MEDICAL AND SCIENTIFIC METHODS OF IDENTIFICATION

• Jurisdiction: Australia

MEDICAL AND SCIENTIFIC METHODS OF IDENTIFICATION

Introduction ................................................................................................... [33F.400]

Fingerprint identification ................................................................................ [33F.410]

Molecular biology (DNA identification) .......................................................... [33F.420]

Dental identification ....................................................................................... [33F.430]

Cranio-facial reconstruction and superimposition ......................................... [33F.440]

Medical identification ..................................................................................... [33F.450]

Pathology ...................................................................................................... [33F.460]

Anatomy and anthropology ........................................................................... [33F.470]

Radiological identification using skeletal remains ........................................ [33F.480]

[33F.400] Introduction

Anatomically, humans show remarkable similarities one to another. However, as a species we are able to distinguish extremely subtle differences of shape and configuration of our bodies, including facial structures that allow for accurate recognition of identity. This allows everyday formal identification of bodies to be carried out by family and friends of the deceased. In a mass fatality situation, this can rarely be performed. The changes of decomposition, the lack of practicality and the ethical problems of asking grieving people to view hundreds of deceased persons on the chance that they will be able identify anyone make visual identification almost useless.

There is no detailed information on the validity of the visual identification of the dead performed generally for coroners. By contrast, many of the medical and scientific methods for human identification (dental examination, fingerprint comparison and molecular biological comparison of DNA) have been subject to specific scientific validation and have been accepted by the legal system as being able to provide an acceptable level of certainty (Reeder, 1999).

Fortunately, there are several validated independent scientific identification methods. They include:

• fingerprint identification;
• molecular biology (DNA identification);
• dental identification;
• cranio-facial reconstruction;
• medical identification; and
• radiological identification.

[33F.410] Fingerprint identification

The taking of fingerprints from a deceased person is one of the mainstays of the identification procedures in mass disasters, in part because a record of fingerprints can be stored as a paper record, as an electronic image and as a coded database entry. In addition, where a fingerprint record is not available for a deceased person, latent prints can be lifted from objects that are likely to have been handled by that person. This ability to use latent fingerprints from a person's normal environment greatly enhances the utility of fingerprints for the identification of deceased persons. Such a form of identification is less accurate than a comparison with fingerprints taken from a known individual in life (as used for criminal record or immigration). In the case of multiple fatalities occurring in the same family or workplace, the use of this type of latent fingerprint comparison will not provide sufficient discrimination among individuals.

Prior to taking fingerprints from a deceased person, it is important to ensure that the procedure will not interfere with other examinations of the body. In some cases, this may mean that the fingerprints will have to be collected after the completion of the autopsy. If photographic recording of injuries to the hands or fingers is an essential part of the autopsy, then the presence of fingerprint ink may obscure the photographic appearances. In addition, trace evidence in the form of hairs, paint flakes, bloodstains and so forth could be lost or contaminated in the process of inking the fingers. In the case of a fresh corpse, the taking of fingerprints is relatively straightforward: standard inks can be used and the finger rolled over the paper or the paper placed in a curved support to allow more of the fingerprint to be recorded. Perhaps the most significant impediment to the taking of fingerprints from a corpse is the presence of rigor mortis. Where the fingers are flexed towards the palm of the hand and are held rigid by rigor mortis, access to the palmer aspect of the fingers may be difficult. Flexing the hand at the wrist can help to extend the fingers and provide access to their palmer surfaces. Alternatively, an attempt can be made to "break" the rigor mortis by forcibly extending the hand at the wrist. When rigor mortis has been broken by stretching the muscles of the forearm in this way, the fingers can be extended so that they lie flat with the palm. Occasionally it is not possible to break rigor mortis in this way without causing damage to other structures of the hand or interfering with injuries and perhaps trace evidence. If this is the case, a surgical incision can be made in the front of the forearm and wrist and the flexor tendons severed in order to free the fingers from their state of fixed flexion. Removal of the deceased person's hands in order to facilitate the taking of fingerprints should almost never be required.

The early processes of decomposition are associated with the lifting and degloving of the superficial layers of the skin that retain the friction ridges or fingerprints. A careful operator can remove the separating layer of superficial skin and by placing this over his or her own gloved finger, ink and fingerprint it. If the tissue is too...