Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) has occasionally been used by anthropologists and forensic scientists to look at morphological characteristics that certain implements leave on bone. However, few studies have addressed techniques or protocols for assessing quantitative differences between tool marks on bone made by different bladed implements. In this study, the statistical variation in cut mark width was examined between control and test samples on bone using a scalpel blade, paring knife, and kitchen utility knife. Statistically significant differences (p < .0005) were found between cut marks made by the same knife under control and test conditions for all three knife types used in the study. When the control sample and test samples were examined individually for differences in mean variation between knife types, significant differences were also found (p < .0005). While significant differences in cut mark width were found, caution should be used in trying to classify individual cut marks as being inflicted by a particular implement, due to the overlap in cut mark width that exists between different knife types. When combined, both quantitative and qualitative analyses of cut marks should prove to be more useful in trying to identify a suspect weapon. Furthermore, the application of SEM can be particularly useful for assessing many of these features.

), except for brief excerpts in connection with reviews or scholarly analysis. Use in connection with any form of information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed is forbidden. The use in this publication of trade names, trademarks, service marks, and similar terms, even if they are not identified as such, is not to be taken as an expression of opinion as to whether or not they are subject to proprietary rights.Printed on acid-free paper Humana Press is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com) We dedicate this atlas to our spouses, whose support enabled us to be successful in this endeavor. ForewordChild abuse investigation is one of the most contentious areas of forensic pathology. The forensic pathologist must determine, within a reasonable degree of medical certainty, the cause and manner of death. This opinion must be rendered with a comprehensive knowledge of the case -a knowledge that includes the medical history, scene findings, police investigation, history of terminal events, and a complete autopsy. The autopsy is one component of the overall investigation, and it is imperative that all injuries be thoroughly documented. Although other pathologists may offer alternative opinions regarding the mechanism of injury, or even the cause of death, the actual anatomic findings should never be in question. The collaborative approach taken at the Harris County Institute of Forensic Sciences (HCIFS) reflects this philosophy. The team of forensic anthropologists who work within the office and alongside the pathologists is immeasurably important in completing the requisite documentation. In our experience, anthropologists bring to the autopsy table another dimension of knowledge that is rarely tapped in the medical examiner setting. In this collaborative setting, suspected child abuse deaths are first examined by a forensic pathologist, with complete documentation of soft tissue injuries including visceral injuries, neuropathology, and examination of subcutaneous tissues. A forensic anthropologist is then brought in with the pathologist to take the examination another step, exposing all skeletal elements. The need for additional studies of the exposed elements (including histology and further anthropologic processing) is determined at that time. In this approach, the traditional role of the forensic anthropologist (examination of skeletal remains) is greatly expanded while keeping within the scope of his or her expertise.The value of the collaborative approach between forensic pathologists and anthropologists is perhaps best illustrated by the numerous examples of classic metaphyseal lesions presented in this text. These lesions are difficult -and sometimes impossible -to identify radiographically. They must be sought at autopsy. Only with careful analysis of many cases using the approach described in this text (including abusive injuries, accidental injuries, and deaths from disease) will the t...

Microscopic saw mark analysis is a well published and generally accepted qualitative analytical method. However, little research has focused on identifying and mitigating potential sources of error associated with the method. The presented study proposes the use of classification trees and random forest classifiers as an optimal, statistically sound approach to mitigate the potential for error of variability and outcome error in microscopic saw mark analysis. The statistical model was applied to 58 experimental saw marks created with four types of saws. The saw marks were made in fresh human femurs obtained through anatomical gift and were analyzed using a Keyence digital microscope. The statistical approach weighed the variables based on discriminatory value and produced decision trees with an associated outcome error rate of 8.62-17.82%.

This study was designed to establish the potential error rate associated with the generally accepted method of tool mark analysis of cut marks in costal cartilage. Three knives with different blade types were used to make experimental cut marks in costal cartilage of pigs. Each cut surface was cast, and each cast was examined by three analysts working independently. The presence of striations, regularity of striations, and presence of a primary and secondary striation pattern were recorded for each cast. The distance between each striation was measured. The results showed that striations were not consistently impressed on the cut surface by the blade's cutting edge. Also, blade type classification by the presence or absence of striations led to a 65% misclassification rate. Use of the classification tree and cross-validation methods and inclusion of the mean interstriation distance decreased the error rate to c. 50%.

Rib fractures are considered highly suspicious for nonaccidental injury in the pediatric clinical literature; however, a rib fracture classification system has not been developed. As an aid and impetus for rib fracture research, we developed a concise schema for classifying rib fracture types and fracture location that is applicable to infants. The system defined four fracture types (sternal end, buckle, transverse, and oblique) and four regions of the rib (posterior, posterolateral, anterolateral, and anterior). It was applied to all rib fractures observed during 85 consecutive infant autopsies. Rib fractures were found in 24 (28%) of the cases. A total of 158 rib fractures were identified. The proposed schema was adequate to classify 153 (97%) of the observed fractures. The results indicate that the classification system is sufficiently robust to classify rib fractures typically observed in infants and should be used by researchers investigating infant rib fractures.