The 'Smart' Bullet is on the Horizon

by Andrea Campbell

Look Up in the Sky!

New technology is a slow and steady march no matter who develops it. I am always torn when a new weapon is developed, and the subject of today’s spotlight is no less frightening and anxiety-driven for me because of its dichotomy of being both useful and deadly. We’re talking about a bullet for machine guns—currently—that guides itself to a target more than a mile away, with accuracy to within eight inches.

The Stuff of Movies

This missile-like bullet was the stuff of fiction such as with the futuristic movie Runaway, a 1984 film written by Michael Crichton, a writer who had an uncanny ability to see what’s coming down the pike. The missile of today, however, can really twist and turn its way around objects, making up to 30 corrections per second.

Can You Imagine?

Developed for the military or law enforcement by Sandia labs, Red Jones, one of the researchers who worked on the laser-guided bullet says, “Where we’re headed, we’re going to be limited only by our imagination.”

Throughout history under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Defense, tens of millions of contract dollars went to companies for just such a weapon. Previously, engineers discovered that the M2, a belt-fed machine gun and standard issue in the U.S. Army 80 years ago, when fired at a distance of 1,000 meters—more than half a mile—would often miss the target by as much as roughly 10 meters.

Small but Smart

Only three years in the making, the prototype bullet is amazingly small—only four inches long and, at an inch-and-a-half in diameter, is a 50 caliber bullet. It operates using an optical sensor, which seeks and stays with a laser beam focused on a target. It also creates outputs from the optical sensors in order to steer the projectile to the target.

“The sensor,” according to Sandia labs, “sends information to guidance and control electronics that use an algorithm in an 8-bit central processing unit to command electromagnetic actuators. The actuators steer the fins that guide the bullet.” This would be similar to a miniaturized guidance system, normally utilized by actual missiles.

Adam Firestone, an army veteran, claims that: “All of a sudden now you’ve got a way to eliminate the collateral damage issue.”

Will we see a form of these miniature “smart bullets” on the streets for criminal purposes? It’s highly likely but only initially used by the upper most, financially-able suspects like drug runners or pirates. Of course now there are still engineering problems Red Jones explains, that will need to be overcome and certain practical considerations such as: can it be tossed or fall off the back of a truck and still function?

Sandia is looking for investors but from all accounts, expect to see this in an action movie in the near future, and heaven forbid, in the far horizon, hear about it in a criminal justice context.

As seen on the Sandia website: Various licensing and partnering options are available. Please contact the Intellectual Property Department to discuss.

For more information, you can download this PDF from Sandia

Photo images: Sandia labs

Tweet

Virtopsy: Is It Feasible?

by Andrea Campbell

(photo left:Jensen Larson/Discovery Health: TV Guide site)

If only the world of television was closer to reality or even on the horizon of probability, examinations for evidence and especially the cause of death would be so much easier. Take for example, the autopsy. This is a grueling, back-breaking process calling for much determination, the correct tools, and years of knowledge. Breaking skin with cutting tools, using saws to split through cartilage and bone is a difficult, highly specialized and tedious task. If it could only be done in a high-tech manner such as what we see on television shows such as Bones and CSI—with detailed scans and video images of what lay inside—so, can it?

Virtopsy Up for Opinion

According to an article for Newswise from Johns Hopkins Hospital, high-tech “Virtopsies” are not total reality and the more traditional physical examination of autopsy is ‘still the gold standard for determining cause of death’ experts claim. “The latest virtual imaging technologies–including full-body computed tomography (CT) scans, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), ultrasound, X-ray and angiography are helpful, they say, but cannot yet replace a direct physical inspection of the body’s main organs.”

Pathologist Elizabeth Burton, M.D., deputy director of the autopsy service at Johns Hopkins, reiterates that traditional autopsies to determine how and why someone died are less frequently performed, but the original methodology is still the basic process used. According to an article written in the January online Annals of Internal Medicine by Burton, along with Johns Hopkins clinical fellow, Mahmud Mossa-Basha, M.D., they offer their own opinion as to why the numbers of conventional autopsies have steadily declined over the past decade and why, despite this drop, the virtopsy is unlikely to properly replace it anytime soon.

Autopsy Drawbacks

A recent German study using the conventional method of both autopsy and imaging, versus just virtopsy, showed that the diagnoses using both techniques together netted more accuracy then just the virtual version alone which failed to find almost double the new diagnoses as the conventional version.

Problematic Concerns of Both

"Medical problems most commonly missed or not seen by autopsy included air pockets in collapsed lungs (which could have impeded breathing) and bone fractures, and the most common diagnoses missed by imaging were heart attack, pulmonary emboli and cancer,” says Burton. She believes that imaging results can also create question because most tissue examples need to be physically examined for analysis. Costs may also be prohibitive as imaging equipment costs hundreds of thousands of dollars and full-body CT scans for example can run about $1,500 each, which, when added to device purchasing and maintenance fees, make vitropsy an awfully expensive option.

One of the positive reasons for imaging usage on the other hand, are that the body can remain closed; and Virtopsy detects internal bleeding, and hidden fractures hard to find in a traditional autopsy. And it is also best at something like following bullet trajectories in gunshot victims, where the track is easiest to follow from the unique image perspective.

“Steady progress in imaging technology is refining conventional autopsy, making it better and more accurate,” says Mossa-Basha, a clinical fellow in neuroradiology at Johns Hopkins. “Physicians really need to be selective and proactive—even before a critically injured patient in hospital dies—in deciding whether an autopsy is likely to be needed and, if so, whether to approach the family in advance. Only in this way do we ensure that we are using the latest scanning devices appropriately during autopsy and when it is most effective in producing the most accurate-as-possible death certificates.”

For additional information, visit the National Institutes site at: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/visibleproofs/galleries/technologies/virtopsy.html

Source:

http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/doctors/results/directory/profile/6976979/Elizabethburton?setsize=10&dbase=main spec_disease=Anatomic%20and%20Clinical%20Pathology

For some interesting real life cases on autopsy and the subsequent evidence, visit:

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/visibleproofs/galleries/cases/index.htm

Photos: Lifelog.it, Brooklyn Museum

Tweet

Developing Fingerprints on Submerged Weapons Now a Reality

by Andrea Campbell

When new technology comes down the pike, to me, it’s just as interesting as how it came to be—or whose brainchild it is—as is what the science enables us to do. That’s why when I read about this technique for pulling latent fingerprints off of handguns that have been underwater, I had to share it with you as it is on the cusp of becoming mainstream. Some information about the authors and the tests follow.

Principals

Kathryn Book for nine years has been a Physical Scientist/Forensic Examiner in the Latent Print Operations Unit at the FBI Laboratory in Quantico. Part of her job is to work with the Bureau’s Evidence Response Team providing latent and human remains processing. The other author and teammate of this plan is James Tullbane, a Supervisory Special Agent on the Technical Dive Team in the Evidence Response Team Unit. Previously he worked as a member of the Underwater Search and Evidence Response Team (USERT) for five years. It’s not surprising that this kind of talent has endeavored to take on a discipline as yet unproven.

The Typical Past

Divers who have recovered materials from water in the capacity of providing evidence for collection, detection, preservation and processing of weapons underwater have basically turned the materials over to the Firearms and Toolmarks Units in order to discover any distinguishing characteristics such as caliber, ammunition and other related tasks. Never had the evidence gone first to the laboratory for latent print processing as it was thought that nothing of significance could be collected in the way of individualistic fingerprints.

Book and Tullbane, however, launched some tests and subsequent studies to see if the possibility of latent print detection and recovery of print evidence could be obtained on handguns that had been submerged in water.

Collection Techniques

The current protocol for collecting handguns within the FBI parameters are to: 1. Photograph the weapon in place, 2. Package the evidence in the found water, and, 3. Submit it to firearms for ballistics testing.

The study and new methodology the authors of these tests took upon themselves found great success: latent prints were developed on weapons tossed into various types of water, well up to 70 days under submersion!

What Are Latents?

In order for fingerprints to be deposited on a surface, they are of two types: Eccrine or Sebaceous. Eccrine (or merocrine gland substances) are the major sweat glands of the human body found in virtually all skin and are fingerprints and is made up of sweat or perspiration that is exuded from the pores of our skin and which highlights the friction ridge patterns on our fingertips. These glands produce a clear, odorless substance consisting primarily of water and NaCl, secretions of the apocrine glands. NaCl is mostly reabsorbed in the duct to reduce salt loss.

Sebaceous prints on the other hand, include fatty acids, lipids, cholesterol and glycerides, including both eccrine secretions and the sebum produced by the sebaceous glands; this is an oily secretion comprised of free fatty acids, wax esters, squalene and more. The most likely method of deposit is when someone touches their nose, hair, skin or other object that contains oils. Now the likelihood of developing the water-based or Eccrine prints is unlikely as they will dissipate in water. Sebaceous prints are less soluable—capable of being dissolved—and the potential for reading them after they have been deposited on a weapon thrown into water is greater.

Difficulty in Processing

Several factors make it difficult to pull prints such as, the surface of the weapon in the way of textured surfaces or a phosphate finish on the weapon, previous oiling or storage of the handgun, and a wiping clean of the gun often provide effective in removing all trace of latents.

Test Set-up

For the testing several natural prints were applied to the weapons along with another print using Lightning Powder’s Latent Print Reference Pad, and all were marked and placed on both sides of the barrel and photographed for reference. Although the tests were conducted in a lab in a controlled environment (e.g. plastic containers), the water used was both fresh and salted with Instant Ocean. Nine trials were done using elapsed time intervals up to 70 days.

Results

Regardless of method of development, processing handguns immediately after removal from water yielded positive results. There were some factors that help to determine the ideal conditions and the things that affect less than prime results are: handguns should be processed immediately, the water temperature if too warm impacts the results; the best results occurred with metal weapons in cold water; and the addition of heat and salt greatly reduces the detection of latent prints.

Obviously further testing and documentation is needed for presentation in court, and evidence proofs in court, but we are very encouraged this will become a mainstay for processing fingerprints from guns thrown into water.

Sources

--Book, Mary Kathryn and James Tullbane. "Detection of latent prints on handguns after submersion in water" Adapted from Evidence Technology Magazine, September-October 2011, pages 22-25 and 29.

Image: Stuart Miles / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Gun on dock: Image: Simon Howden / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Tweet

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

Cell Phone Forensics

By Andrea Campbell

Statistics are that in 2005 over two billion cell phones were out in the universe. Today that number hovers around five billion. Estimates are that that number of mobile phones will grow by another billion in 2012—that’s a lot of communication devices and evidence.

New Technology

Unfortunately for many crime scene investigators today there isn’t a lot of information about how to collect and use mobile phone forensics because this technology is in its infancy. Unless investigators operate in a large metropolitan area where there are plenty of technology nerds to consult, or unless they have access to professional organization training seminars, odds are they will not have the kind of knowledge needed or know how needed to utilize what a phone offers: data from a call list, photographs, text messages, video and more usable leads.

Cyber Forensics

According to Science Daily, “Approximately 80 to 90 percent of legal cases today involve some sort of digital evidence.” It’s the recovery and interpretation of this evidence that is sometimes in question by the courts and, at other times, just difficult to access correctly or to explain to juries. Cyber Forensics also involves other devices such as mp3 players, CDs, and more. Wayne Jansen, researcher with the National Institute of Standards and Technology says, "One of the first things that's looked at is a cell phone now.” But unclear forensic tactics for gathering evidence means that some investigators resort to ad hoc tools and procedures—making cell data likely to face new hurdles in the courtroom.

Flasher Box

Non-experts can transfer cell phone data to a computer with a flasher box. According to Lester Wilson, managing director of a London company that makes forensic tools and who often works for police extracting evidence, "People seem to take joy in recording their crimes to their mobiles. Anything you can think of--street robbery, kidnapping, sex crimes--they're taking pictures…" Apparently getting a “forensic” tamper-free version of a tool has not always been available until more recent machines and software. There will always be some models for which no existing forensic tools work. In that case, "Sometimes the best tools are hacker tools, as long as they've been thoroughly examined and reverse-engineered," said Jansen, who helped write NIST's official recommendations for documenting the chain of evidence and creating tamper-proof files. And with the plethora of cell phone choices, the more complex models can be problematic as they are vulnerable to tampering. This means that using wireless technology, the data can be changed.

Seize, Isolate and Document: Data Mining

According to the National Institute of Justice, by exporting information from multiple digital devices (such as call logs from multiple cellular phones or e-mails from computers) and importing that data into an analytical software package, investigators using data-mining techniques can diagram and visualize a criminal enterprise or a timeline of events. This graphical representation can make it easier for investigators to understand the complex relationships in a criminal enterprise or for a jury to understand criminal activity and the possible connections among offenders in a courtroom presentation

SOP

All cell phone discovery must start with Standard Operating Procedures and handled carefully and documented just as other evidence to prevent contamination or tampering. This starts with the legal rights to collect such evidence, photographing of all phases, isolating the components to prevent remote access or a network signal, maintaining network isolation and proper documentation and, so often overlooked, preparation for the courts. For now some investigators will have to enter into training courses, seek certification and the counsel of veterans, and stay in the loop as far as obtaining the most current software and technologies.

Reference & Resource

Dixon, Evan, “Best Practices in Mobile Phone Investigations”, Evidence Technology Magazine, Sept.-Oct., 2011.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2009/0104-digital_evidence.htm

http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2007/05/cellphone_forensics

http://www.nij.gov/topics/forensics/evidence/digital/mobile/welcome.htm

https://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles1/nij/199408.txt

Photos: everystockphoto.com

Tweet

A Rape Case In Sweden

by Andrea Campbell

I am never surprised at the results that can be achieved with forensic science. It is comforting to know that as time moves on, so do improvements in evidence collection and evaluation. Today’s story illustrates these ideas and even though it happened in Sweden, we are happy to see a righteous outcome.

High-Intensity UV Lamps

Body fluids are an important part of a crime scene, in murder and especially with sexually-based crimes. Since body fluids have properties that make them fluoresce under alternate light, it makes sense to walk the scene carefully with the light in hand and mark all the stains with cones or markers that may prove to be clues later on. The light won’t tell you what you’re looking at, but after collection and examination, you may get DNA and other readings.

The Rape in Sweden

On a cold day in Sweden, crime scene investigator Birgitta Jansson, who is with the Karlstad, Sweden police technical division, walked through the snow. It was dawn at about 7:20 in the morning and the sun was waiting to rise over the horizon. An outdoor scene, the crime was committed in a residential area near the center of town, and not far from a school. The case was an alleged rape and it took place at the corner of a hockey rink in a snow drift.

The snow left behind some obvious impressions: the shape of a human figure—arms, legs and torso—that were clear enough. In addition to the visual evidence were some Swedish coins that had fallen from the perpetrator’s pockets that were lodged deep in the snow. Blood was also found near the coins, and all were subsequently collected as evidence.

Investigators then used a high-intensity ultraviolet light to illuminate the scene, just as the sun was beginning to rise. Three spots, thought to be semen, were found in a 4 x 4-inch area.

“The light made the semen fluoresce in the snow, to the extent that I never thought possible,” said Jansson. “Actually, I was amazed that it worked. I never thought you could distinguish semen from snow with the help of a high-intensity UV light. And there was no doubt—the fluorescence was incredibly strong and clear. I have never seen anything like it.”

Jansson examined the glowing pieces more closely and found that they were now frozen liquid laying separate from the snow. They secured and collected those lumps of ice and packed them into bio bags, stored them in the freezer in the police car, in the hopes of sending the frozen liquid to the laboratory.

Back at the Laboratory

Once the lab examined the frozen, cube-like evidence it was clear that there were both semen and vaginal secretions. The sperm produced DNA and was ultimately matched to the vaginal swabs taken from the victim. The rapist was subsequently tried, convicted and sentenced.

The Fluids That Fluoresce

Semen, vaginal secretions, urine, sweat and saliva are all bodily fluids that will fluoresce under UV light. Urine is the easiest to detect, followed by semen, and the others will too, only more often very faintly.

Rehn, Lisel, “Semen fluoresced in the snow solved a rape case in Sweden,” Evidence Technology Magazine, July-August 2011, pp 24-25.

DNA photo: US National Library of Medicine 
photo (right): jah~

Tweet

Junk Science Defined

by Andrea Campbell

I often talk to readers about their frustration over conflicting information which is thrust at them under the guise of being “scientific.” For example, a few years ago there were published studies about eggs as related to a healthy diet—were they a cholesterol risk? and should they should be restricted? Today, we read articles touting eggs as an excellent source of protein and are told the benefits outweigh any supposed cholesterol risk assessment or trial. This same type of controversy has been applied to many foodstuffs, vitamin supplements, drugs and even forensic science. Aspirin in, aspirin out; dairy in, dairy out, evidence in, evidence out. What is a reader to believe?

I remember an article published in Imprimis by Lee Ann Fisher Baron, who was at that time, Savona Professor for Natural Sciences at Hillsdale College. Her writing zeroed in on some of that frustration and provides suggestions. Baron believes there has been much political abuse of scientific research. She says, “From persistent doomsday scenarios like global warming to the latest ergonomic arguments for near-total regulation of the American workplace, this abuse of science represents not only an economic threat, but a threat to freedom as well.” To further define what she means by “threat,” Baron sites Americans inability to distinguish solid science from “junk science.”

Further, Baron argues that science has the ability to change history. As fruit of this, she points to the discovery of antibiotics, polymers, and the importance of the Human Genome Project as key discoveries in both the past and future of our lives. In addition to the benefits though, we must also look at apparent drawbacks: that is, in order to come up with these revolutionary discoveries, science is also prone to error, and publishes findings that are just plain wrong or wrong-headed in their thinking. The proper scientific approach to projects should involve the “scientific method.” This type of methodology is based on a precise set of steps or experiments that can be repeated with the same results by anyone.

One of the best arbiters of testing success then is the use of “the control.” We’ll explain control using a hypothetical—let’s say that there is a vaccine that can lengthen the interval between blood sugar levels for a diabetic, in order to prevent severe highs or lows. Two or more groups should be formed to assure the accuracy of the tests. The larger group should be divided into a group of subjects who take the actual vaccine, and a second group is given a placebo.

To further validate the test, neither group should be told which medication they are taking. And to complete the facilitation of true scientific testing, the researchers who administer the vaccine should not know which group is which, thereby creating a “double-blind.” By working under these secret test arrangements, the researchers can measure the “placebo effect”—a phenomenon whereby patients improve because they falsely believe they are receiving medicine. Also, with the researchers in the dark as to who is getting what, it completes the exam by precluding any prejudice they may unknowingly present in their reports.

In an ideal world, a scientist will publish his results, present his paper, and allow the research community to evaluate his findings, sometimes called “peer review.” Others will review the articles, repeat any relevant tests, and question the various conclusions. Junk science, Baron claims, bypasses this process and is often presented to the public under the aegis of “expert” status and whole cloth truth.

So what is a reader to do to protect themselves against the onslaught of guesstimation? Baron suggests that schools up their curricula and imbue students with a love of research. Teach them to become pit-bulls for accuracy. Stimulate their minds with valuable, educational experiments—not like a Seattle middle school, which taught children the eating habits of birds by trying to pick up Cheerios with tongue depressors, toothpicks, spoons and clothespins between their teeth!

In general, Baron suggests: we should be careful to only accept evidence after it has been subjected to the scientific method; that we read everything with a healthy skepticism, and ask questions instead of blindly believing what we hear or read.

Photos and graphics: Clipart.com

Tweet