A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Detection of Clandestine Graves

Griffin, Tom J.; Swanburg, Jack G.; Lindemann, John W.; Davenport, G. Clark; Trammell, Vickey; Armbrust, Cecilia T.; Kondratieff, Boris; Nelson, A. H.; Castellano, Kim; Hopkins, Dick

doi:10.1520/jfs13337j

Cited by 167 publications

(132 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

128

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…cadavers) in terrestrial ecosystems has received increased attention due to pressing issues in forensic science and public health. An understanding of the fate of cadavers has implications for the estimation of postmortem interval (Vass et al, 1992), location of clandestine gravesites (France et al, 1992) and transmission and degradation of causative agents (Rapp et al, 2006). Although several studies have investigated the fate of the cadaver itself (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temperature affects microbial decomposition of cadavers (Rattus rattus) in contrasting soils

Carter

Yellowlees

Tibbett

2008

Applied Soil Ecology

145

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temperature affects microbial decomposition of cadavers (Rattus rattus) in contrasting soils

Carter

Yellowlees

Tibbett

2008

Applied Soil Ecology

145

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Previous research has tested the efficacy and applicability of different noninvasive geophysical technologies under controlled conditions in the detection of buried bodies, pig cadavers (70 kg average) and buried evidence (Davenport et al, 1988;Davenport et al, 1990;France et al, 1992;France et al, 1997). Conclusions from these studies indicate that GPR was the most important tool used to delineate graves and practical application by law enforcement investigators and geophysical contractors has confirmed these conclusions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

The Application of GPR in Florida for Detecting Forensic Burials

Koppenjan¹,

Schultz²,

Falsetti³

et al. 2003

Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A study was performed at the University of Florida to measure ground penetrating radar (GPR) performance for detecting forensic burials. In controlled scenarios, 24 burials were constructed with pig cadavers. Two soils were utilized to represent two of the most common soil orders in Florida: an Entisol and an Ultisol. Graves were monitored on a monthly basis for time periods up to 21 months with grid data acquired with pulsed and swept-frequency GPR systems incorporating several different frequency antennas. A small subset of the graves was excavated to assess decomposition and relate to the GPR images during the test.The grave anomalies in the GPR depth profiles became less distinctive over time due to body decomposition and settling of the disturbed soil (backfill) as it compacted. Soil type was a major factor. Grave anomalies became more difficult to recognize over time for deep targets that were within clay. Forensic targets that were in sandy soil were recognized for the duration of this study. Time elapsed imagery will be presented to elucidate the changes, or lack thereof, of grave anomalies over the duration of this study. Further analysis was performed using Synt hetic Aperture Radar (SAR) reconstruction of images in 2-D and 3-D.

show abstract

“…The changes to the visible appearance, chemical properties and biodiversity of the soil and surrounding environment are the result of soft tissue decomposition (France et al 1997 ;Carter et al 2007 ;. Investigators can utilize the changes that occur at a deposition site in order to aid in the detection and recovery of remains.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%