JFMT Online
  Home   Subscribe   Feedback   Sitemap  
 

Journal of Forensic
Medicine and Toxicology
(International Edition)
A peer Reviewed Journal Dedicated to the
promotion of all branches of medicine and
science useful in the administration of justice.

 

Home
Home About Journal Editorial Board Current Issue Archives Online submission Contact
 
Home
     
  DOWNLOAD  
   Archives  
   This Issue Table of Content (PDF)  
     
     
  INFORMATION  
   For contributors (PDF)  
   For readers  
   For Advertisers  
     
  SEARCH  
     
 
search engine by freefind advanced
 
     
  BROWSE  
   By Issue  
   By Author  
   By Title  
     
 

ANALYSIS OF BITEMARKS ON INANIMATE OBJECTS – ITS ROLE IN FORENSIC DENTISTRY

Sabitha Devi R

 
 
 
 

Abstract:
BITEMARKS – other name “MORSUS HUMANUS” 4 is a physical alteration in a medium (object or tissue), representative pattern caused by the contact of teeth of an animal or human. Bitemarks are an important and sometimes controversial aspect of forensic odontology. Teeth are used as weapons in the case of offence or defense.
Bitemarks made on foodstuffs in the crime area are of great importance in criminal investigation which plays an important role in identifying the suspect and constitutes one of the commonest forms of dental evidence present in dental courts. An important step in bitemark investigation is comparing and matching a suspect s dentition with bitemark left on the inanimate object at crime scene.
The present study was done on 35 subjects to asses and compare the bitemarks on inanimate objects (cucumber) with that of the dentition. These subjects were asked to give their impression from which the master dental casts were fabricated. Impressions made on the cucumber were recorded by rubber based elastomeric impression material. These impressions were compared and evaluated to the tracing (superimposing technique manually) obtained from dentulous casts models.
The experts expressed the percentage (%) of matching ranged from 61.7% to a maximum of 98.1% in the present study which matches parallel to that of other studies.

 
 
 
 

Keywords:
bitemarks; inanimate object (cucumber); elastomeric rubber based material, superimposing technique; forensic experts.

 
 
 
 

References:

  1. CM Bowers. Forensic science 11th Edi. December 1996.

  2. The Holy Bible, King James Version. Salt Lake City: Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, 1989:5, 6.

  3. Harvey W. Dental Identification and forensic Odontology, London: Henry Kimpton 1976:90.

  4. Frank R Boland. Sixty cases of human bites in Negroes. J. Am Med Assooc. 1941; 116 (2):127-131.

  5. Martin-de Heras Stella, Valenzuela Aurora, Javier Valverde A, Torres Juan Carlos, Lina-del Cashllo Juan D. Computer Based Production of Comparison Overlays from 3D-Scanned Dental Casts for Bite Mark Analysis. J. Forensic Sci, Jan.2005; 50(1): 127-33.

  6. Spencer L Rogers -Testimony of teeth, Forensic aspects of human dentition. Dental identification. 1994; 85-86.

  7. Herschaft EE. Forensic Dentistry. Neville’s Textbook of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology 2nd Edn., Elsevier Saunders, 2002; 763-783.

  8. Luntz L, Luntz P. Handbook of Dental Identification. Lippincott, Philadelphia, 1973:154.

  9. Nazar Al-Talabani, Noori D, Al-Moussawy, Faik A. Baker, Haitham Abdullah Mohammed. Digital Analysis of Experimental Human Bitemarks: Application of Two New Methods. Journal of Forensic Sciences 51(6):1372 -1375.

  10. BR Rothwell, Bite marks in forensic dentistry: a review of legal, scientific issues. J Am Dent Assoc 1995; 126: 223-232.

  11. Balwant Rai, SC Anand, Manish Madan, SK Dhattarwal. Bite Marks: A new Identification Technique.Journal of Forensic Science, 2007; 2 (1).

  12. Gorea RK, Jha M, Jasuja OP, Vasudeva K, Aggarwal AD. Marvelous Tools of Identification; Bite Marks. Medico-Legal Update, 2005; 5(2).

  13. Lessig R, Wenzel V, Weber M. Bite mark analysis in forensic routine case work. EXCLI Journal 2006; 5:93-100.

  14. RawsonRD, Y Fantis, Herschaft EE, Vale GL, Sperber ND. Reliability of the Scoring System of the American Board of Forensic Odontology for Human Bite Marks. Journal of Forensic Sciences 1986; 31(4):1235-1260.

  15. Arheart KL, Pretty IA. Results of the 4th ABFO Bitemark Workshop—1999. Forensic Sci Int. 2001 Dec 27; 124 (2-3):104-11

  16. David J Sweet. Human Bitemarks: Examination, Recovery, and Analysis, in Manual of Forensic Odontology, 1997, 3rd EdN, p-148.

  17. MJ Thani M, Brawn Yenk. Bite documentation and analysis: Forensic 3D/CAD photogrammetry approach. Forensic science international 2003; 135: 115-121.

  18. EH Dinkel. The Use of Bite Mark Evidence as an Investigative Aid. J. Forensic Sci. 1973; 19:535.

  19. Vale GL. Dentistry, bitemarks and the investigation of crime. British Dental Journal. 1996; 24:29-34.

 
 
 
 

Author:
Assistant Professor
Dept. of Oral Pathology, St. Joseph Dental College
Eluru, West Godavari (Dt.) Andhra Pradesh-534004
Mobile : 09246663334, 09246663335

 
     
Home


© 2010 Journal of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology,
Dept. of Forensic Medicine & Toxicology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences,
New Delhi, INDIA.