More Forensics and Fiction: a book review

by Andrea Campbell

I have conducted a few interviews with my friend and colleague, Doug Lyle, M.D.  Each of his books that have been sent to me to review has set forth promises for the reader and, in my estimation, all expectations have been met. That's why I was happy to receive his latest book, a research title for writers (and lovers of writers and fiction) called More Forensics and Fiction.

Now Doug, also professionally known as D.P. Lyle, M.D., has also acted as a consultant and advisor on various television shows like Law & Order, CSI: Miami, Monk and House, so I know he is adept at research and his medical background makes him one of the best.

Doug also has a web site, The Writer's Forensics blog, that has provided more than enough material for this latest book--due out in April--and has also well-supplied two previous titles, Murder and Mayhem: A Doctor Answers Medical and Forensic Questions for Mystery Writers, and the second, Forensics and Fiction: Clever, Intriguing, and Downright Odd Questions from Crime Writers.  In these volumes, Dr. Lyle answers questions, forensic questions, yes--but more interesting, questions from fiction writers and authors who need to add verisimilitude to their stories, and who can't afford to create scenarios unless they are right. Consequently, this makes for a lot of screwy and somewhat "out there" criminal plotting, and also reflects on the type of creative sketches and stretches of the imagination and that makes this book two-fold: a research vehicle and an interesting read.


There are no "typical" questions as these are forming the basis of fictional stories that involve crime and essentially made-up situations. The questions are however, broken up into parts such as: Traumatic Injuries, Illnesses, Doctors and Hospitals in Part 1, to another part such as: The Coroner, the Body and the Autopsy in Part IV, and, what could be my favorite and final section Odds and Ends, Mostly Odds making up Part V. And, of course, one of the fun parts is that these questions come from storytellers both famous and not, whose goal it is to want their readers to turn the page, so some of them are truly "out there."

Just to illustrate a few of the questions inside More Forensics and Fiction: Will snake venom injected into fruit cause death? What happens when someone swallows razor blades? and Can DNA be obtained from a half-eaten bagel?

And actually, here is a partial answer to a particular question and it is also related to one of my pet peeves (I will explain after): "Do teeth and their fillings remain in a skull twenty years after death? A.: Actually, the teeth often fall from the skull and jawbone. This is due to decay of the gum and the socket tissues that anchor the teeth in place. It depends on the degree of decay and how long after death the skull is found. You can construct your story either way..."(and so on).


As for my own pet peeve, how can someone find an ancient skull and the lower part, the mandible, is still attached?  "In decayed bodies, the mandible becomes detached from the skull as the temporomandibular joint and supporting ligaments deteriorate," yet we often see the skull with the jaw attached, even after discovery of years!


More Forensics and Fiction, by D.P. Lyle, paperback, 432 pages, Medallion Press, April 2012.

Tweet

Amanda Knox: 'I'll be home for Christmas, if only in my dreams'

by Anne Bremner

In the three years since Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito were arrested in the murder of Knox's British roommate, Meredith Kercher, public opinion appears to have swung in their favor in Italy and abroad. Crime novelist Doug Preston says this may have an effect on the appeals trial, which opened with a preliminary hearing this month. While Amanda didn't make it home for the holidays this year, she may be home for Christmas next year.

The shift in opinion began when the original prosecutor in the Knox/Sollecito case, Giuliano Mignini (photo right), was convicted of abuse of office and sentenced to 16 months in prison. Then, the original trial judge, Giancarlo Massei, issued his massive 427-page conclusion. At least here in America, many judicial experts were disturbed, if not shocked, by the sheer amount of unsupported surmise, conjecture, and speculation that formed the backbone of the opinion. The loquacious Massei speculated freely, without offering evidence, about such basic issues as motive, the murder weapon(s) used, how the murder was committed, and why.

Also during the past year, a range of American experts re-examined and/or commented on the forensic and DNA evidence, which was exactly the kind of independent examination that the original trial court had denied the defense. These experts include the notable FBI special agent Steve Moore, a DNA expert and former Air Force scientist Mark Waterbury, criminologists Paul Ciolino and Larry Kobilinsky, and forensic specialist Ron Hendry. All concluded that the evidence collection had been grossly incompetent and that the scientific analysis of that evidence was deeply flawed. The DNA experts said the DNA conclusions, crucial to the conviction, had been deliberately manipulated and did not meet even the most minimal international standards. None of these scientists had been hired by the Knox family or accepted fees for their work, making it hard to question their independence.

This past weekend, the Italian Courts ordered a complete independent review of the forensic evidence. This was a major victory for Amanda. It is a good sign that the names have been made known in advance of the January 22, 2011 trial date, which suggests a more open process this time around. It is important to maintain the spotlight, demanding professionalism and expecting that an unjust verdict will be overturned so all parties concerned may finally move on and an innocent young woman can put this nightmare behind her for good.

Criminalist Mark Waterbury explains that if the forensic review burrows down into identification details, alleles and profile correspondences, they are deliberately missing the point. Larger issues render that evidence meaningless. You can't just twist a knob and make a new machine, technique or protocol. The standards that were not met are not meaningless red tape, but, rather, necessary steps to produce valid results.

One can directly witness Italian criminologist Stefanoni using very poor sample acquisition techniques, yet she is the same person who claimed that she had never seen contamination in her lab. She also testified that she "only changed gloves after handling a specimen that was particularly contaminated with blood." Material transfer is a surface energy phenomenon. It does not require dripping liquids to happen. Pet a cat. I rest my case. Stefanoni betrays ignorance of the basic physics of materials that cause the most contamination and is not competent to claim that those physics do not apply to her.

This speaks directly to her further claims about the knife, that DNA could not possibly have come from contamination in a lab full of Meredith's DNA. No responsible researcher would make such a claim. Many of the details of her unique test have not yet been revealed, which further compromises the integrity of the results. Full disclosure of the DNA data files and procedures to both the reviewers and the defense is critical.

Will Knox and Sollecito be acquitted? Per Preston, nearly 50 percent of all Italian criminal convictions are overturned on appeal. Indeed, in Italy, so common are reversals, that you are not actually considered convicted until you’ve been convicted on appeal. This is the main reason Mignini has not lost his job as he continues to appeal his own sentence for abuse of office. He is still acting as a prosecutorial consultant in the Knox appeal, and he has been busy filing criminal slander charges against many of his critics in Italy and America.

Everything hinges on whether the appeals court will decide to retry the case or just re-examine certain parts. Sources in Italy say that the judiciary would like to find a way to convict Amanda on lesser charges, proclaim time served, and get her out of the country. That would save face for the powerful interests who convicted her in the first place, while getting rid of a thorn in the side of U.S.-Italian relations. Italians are deeply embarrassed at the bright light this case has shone on their criminal justice system. They are acutely aware of its shortcomings and have been trying to reform it for years, and they are not happy that its flaws are on display in this case, exposed to outside criticism.

Among the many "Friends of Amanda Knox" are prominent authors, judges, attorneys, scientists and law enforcement experts such as Doug Preston, Paul Ciolino, Michael Heavey, Tom Wright, Mark Waterbury, Bruce Fisher, Charlie Wilkes and myself. Our Christmas wish this year was granted as the court in Perugia embarked upon an ongoing examination and criticism of the forensic evidence in the Knox case. Even world-renowned forensic expert Dr. Cyril Wecht has offered his assistance to Amanda Knox as she continues her quest for vindication. John Douglas, the inventor of modern FBI criminal profiling methods, declares in the current issue of Maxim magazine that "Amanda Knox is innocent." Let's hope Amanda is granted her dream of justice and freedom--if not during this holiday season, then certainly sometime soon in the coming months.

Tweet

Documenting the Crime Scene with A Sketch

by Andrea Campbell

After the first responder cordons off and protects a crime scene, the next step is a documentation of record that lays out the room and the evidence. Reports can be made in many different manners; for example, an investigator can record audio of the scene, take extensive notes, shoot photos or video, and map out the scene. 

Today we are going to talk about sketching.

Investigators need to document all observations of the scene. A sketch will help them to recall locale and evidence. They may make a rather informal first sketch, using any drawing tools, such as pencils, pens, even colored pencils. It probably won’t help to use chalk or charcoal because they smudge unless preserved with a setting spray. This is not a good idea at the scene, since other elements may be sprayed there.

Sketch after the scene has been photographed. This ensures nothing has been moved, kicked or otherwise disturbed. While a “rough” sketch will be difficult for some budding artists, rough is all you need in the beginning. If it's used in a court of law, it can be cleaned up. So go with messy and crude but accurate.

Sketches help clarify what is where in a photograph. A sketch may offer a different perspective, such as a top-down bird's-eye view, an elevation or side view, or a three-dimensional view. Oftentimes an exploded or larger view can accompany any perspective; this view may be a close-up or cross-sectional view of the scene.

What should you document? The physical artifacts, such as furniture, tables, lamps, and so forth, similar to a blueprint; the precise location of weapons, evidence, and the body; even a traffic pattern. Investigators may use this documentation to help with interviews, jog someone’s memory, establish a permanent record of the scene or location, and assist when writing a report. In jury trials, sketches can help answer various questions and aid witnesses, lawyers and judges. If the perpetrator or suspect visited several areas of the house, for example, going from bedroom to bathroom or into the kitchen, the sketch will help to recreate the series of events. With accident scenes, sketches may display distances for a better understanding of the sequence of events. 

*Note: Don’t forget to reference on your crime scene drawing where you were standing.

A final sketch can be made using templates or a computer. It should indicate distances; most art uses a scale of one inch to one foot to ease understanding. The sketch needs a label of the crime, such as Private Residence and Homicide. It needs the name of victim,  location, date and time, case number assigned, and the initials or name of the person who drew it. As with any good map, include a legend so the reader can learn some facts without having to ask. Besides the scale, indicate direction if possible -- north, south, east, west. Try to indicate which way doors open, potentially important elements later on. If you use symbols to represent something, such as a square for a seat or a triangle for an end table, make that known. You may code key elements with the alphabet for clarity. Itemize specific evidence, artifacts and elements. The couch might be where the body was found, making it item “A” or, in a numbered system, “1”. Don’t include clutter that's not relevant. A pile of clothes may not mean anything -- unless it has blood on it. Label a table of measurements with the disclaimer “All measurements are approximate.”

Remember that a bird’s-eye view won’t show the height of items at the scene. If the gun was on top of a cabinet, only an elevation view with measurements will indicate that. A 3-D crime scene is usually the function of a computer rendering, created by a software program.

If the distance markers were established or made by someone else, make note of that for credibility. It's better to anticipate a question than try to answer one if you get blindsided in court.

The National Crime and Investigation Training website has an example of a sketch. See: http://www.ncit.com/Tips Tricks/Sketching/sketching.html

The Crime Scene Sketch has a pdf file of key facts to remember along with tips. (Search Crime Scene Sketch):
http://www.bcps.org/offices/science/secondary/forensic/Crimescene%20Sketch.pdf

Another extremely detailed pdf file, complete with CAD drawing examples and notes on triangulation of measurements, can be picked up here:

http://www.authentegrity.com/download/CrimeScene Diagramming.pdf

One particularly delightful website, created by retired forensic investigator Thomas F. Hanratty, includes crime scene sketches from all Sherlock Holmes cases.

See: http://redbirdstudio.com/CrimeScenes/

An absolutely beautiful rendition, including some top-notch software examples, can be found at: http://www.doj.state.wi.us/dles/crimelabs/physicalEvidenceHB/Ch4_CrimeSceneSketch.pdf

A commercial site that sells the Smart Draw program: http://www.smartdraw.com/resources/how-to/Crime-Scene-Diagrams

Tweet