An anthropological analysis was conducted on skeletal and dental remains brought to the Galveston County Medical Examiner's office. The skeletal remains were dry, fragmented, and absent of typical fluvial characteristics. During microscopic examination, semitransparent, circular objects were discovered on the dentition, the mandible, tibial plateau, and distal femur. The objects were glycoproteinous adhesions deposited by the acorn barnacle, Balanus improvisus. B. improvisus is an intertidal barnacle found in estuaries in Galveston Bay. Basal diameter of the adhesions on the dentition were significantly smaller than those found on the postcranial bones (p = 0.010), indicating two consecutive cohorts adhered to the bone and dentition. As settlement typically occurs once a year, this would indicate that the remains were in the fluvial environment for at least 375-410 days. It is important in geographic areas that have prevalent fluvial environments that human remains, particularly dentition, are microscopically examined for marine life evidence.

Here, we characterize the cool weather insect fauna found associated with partially skeletonized and desiccated human remains recovered from an abandoned house in an urban area of subtropical, coastal Galveston County, Texas, and use the information to conclude an approximate postmortem interval of 7-10 months. The predominant factors that allow for a confident assessment of the postmortem interval include climatological data, entomological data, and anthropological data. The documented insect fauna represents a unique assemblage present in a particular environment (an urban abandoned house in coastal Texas) at a particular time of year (winter) and includes expected forensically significant insects such as calliphorid flies, muscid flies, and dermestid beetles but also includes less commonly encountered insects such as an unusually dense population of live case-making clothes moths.

Editor, The article "Cognitive bias in forensic pathology decisions" by Dror et al [1] claims to demonstrate that forensic pathologists per se are subject to cognitive bias in their collective determinations and certifications of manner of death. They chose as their focus group children under six years of age whose manner of death was either accident or homicide. Their conclusion is based on two prongs: a select group of death certificates and a survey which they crafted. The purpose of this letter is not to further analyze the notional issue of bias on the part of forensic pathologists, but rather to show how very flawed the Dror et al, undertaking, indeed is.