Bite mark analysis in forensic routine case work

Abstract

The individuality of the human dentition frequently allows the Forensic Odonto-Stomatologist (FOS) to reach a strong opinion of association in cases of identification and bite mark analy-sis. Such analysis can often be useful during the investigation of violent crimes, especially those involving sexual assault. Bites from animals are rarely the object of bite mark analysis. The teeth of animals leave patterned injuries that appear quite different from those created by human teeth. This is especially true with dogs, which are predominant culprits in bites to humans. Dogs bite humans at a rate eight times more frequently than humans bite each other. However, such bites may need to be analyzed in order to distinguish what species of animal may have been the attacker, or exclude one or more animals when there is more than one possible offender. Typical cases of routine bite mark analysis encountered by the FOS are presented. Two cases of dog bites appearing as possible accidents and two human bites report about this spectrum. In another case, a child abuse with several specific bite marks shows the potential to detect the perpetrator. The last case representing a bite mark in a fruit is obtained from criminal routine case work. It is hoped that these cases will demonstrate the significant role the analysis of bite marks might play alongside other criminalistic routines. The FOS is often involved in a late stage of the investigation. This is one reason for the problems associated with the bite mark analysis in the cases presented. Additionally, the quality of the documentation of patterned injuries is often incomplete.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 35 citations exist upstream.