, drama, glamour, influence and comfort level of their jobs—which they describe as far more mundane, tedious and boring.<ref name="how_accurate">Flavin, Brianna (quoting Brian McKenna, retired police Lieutenant and Crime Scene Investigator), "How Accurate are Crime Shows on TV? Debunking 7 Common Myths," Archived 31 May 2017 at the Wayback Machine 7 February 2017, Blog, School of Justice Studies, Rasmussen College, Inc., Oak Brook, IL, retrieved 31 May 2017</ref><ref name="accurate_psu">Stanton, Dawn (quoting Robert Shaler, Ph.D., prof. of biochemistry and molecular biology, dir., forensic science program, Penn. State Univ. formerly at Pittsburgh Crime Laboratory, New York City Office of Chief Medical Examiner, and Lifecodes Corp (nation's first forensic DNA laboratory)), "Probing Question: Is forensic science on TV accurate?," Archived 6 December 2016 at the Wayback Machine 10 November 2009, Eberly College of Science, Penn. State Univ., retrieved 31 May 2017</ref>

Some claim these modern TV shows have changed individuals' expectations of forensic science, sometimes unrealistically—an influence termed the "CSI effect".<ref>Holmgren, Janne A.; Fordham, Judith (January 2011). "The CSI Effect and the Canadian and the Australian Jury". Journal of Forensic Sciences. 56 (S1): S63–S71. doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2010.01621.x. PMID 21155799. S2CID 21221066.</ref><ref name="alldredge">Alldredge, John "The 'CSI Effect' and Its Potential Impact on Juror Decisions," Archived 2 September 2016 at the Wayback Machine (2015) Themis: Research Journal of Justice Studies and Forensic Science: Vol. 3: Iss. 1, Article 6., retrieved 31 May 2017</ref>

Further, research has suggested that public misperceptions about criminal forensics can create, in the mind of a juror, unrealistic expectations of forensic evidence—which they expect to see before convicting—implicitly biasing the juror towards the defendant. Citing the "CSI effect," at least one researcher has suggested screening jurors for their level of influence from such TV programs.<ref name="alldredge" />

Controversies

Questions about certain areas of forensic science, such as fingerprint evidence and the assumptions behind these disciplines have been brought to light in some publications<ref>"'Badly Fragmented' Forensic Science System Needs Overhaul". The National Academies. 18 February 2009. Archived from the original on 26 August 2009. Retrieved 9 March 2009.</ref><ref>"National Academy of Sciences Finds 'Serious Deficiencies' in Nation's Crime Labs". National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. 18 February 2009. Archived from the original on 5 March 2010. Retrieved 7 March 2009.</ref> including the New York Post.<ref name=ForensicChallenge>Katherine Ramsland (6 March 2009). "CSI: Without a clue; A new report forces Police and Judges to rethink forensic science". The New York Post, PostScript. Archived from the original on 10 March 2009. Retrieved 7 March 2009.</ref> The article stated that "No one has proved even the basic assumption: That everyone's fingerprint is unique."<ref name=ForensicChallenge /> The article also stated that "Now such assumptions are being questioned—and with it may come a radical change in how forensic science is used by police departments and prosecutors."<ref name=ForensicChallenge /> Law professor Jessica Gabel said on NOVA that forensic science "lacks the rigors, the standards, the quality controls and procedures that we find, usually, in science".<ref>Jessica Gabel, lawyer and lecturer from NOVA "Forensics on Trial" Archived 27 June 2017 at the Wayback Machine</ref>

The National Institute of Standards and Technology has reviewed the scientific foundations of bite-mark analysis used in forensic science. Bite mark analysis is a forensic science technique that analyzes the marks on the victim's skin compared to the suspects teeth. <ref>"Bite Mark Analysis | NC PRO". ncpro.sog.unc.edu. Retrieved 5 December 2023.</ref> NIST reviewed the findings of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2009 study. The National Academics of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine conducted research to address the issues of reliability, accuracy, and reliability of bitemark analysis, where they concluded that there is a lack of sufficient scientific foundation to support the data.<ref>"Forensic Bitemark Analysis Not Supported by Sufficient Data, NIST Draft Review Finds". NIST. 11 October 2022.</ref> Yet the technique is still legal to use in court as evidence. NIST funded a 2019 meeting that consisted of dentists, lawyers, researchers and others to address the gaps in this field. <ref>"Forensic Bitemark Analysis Not Supported by Sufficient Data, NIST Draft Review Finds". NIST. 11 October 2022.</ref>

In the US, on 25 June 2009, the Supreme Court issued a 5-to-4 decision in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts stating that crime laboratory reports may not be used against criminal defendants at trial unless the analysts responsible for creating them give testimony and subject themselves to cross-examination.<ref>Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 557 U.S.305 (2009). This article incorporates public domain material from this U.S government document.</ref> The Supreme Court cited the National Academies of Sciences report Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States<ref name="Nap.edu-2009">Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward. Nap.edu. 2009. doi:10.17226/12589. ISBN 978-0309131308. Archived from the original on 27 May 2010. Retrieved 8 June 2010.</ref> in their decision. Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia referred to the National Research Council report in his assertion that "Forensic evidence is not uniquely immune from the risk of manipulation."

In the US, another area of forensic science that has come under question in recent years is the lack of laws requiring the accreditation of forensic labs. Some states require accreditation, but some states do not. Because of this,<ref>"The Impact of False or Misleading Forensic Evidence on Wrongful Convictions". National Institute of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Retrieved 30 November 2023.</ref><ref>"Justice Department Announces New Accreditation Policies to Advance Forensic Science". Office of Public Affairs. U.S Department of Justice. 7 December 2015. Retrieved 30 November 2023.</ref> many labs have been caught performing very poor work resulting in false convictions or acquittals. For example, it was discovered after an audit of the Houston Police Department in 2002 that the lab had fabricated evidence which led George Rodriguez being convicted of raping a fourteen-year-old girl.<ref name="nytimes.com">Liptak, Adam; Blumenthal, Ralph (5 August 2004). "New Doubt Cast on Testing in Houston Police Crime Lab". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 31 October 2014. Retrieved 24 October 2014.</ref> The former director of the lab, when asked, said that the total number of cases that could have been contaminated by improper work could be in the range of 5,000 to 10,000.<ref name="nytimes.com"/>

The Innocence Project<ref>"Innocence Project – Help us put an end to wrongful convictions!". Innocence Project.</ref> database of DNA exonerations shows that many wrongful convictions contained forensic science errors. According to the Innocence project and the US Department of Justice, forensic science has contributed to about 39 percent to 46 percent of wrongful convictions. <ref>"When forensic science isn't so scientific (Rebroadcast)". 1A. Retrieved 5 December 2023.</ref> As indicated by the National Academy of Sciences report Strengthening Forensic Sciences in the United States,<ref name="Nap.edu-2009" /> part of the problem is that many traditional forensic sciences have never been empirically validated; and part of the problem is that all examiners are subject to forensic confirmation biases and should be shielded from contextual information not relevant to the judgment they make.

Many studies have discovered a difference in rape-related injuries reporting based on race, with white victims reporting a higher frequency of injuries than black victims.<ref name="ReferenceA">Baker RB, Fargo JD, Shambley-Ebron D, Sommers MS. "A source of healthcare disparity: Race, skin color, and injuries after rape among adolescents and young adults". Journal of Forensic Nursing, 2010; 6: 144–150</ref> However, since current forensic examination techniques may not be sensitive to all injuries across a range of skin colors, more research needs to be conducted to understand if this trend is due to skin confounding healthcare providers when examining injuries or if darker skin extends a protective element.<ref name="ReferenceA"/> In clinical practice, for patients with darker skin, one study recommends that attention must be paid to the thighs, labia majora, posterior fourchette and fossa navicularis, so that no rape-related injuries are missed upon close examination.<ref name="ReferenceA"/>

Forensic science and humanitarian work

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) uses forensic science for humanitarian purposes to clarify the fate of missing persons after armed conflict, disasters or migration,<ref>"Forensic science and humanitarian action". ICRC. 28 July 2014. Archived from the original on 7 July 2014. Retrieved 3 August 2014.</ref> and is one of the services related to Restoring Family Links and Missing Persons. Knowing what has happened to a missing relative can often make it easier to proceed with the grieving process and move on with life for families of missing persons.

Forensic science is used by various other organizations to clarify the fate and whereabouts of persons who have gone missing. Examples include the NGO Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team, working to clarify the fate of people who disappeared during the period of the 1976–1983 military dictatorship. The International Commission on Missing Persons (ICMP) used forensic science to find missing persons,<ref>Forensic archeology and anthropology (28 February 2012). "Forensic archeology and anthropology". Ic-mp.org. Archived from the original on 24 June 2014. Retrieved 3 August 2014.</ref> for example after the conflicts in the Balkans.<ref>"Southeast Europe". Ic-mp.org. 28 February 2012. Archived from the original on 13 August 2014. Retrieved 3 August 2014.</ref>

Recognising the role of forensic science for humanitarian purposes, as well as the importance of forensic investigations in fulfilling the state's responsibilities to investigate human rights violations, a group of experts in the late-1980s devised a UN Manual on the Prevention and Investigation of Extra-Legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions, which became known as the Minnesota Protocol. This document was revised and re-published by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in 2016.<ref>"The Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016): The Revised United Nations Manual on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions (2016)" (PDF). UN Human Rights. New York, Geneva: UN Human Rights Office of the Commissioner. 1 January 2016. Retrieved 23 December 2023.</ref>

See also

Lua error in mw.title.lua at line 318: bad argument #2 to 'title.new' (unrecognized namespace name 'Portal').

  • Association of Firearm and Tool Mark Examiners – International non-profit organization
  • Lua error in Module:GetShortDescription at line 33: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
  • Computer forensics – Branch of digital forensic science
  • Lua error in Module:GetShortDescription at line 33: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
  • Diplomatics – Academic study of the protocols of documents (forensic paleography)
  • Epigenetics in forensic science – Overview article
  • Evidence packaging – Specialized packaging for physical evidence
  • Forensic biology – Forensic application of the study of biology
  • Lua error in Module:GetShortDescription at line 33: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
  • Forensic identification – Legal identification of specific objects and materials
  • Lua error in Module:GetShortDescription at line 33: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
  • Forensic photography – Art of producing an accurate reproduction of a crime scene
  • Forensic polymer engineering – Study of failure in polymeric products
  • Forensic profiling – Study of trace evidence in criminal investigations
  • Glove prints – Mark left on a surface by a worn glove
  • History of forensic photography
  • Lua error in Module:GetShortDescription at line 33: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
  • Lua error in Module:GetShortDescription at line 33: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
  • Outline of forensic science – Overview of and topical guide to forensic science
  • Profiling (information science) – Process of construction and application of user profiles generated by computerized data analysis
  • Retrospective diagnosis – Practice of identifying an illness after the death of the patient
  • Lua error in Module:GetShortDescription at line 33: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value). (RSID)
  • Scenes of crime officer – Officer who gathers forensic evidence for the British police
  • Skid mark – Mark left by any solid which moves against another
  • Lua error in Module:GetShortDescription at line 33: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).

References

<references group="" responsive="1"></references>

Bibliography

External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Forensic science.

Lua error in Module:Authority_control at line 181: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).

Retrieved from "https://kynnco.com:443/kynnpedia/index.php?title=Forensic_science&oldid=6245"