Entomological Contributions to the Legal System in Southeastern Spain

Abstract

The aim of this work is to present a number of forensic cases that took place in Southeastern Spain (Murcia province) in which the entomological evidence aided to fully solve the issues raised during the legal enquiry, enhancing the close interrelationships between experimental studies performed and actual forensic cases assessed. In all cases, the expert report was requested by the police agents or the medical examiners, the latter attempting to make stronger their own conclusions. The assessment of all cases was possible by comparing the evidence and circumstances of each one with the experimental data previously obtained in our laboratory concerning aspects such as faunistic, ecological, morphological, etc., and by considering data from other researchers. In all cases, the evidence could be addressed, although in some cases, it had not been properly collected or processed. Thus, the utility of the experimental studies in forensic practice, even when being considered merely biological, and without immediate practical application, can be demonstrated as well as the need for providing specialized instruction on Forensic Entomology procedures to the different agents involved in forensic investigation.

Coexistence and intraguild competition of Chrysomya albiceps and Lucilia sericata larvae: case reports and experimental studies applied to forensic entomology

“…The coexistence of Ch. albiceps and L. sericata in forensic cases is not frequently cited (Arnaldos and García, 2021;Tantawi et al, 1996;Ullyett, 1950), although the effect of their coexistence has been confirmed in this study.…”

“…In the Iberian Peninsula, these two species are the most common thermophilic Calliphoridae found on corpses, and in southwestern Europe they have been recorded in several forensic cases, but there are no details about their coexistence on corpses (Arnaldos et al, 2005(Arnaldos et al, , 2004Arnaldos and García, 2021;Cainé et al, 2009;Carles-Tolrá, 2002;Gómez Fernández, 1963, 1957;García-Rojo et al, 2008;García-Rojo and Honorato, 2004;González-Mora et al, 1990;Magaña, 2001;Martín-Vega et al, 2017;Martínez-Sánchez et al, 2006). There are studies of coexistence with other species of Calliphoridae (Barbosa et al, 2021;Flores et al, 2017;Fouche et al, 2021;Komo et al, 2021Komo et al, , 2019Spindola et al, 2017), but, except for Ullyett (1950) and Kheirallah et al (2007), there are no studies about the larval coexistence of L. sericata and Ch.…”

Discrimination of Diptera order insects based on their saturated cuticular hydrocarbon content using a new microextraction procedure and chromatographic analysis

“…Previous studies have observed chemical similarities in the cuticle of the latter three species. 2 However, separations between species can be also observed within the sets. Thus, the species S. nudiseta and C. vomitoria species are separated with a slight overlap between the two groups.…”

“…Each species has a distinct colonisation behaviour and life cycle, which must be considered when estimating the minimum post-mortem interval (mPMI). 2 Fauna associated with a corpse is mainly composed of necrophagous arthropods, with Diptera (such as flies or mosquitoes) being the most investigated order in the forensic field. 3–8 Within Diptera order, Calliphoridae is the most widely studied family regarding CHCs 4,7,9–14 followed by Sarcophagidae 10,15 and Phoridae.…”

Looking Back to Move Forward: How Review Articles Could Boost Forensic Entomology

“…However, these types of a posteriori analyses of forensic databases are still scarce. More frequent is the publication of case reports addressing one or a few particular cases (e.g., [ 24 ]). The publication of those particular case reports can be useful if, for example, they describe the occurrence of a species which had not previously been considered as forensically relevant [ 25 ], highlight how an entomological analysis can provide new and significant insights into a case [ 26 ] or show other utilities and applications of the evidence [ 27 ].…”