Inconsistency in opinions of forensic odontologists when considering bite mark evidence

Reesu, Gowri Vijay; Brown, Nathan

doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2016.06.002

Cited by 17 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Various scientific principles and factors are required to be considered to make the bite mark applicable for personal identification. The injury site, size, and age, as well as the skin mobility, the degree of trauma, and the state of structures underlying the skin in the injured area are some factors that need to be considered [ 150 ]. Many studies impact the more accuracy and reproducibility of bite marks obtained on food items than those on the skin [ 151 ].…”

Section: Bite Markmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dental Radiographic/Digital Radiography Technology along with Biological Agents in Human Identification

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The heavy casualties associated with mass disasters necessitate substantial resources to be managed. The unexpectedly violent nature of such occurrences usually remains a problematic amount of victims that urgently require to be identified by a reliable and economical method. Conventional identification methods are inefficient in many cases such as plane crashes and fire accidents that have damaged the macrobiometric features such as fingerprints or faces. An appropriate recognition method for such cases should use features more resistant to destruction. Forensic dentistry provides the most appropriate available method for the successful identification of victims using careful techniques and precise data interpretation. Since bones and teeth are the most persistent parts of the demolished bodies in sudden mass disasters, scanning and radiographs are unrepeatable parts of forensic dentistry. Forensic dentistry as a scientific method of human remain identification has been considerably referred to be efficient in disasters. Forensic dentistry can be used for either “sex and age estimation,” “Medical biotechnology techniques,” or “identification with dental records,” etc. The present review is aimed at discussing the development and implementation of forensic dentistry methods for human identification. For this object, the literature from the last decade has been searched for the innovations in forensic dentistry for human identification based on the PubMed database.

show abstract

Section: Bite Markmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dental Radiographic/Digital Radiography Technology along with Biological Agents in Human Identification

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…La identificación mediante análisis de huellas de mordedura es uno de los aspectos más desafiantes y discutibles de la odontología forense, ya que este tipo de evidencia puede ser factor clave para exonerar o condenar a un individuo en casos criminales (Reesu & Brown, 2016). La definición de "análisis" refiere a un estudio cuidadoso de algo para aprender sobre sus partes, lo que hacen y cómo se relacionan entre sí, concepto que en el área de las huellas de mordedura debe ser realizado como parte de la autopsia medicolegal a través de la documentación e interpretación objetiva de la morfología lesional, "sean o no huellas de mordedura" (Souviron & Haller, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Patrones Morfológicos Erróneamente Diagnosticados como Huellas de Mordedura en Contextos Forenses: Una Revisión con Búsqueda Sistemática

Dal-Santo-Mendoza

Fonseca

2021

Int. J. Morphol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In general, especially bites on human skin, the bitemark on substrate analysis will never be as unique as the dentition that created it, since the uniqueness is one of the key requirements for an identification method (Tuceryan, Li, Blitzer, Parks, & Platt, 2011;Osborne, Woods, Kieser & Zajac, 2014). This analysis has been criticized in Courts and among forensic researchers (Oliveira et al, 2010;Reesu & Brown, 2016). Despite this limitation, in some cases these are the only forensic evidences (Tuceryan et al, 2011;Verma, Kumar & Bhattacharya, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In recent years, the use of bitemarks have been refuted (De Sainte Croix, Gauld, Forgie & Lowe, 2016). Many experts argue that the use of these marks as evidence depends on many factors such as well-positioned photographs, expert experience, type of bruise, among others (Verma et al, 2013;Chinni, Al-Ibrahim & Forgie, 2014;Reesu & Brown, 2016). This study aimed to show the applicability of a method to reproduce pieces of chewing gum for human identification purposes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of reproduction technique of bitemarks printed in chewing gum for human identification

Villalobos¹,

Flores²,

Galo³

et al. 2020

RSD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forensic Odontology is the science that correlates dental and legal principles, used for processes such as human identification. One of the possible acting fields for Forensic Odontologists is the analysis and study of patterns and injuries created by human bite marks. This study aimed to show the applicability of dental marks printed in chewing gum for human identification in forensic investigations. A transversal observational study was carried out. The data was collected from 20 volunteers over 18 years old. Each subject had their upper and lower dental casts and was asked to chew a piece of gum for one minute. The pieces of chewing gum were refrigerated at -20ºC for a week, and reproduced with addition and condensation silicones using an adapted reproduction technique. The analysis of the chewing gum was made by overlays. The ANOVA test showed no significant differences on width and length between the pieces of chewing gum and their reproductions (greatest width p=0.918, and the length p=0.981). The analysis of the reproductions with plaster mold showed that there was no difference when using addition silicone or condensation silicone. During the analysis, various suspects could be excluded from the investigation (up to 11, depending on the technique used), but it was not possible to confirm one of them as the main suspect. The study showed that the reproduction technique of chewing gum is efficient, viable and easily performed; and can be used in cases of human identification in forensic investigations. However, it is necessary to certify that the chewing gum effectively presents a bite mark and that it is correctly handled to avoid alterations. It also became evident that the process of refrigeration is essential for the analysis proposed in this study.

show abstract

Inconsistency in opinions of forensic odontologists when considering bite mark evidence

Cited by 17 publications

References 25 publications

Dental Radiographic/Digital Radiography Technology along with Biological Agents in Human Identification

Dental Radiographic/Digital Radiography Technology along with Biological Agents in Human Identification

Patrones Morfológicos Erróneamente Diagnosticados como Huellas de Mordedura en Contextos Forenses: Una Revisión con Búsqueda Sistemática

Evaluation of reproduction technique of bitemarks printed in chewing gum for human identification

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About