Bite marks on skin and clay: A comparative analysis

Abstract Bite marks are always unique because teeth are distinctive. Bite marks are often observed at the crime scene in sexual and in physical assault cases on the skin of the victims and sometimes on edible leftovers in burglary cases. This piece of evidence is often ignored, but if properly harvested and investigated, bite marks may prove useful in apprehending and successfully prosecuting the criminals. Due to the importance of bite marks, we conducted a progressive randomised experimental study conducted on volunteers. A total of 188 bite marks on clay were studied. Based on these findings, 93.34% of the volunteers could be identified from the bite marks on the clay. In addition, 201 impressions on skin were studied, and out of these cases, 41.01% of the same volunteers could be identified based on the bite mark impressions on the skin.

[1]  T. David.  Adjunctive use of scanning electron microscopy in bite mark analysis: a three-dimensional study. , 1986, Journal of Forensic Sciences.

[2]  R. Sognnaes,et al.  Unusual three-dimensional bite mark evidence in a homicide case. , 1976, Journal of forensic sciences.

[3]  D. Whittaker.  Some laboratory studies on the accuracy of bite mark comparison. , 1975, International dental journal.

[4]  Jair E. Garcia,et al.  Characterization of Digital Cameras for Reflected Ultraviolet Photography; Implications for Qualitative and Quantitative Image Analysis During Forensic Examination , 2014, Journal of forensic sciences.

[5]  N. Sperber.  Chewing gum-an unusual clue in a recent homicide investigation. , 1978, International journal of orthodontics.

[6]  J O Katz,et al.  The present direction of research in forensic odontology. , 1988, Journal of forensic sciences.

[7]  R. K. Gorea.  Bite marks utility in sexual offences , 2011 .

[8]  I. Pretty,et al.  Lack of dental uniqueness between two bite mark suspects. , 2001, Journal of forensic sciences.

[9]  J Jakush,et al.  Forensic dentistry. , 1989, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[10]  T Sitalaximi,et al.  Autosomal microsatellite profile of three socially diverse ethnic Tamil populations of India. , 2003, Journal of forensic sciences.

[11]  R D Rawson,et al.  Computerized axial tomography as an aid in bite mark analysis: a case report. , 1987, Journal of forensic sciences.

[12]  E. Robinson,et al.  Toneline bite mark photography. , 1992, Journal of forensic sciences.

[13]  D. Ubelaker.  Review of: The Scientific Study of Mummies , 2004 .

[14]  T Solheim,et al.  Scanning electron microscopy in the investigation of bite marks in foodstuffs. , 1975, Forensic science.

[15]  Anne H McNamee,et al.  Adherence of forensic odontologists to the ABFO guidelines for victim evidence collection. , 2003, Journal of forensic sciences.

[16]  T. Lowry.  THE SURGICAL TREATMENT OF HUMAN BITES , 1936, Annals of surgery.

[17]  T P Sweeney,et al.  Forensic odontology. , 1979, Journal of the Hawaii Dental Association.

[18]  Wood Re,et al.  Image editing and computer assisted bitemark analysis: a case report. , 1994 .

[19]  M. Weber,et al.  Bite mark analysis in forensic routine case work , 2006 .

[20]  T. Kanchan,et al.  Analysis and identification of bite marks in forensic casework. , 2013, Oral health and dental management.

[21]  Roland F Kouble,et al.  A comparison between direct and indirect methods available for human bite mark analysis. , 2004, Journal of forensic sciences.