Forensic Osteology

Dettmeyer, R.; Verhoff, Marcel A.; Schütz, H.

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-38818-7_23

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Modern criminalistics is a complex, multidisciplinary endeavor that comprises a vast range of scientific theories, techniques, and applied technologies. Among the oldest and most fundamental branches of criminalistics is forensic osteology, which, in the broadest sense, is the “investigation and assessment of discovered [human, Homo sapiens ] bones” (Dettmeyer, Verhoff, & Schütz, 2014, p. 377). Today, such investigations and assessments routinely include the analysis of perimortem and postmortem trauma to bone cortices, what we refer to here as bone surface modifications, or BSMs, which potentially provide critical information about the agents and events of body deposition.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cruel traces: Bone surface modifications and their relevance to forensic science

Egeland

Pickering

2020

WIREs Forensic Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The reconstruction of perimortem and postmortem events is of critical importance to criminal investigations. In many cases, the information required for these reconstructions can be accessed through the analysis of skeletal remains. One particular class of skeletal data—trauma to the surfaces of bones, or bone surface modifications (BSMs)—can reveal much about the perimortem and postmortem intervals. While the study of BSMs originated within the fields of paleontology and archeology and was only later integrated into forensic science, a fruitful interdisciplinary exchange of data and methods is now commonplace. BSMs from thermal alteration, sharp‐force trauma, terrestrial and aquatic scavengers and predators, bacteria and fungi, insects, weathering, and sediment abrasion can supply investigators with valuable information about the agents and events of a corpse's deposition, including weapon type, local environmental conditions, the postmortem interval, and the presence, temperature(s), and/or length(s) of thermal exposure. Based on a review of this rich body of literature, we argue that (a) all associations between a BSM and its alleged source must rest on observational cause‐and‐effect studies; (b) secure identifications of BSMs should rely both on the intrinsic features of the modifications themselves and relevant contextual data; (c) the scientific validity of BSM research depends, ultimately, on rigorous blind‐testing and the establishment of error rates; and (d) researchers need to make a concerted effort to enhance interanalyst correspondence through objective definitions, measurements, and/or codes of BSM features. The most promising path forward lies in the combination of digital image analysis and multivariate predictive modeling. This article is categorized under: Forensic Anthropology > Trauma Analysis Forensic Anthropology > Taphonomic Changes and the Environment Forensic Anthropology > Time Since Death Estimation

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%