Forensics : 1960 When bitemarks were considered equal to fingerprints……..

………a British dentist said “bruises in human flesh” bitemarks were”unreliable evidence” and expressed reasons that were, 49 years later, used by the National Academy of Sciences in 2009 . He also said “usually a self-styled expert” and “so-called expert (s)” were involved in court deliberations touting their accuracy.  Using those terms today, other than in your sleep, will get you sued or worse.

In 2015, the co-director for research at  the White House Office of Science and Technology Planning says their use for “matching” should be eradicated.  This speaker, Dr. Jo Handlesman, is immune from charges of defamation and infliction of emotional distress. I hope.

Full article on this “blast from the past” is at Professor Iain Pretty’s blog ‘Forensic Dentistry Online’ News. Below is an excerpt from the 1960 journal.

Fearnhead

Read the full 1960 journal paper from RW Fearnhead MDS.

 

About csidds

Dr. Michael Bowers is a long time forensic consultant in the US and international court systems.
This entry was posted in AAFS, ABFO, Bite Marks, Bitemarks, CSI, expert testimony, forensic science reform and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Forensics : 1960 When bitemarks were considered equal to fingerprints……..

  1. mbhauptle says:

    That was then, & this is now. I want to slam dunk those Odonts who have besmirched my reputation, by association! I will write a scientific treatise, pictorially representative of the “similarities” of our dentition, but I want Publishing rights.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s