Skip to main content

Bite mark analysis

Bite-mark Analysis

    Forensic odontologists, otherwise known as forensic dentists, study the shape of a person’s bite in order to match them with a known sample. Known samples of bites are found on a victim’s body and are seen as an infallible science used to capture the guilty. In reality, bite-mark analysis, or odontology, isn’t as fool-proof as one believes. Several cases have appeared in which DNA testing has proved a convicted person innocent, even after a ‘careful’ examination of the teeth imprints.
    A variety of problems have arose from odontology, the biggest being its claim of infallibility. Odontologists claim that they have 100% accurate matches between the suspects bite-mark and the bite-mark found on a victim’s body. What this statement means is that there is no other person on earth that has the same bite-mark as the suspect, and this is what odontologists truly believe. The problem with this statement is that, like fingerprints, “bite mark methodology has never really undergone sound scientific validation and has never been carefully and critically scrutinised in order to legitimately pass the appropriate tests for admissibility, such as the Frye or Daubert tests as applied in parts of the USA” (Clement et. al.).
    Another problem with bite-mark analysis is the bite-mark itself. Even if no two people on earth had the same bite-mark, or even if it was very unlikely, there is still the issue of the bite-mark itself changing form throughout the healing process. Even if a body is dead. The wound still starts its healing process, not to mention the decomposition process. Other effects on the bite-mark can come from environmental factors such as the bite rubbing up on something sharp and causing other abrasions which might change the bite-marks form. The final problem with the bite-mark itself is that it might not even be a bite-mark (Shelton). It could very well be a bruise they got or an abrasion received from falling on anything rough and sharp like rocks. Overall, bite-mark analysis isn’t as reliable and fool-proof as one would wish and has put multiple innocent people behind bars, on death row, and possibly even led to their death.
Works Cited
Clement, J.g., and S.a. Blackwell. “Is Current Bite Mark Analysis a Misnomer?” Forensic Science International, vol. 201, no. 1-3, 2010, pp. 33–37., doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.03.006.
Shelton, Donald E. "The "Who" Question." Forensic Science in Court: Challenges in the Twenty-first Century. N.p.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. 39-50. Print.
“The Real CSI.” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service, www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/real-csi/.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Case of Ronald Cotton

The Case of Ronald Cotton The Crime In July of 1984, in North Carolina, a white woman named Jennifer Thompson was sleeping in her apartment when a man cut her phone lines, shattered her porch light, and broke into her apartment. She woke up to the man standing next to her bed, holding a knife to her throat. Over the next half hour, she was brutally raped, but Jennifer made herself study her attacker so, if she ever got the chance, she would be able to identify him and send him to prison. After tricking her assailant into letting her get up, she escaped and went to the hospital. Her assailant fled the scene, only to rape another woman half a mile away. Investigation and Trial With Jennifer’s help, the police were able to create a composite sketch of her attacker, using the details she studied while she was being attacked. After the sketch was released to the public, tips were received about a man named Ronald Cotton who worked in the area, and had a prior felony r...
Post a Comment
Read more

David Shawn Pope

Voice Comparison Convicts The Crime In July of 1985 in Dallas County, Texas, a man knocked on a woman’s door asking if somebody lived there, and then immediately left. The following morning at 6 AM the woman awoke to find the man standing over her bed with a knife. He assaulted and raped her, and fled the scene. She called the police and reported the crime. In the next following weeks, she was contacted by an anonymous caller who she immediately claimed was the rapist because she recognized his voice. He called several times and the police were able to record a few of the calls. The Investigation The victim was able to help produce a composite sketch of the suspect. David Shawn Pope became a suspect after police saw him around the area and thought he looked similar to the sketch. Pope was presented to the victim multiple times in a photo lineup, along with other similar looking males and no identification was made. After there was no identification, those six peop...
Post a Comment
Read more

Bitemark case

Arizona v Ray Krone Background             On December 29, 1991, the body of thirty-six year old Kim Ancona was found nude and fatally stabbed in the men’s restroom of the bar she worked at in Phoenix, Arizona. The perpetrator left behind little evidence, only leaving blood at the crime scene which matched the victim’s type and saliva on her body coming from the most common blood type. No semen was found and no DNA testing was done on the blood or saliva. What investigators did rely on was bite-marks on the victim’s breast and neck.             The police learned from a friend of the victim’s that Ancona was to close up the bar with a regular customer, Ray Krone, that previous night. The police immediately asked Krone to make an impression of his teeth on Styrofoam for comparison. Ray Krone had no previous criminal record, had been honorable discharged from the military, and had ...
Post a Comment
Read more