Misinterpretation of a Gunshot Injury by a Non-forensic Medicine Expert: A Case Report of Misguidance in a Criminal Investigation Involving the Unusual Firearm Injury 'Kronlein Shot’

Abstract

In India, the majority of postmortem examinations are conducted by medical professionals who lack expertise in the field of forensic medicine. Medicolegal autopsy services that are done by forensic experts are primarily confined to tertiary care centers, although a significant portion of medicolegal postmortem examinations occurs in non-tertiary healthcare setups. In this context, postmortem examination reports occasionally fail to encompass essential medicolegal features, resulting in dissatisfaction among both crime investigators and the deceased's relatives. As the doctors managing these postmortem examinations are not experts in the field of forensic medicine, if a case involves an unusual pattern of injury, the situation becomes further complicated. The absence of proper forensic assessments heightens the risk of the crime investigation heading in the wrong direction. Firearm injuries are well known for their varied pattern of injury. The present case reports one of the unusual patterns of firearm injury where a gunshot injury with close contact on the head resulted in the bursting of the skull, which is commonly referred to as a Kronlein shot. Such injuries involve extreme skull mutilation. Unlike typical contact gunshot injuries, in cases of extensive facial and cranial destruction, locating the entry wound and detecting other typical features of firearm injury become challenging. This complexity confused the autopsy surgeons of this case who were not experts in forensic medicine and mis-framed the opinion regarding the causative weapon which in turn confused the police official in the crime investigation. The case was later on referred to our institute for forensic medicine expert opinion and opinion was given after consideration of postmortem examination findings mentioned in the postmortem report, photographs of the deceased, circumstantial evidence gathered by police, and correlating all these facts with standard published literature. The case underscores the essential role of forensic experts in decoding complex medicolegal mysteries and ensuring accurate justice delivery. The case also highlights the importance of the need for comprehensive forensic examinations and considering circumstantial evidence in drawing various conclusions in a medicolegal autopsy.