|
|
Below, you will find a list of references, with a brief description of the paper, in chronological order. These references relate to bitemarks only. A review of these articles is available on this site here . Many of these articles are difficult to access, and we can provide many of them via our document delivery service. We charge a small handling fee for this service to cover photocopying and mailing. Conditions and details on the document delivery page. |
1960 Fearnhead RW. Med Sci Law; 1:273-77
Facilities for forensic odontology. Describes the use of hand drawn acetate
overlays. Draws the conclusion that "evidence which involves the
identification of a person by tooth-marks left as bruises in flesh should
never be admitted". Describes simple experiment. One of the first papers
to question the use of bitemark evidence based upon the reliability of the
technique.
1963 Taylor DV. Brit Dent J; 114:389 The
law and the dentist. Written by a dual qualified dentist and lawyer. Describes
all aspects of forensic dentistry, including bitemarks. States
"..unlikely to establish convincing proof in most cases".
1966 Layton JJ. J Forensic Sci Soc;
6:76-80 Identification from a bitemark in cheese. A bitemark in cheese found
at a crime scene. Control bitemark made in similar cheese by the suspect and
twenty points of similarity are discussed. Suspect admitted guilt. States that
BMs can never be as positive as fingerprints.
1966 Harvey W, Butler O, Furness J, Laird
R. J Forensic Sci Soc; 8(4):157-219 The Biggar murder. Dental, medical, police
and legal aspects of a case "in some ways unique, difficult and
puzzling". Extensive case report detailing a Scottish murder in which
bitemark evidence played a key role in the conviction of the defendant.
1968 Furness J. Br Dent J; 124(6):261-7 A
new method for the identification of teeth marks in cases of assault and
homicide. Paper describes the inking of the occlusal surfaces of the teeth
which are then photographed and placed on white board. Lines of comparison are
drawn with photographs of the injury. Technique is still used today for court
exhibits depicting bitemark comparisons.
1969 Furness J. J Forensic Sci Soc;
9:126-75 Teeth marks and their significance in cases of homicide. Paper claims
to differentiate between marks made in self-defence, those made sadistically
and "love-nips". Unconvincing. Numerous case examples given. There
is somewhat of a debate on the psychology of biting and the inferences that
can be made about an attacker from the injury.
1970 Hodson JJ. Med Sci Law; 10(4):247-51
Forensic odontology and its role in the problems of the police and forensic
pathologist. Paper outlines the value of forensic dentistry to the police.
Recommends the type of dentists who should be called to assist. Summarises
with case reports including a bitemark case on two young children.
1970 Levine LJ, Beaghler RL. NY State Dent J; 36(9):539-42 Forensic odontology - a routine case and commentary. This paper, written for the general practitioner, mentions bitemarks only in passing. The majority of the paper is devoted to an identification case.
1970 Furness J. Probe; 11:221-22 Dental
evidence in a case of rape. Case report describing a bite to the nose of an
assailant.
1971 DeVore DT. Med Sci Law; 11(3):144-5
Bitemarks for identification? A preliminary report. Author used ink models to
place marks on living volunteers and cadavers. Photographs of the marks were
taken in several body positions. Skin from the cadavers bearing the ink was
excised. Paper concludes that there is a large margin of error in using
bitemark photographs and unsecured excised skin. States that the exact
position of the body when bitten must be known and replicated. A useful study.
Little attention has been paid to this paper that encourages caution when
examining bite injuries.
1972 MacDonald DG, MacFarlane TW. Glasg
Dent J; 3(1):16-9 Forensic odontology. Report of a case involving bitemarks.
Case report of a bitemark on a living victim.. 6
1973 Stoddart TJ. Br Dent J; 135(6):285-7
Bitemarks in perishable substances. A method of producing permanent models. A
method for producing accurate models of bitten materials, silicone impression
material is recommended. Technique described is still applicable today.
1973 Butler OH. Int J Forens Dent;
1(1):23-4 The value of bitemark evidence. Written by a police officer, this
paper discusses the types and presentation of dental evidence.
1973 Woolridge ED. Int J Forens Dent;
2(1):6-12 Significant problems of the forensic odontologist in the USA.
Describes some of the legal issues that surround forensic dentistry. This
topic has been addressed in more contemporary articles.
1974 Marshall W. Criminol; 9(32):21-34
Bitemarks in apples - forensic aspects. Paper describes the stability and
usefulness of bites in a variety of different types of apple.
1973 Sims BG, Grant JH, Cameron JM. Med
Sci Law; 13(3):207-10 Bitemarks in the 'battered baby' syndrome Describes the
frequent occurrence of bite injuries in child abuse cases and presents three
cases.
1974 Simon A, Jordan H, Pforte K. Int J
Forens Dent; 2:17-2 Successful identification of a bitemark in a sandwich.
Case report describing a bitemark in a sandwich.
1974 Jonason CO, Frykholm KO, Frykholm A.
Int J Forensic Dent; 2(6):70-8 Three dimensional measurement of tooth
impression of criminological investigation. Use of a stereomicroscope to
measure the three dimensional aspects of bitemarks. Later repeated using
scanning electron microscopy.
1974 Clift A, Lamont CM. J Forens Sci Soc;
14(3):241-5 Saliva in forensic odontology. Describes the methods for
collecting and analysing saliva for the determination of blood groups.
Influential paper, although now superseded by DNA work.
1974 Dinkel EH Jr. J Forens Sci; 19(3):535-47 Use of bitemark evidence as an investigative aid. Reviews the current (74) literature dealing with the handling and examination of bitemarks. Includes a discussion of the legal implications of the time. Case reports described. Comprehensive, and describes areas in which improvement must be made.
1974 Barbanel JC, Evans JH. J Forensic Sci
Soc; 14(3):235-8 Bitemarks in skin - mechanical factors. Describes the
mechanical factors used to produce a bite, including tongue pressure and
suction. States that the properties of particular skin area bitten may affect
the appearance of a bitemark. Clear and concise coverage of the topic that has
not been addressed since.
1974 Millington PF. J Forensic Sci Soc;
14(3):239-40 Histological studies of skin carrying bitemarks. Histological
examination of bites from both living and deceased individuals. States that
complete recovery of a bite injury may take 2 or 3 weeks. States that the use
of histology in determining the time of the injury may be helpful. The ageing
of wounds, and in particular bitemarks, is still debated.
1974 MacDonald DG. J Forensic Sci Soc;
14(3):229-33 Bitemark recognition and interpretation. Describes a method of
classification of bitemarks based on their aetiology.
1974 MacFarlane TW., MacDonald DG,
Sutherland DA. J Forensic Sci Soc; 14(3):247-52 Statistical problems in dental
identification. Discusses the issue of the individuality of the human
dentition and describes an experiment to determine this. Authors conclude that
their preliminary data supports the notion that human teeth are unique to an
individual level. Surprisingly, considering the importance of this issue to
forensic dentists, this paper has been somewhat ignored and may be worth
revisiting.
1974 Ruddick RF. Med Biolo Illus;
24(3):128-9 A technique for recording bitemarks for forensic studies Describes
the use of alternative light sources for the enhancement of bitemark injuries.
A subject of interest to many forensic dentists.
1975 Sognnaes RF, Therrell R. J Cal Dent
Assoc; 3(10):50-3 Bitemark lesions in human skin caused by an unequivocally
identified 'suspect'. Describes an accidental bite caused by a child on her
father.
1975 Solheim T, Leidal TI. Forensic Sci;
6(3):205-15 Scanning electron microscopy in the investigation of bitemarks in
foodstuffs. In this study students with no obvious irregularities on their
anterior teeth were asked to bite various foodstuffs. Using SEM the marks were
analysed and the authors concluded that as many individual characteristics
were visible the technique was useful in forensic investigations. An
interesting technique, although infrequently used in case work.
1975 Whittaker DK. Int Dent J;
25(3):166-71 Some laboratory studies on the accuracy of bitemark comparisons.
Author studied bites in wax and on pig skin. Found that those on pig skin were
less reliable than those on wax in terms of biter identification. Extrapolates
that bites on human skin may be similarly unreliable; offers a warning that
more research is required.
Highly cited paper - often regarded as one of the first attempts to validate
the science of bitemark analysis. Warning went unheeded.
1975 Whittaker DK, Watkins KE, Wiltshire
J. Int J Forensic Dent; 3:2-7 An experimental assessment of the reliability of
bitemark analysis. Same paper as described above - republished with some
editorial differences and apparently two new authors.
1976 Bang G. Acta Odontol Scand;
34(1):1-11 Analysis of tooth marks in a homicide case. Observations by means
of visual description, stereo-photography, scanning electron microscopy and
stereometric graphic plotting. Author was asked to re-examine a bitemark case
involving an injury to a breast. Using novel techniques, including SEM, the
author found that the originally convicted individual was the likely biter.
1976 Anderson WR, Hudson RP. Forens Sci;
7(1):71-4 Self inflicted bitemarks in battered child syndrome. Victim of child
abuse victim had bitemarks on both arms. Authors demonstrated that the bite
was from the victim. Importance of this phenomenon in evaluation of bite
injuries is discussed. Used transparent overlays in analysis. Established that
bites can be self-inflicted.
1976 MacDonald DG, Laird WR Int J Forensic
Dent; 3(10):26-30 Bitemarks in a murder case. Case report describing a murder
involving a bite to the abdomen and breast. Authors describe the use of
statistics to determine the number of individuals capable of producing the
bite. Statistical evidence was presented in court. Use of statistics is
interesting in this case. Arrived at a figure of 1 in 62 million. It must be
noted that approximately half of the Scottish population were edentulous at
this time.
1976 Sognnaes RF. Int J Forensic Dent;
3(9):14-6 Dental science as evidence in court. Describes some applications of
forensic dental techniques in court.
1976 Mills PB. Int J Forensic Dent; 3:38-9
An unusual case of bitemark identification. Describes a bitemark on a bullet.
1976 Vale GL, Sognnaes RF, Felando GN,
Noguchi TT. J Forensic Sci; 21(3):642-52 Unusual three-dimensional bitemark
evidence in a homicide case.
Describes a case of bitemark identification. Bite was on victim's nose.
Authors concluded a positive match and this became the first case in
Californian Law using bitemark evidence.
1976 Goodbody RA, Turner CH, Turner JL.
Med Sci Law; 16(1):44-8 The differentiation of toothed marks: report of a case
of special interest. Discusses the differences between bite injuries and
"toothed" injuries such as those made by a saw. Used acetate film to
compare to a suspect's dentition.
1977 Levine LJ Dent Clin N Amer;
21(1):145-158 Bitemark evidence. Review followed by numerous case reports.
1977 Sognnaes RF. Int J Forensic Dent;
4(13):17-20 The case for better bite and bitemark preservations. Describes the
excision of skin and the use of elastomeric impression materials for the
preservation of bitemark evidence.
1977 Kerr NW. Int J Forensic Dent; 4:20-23
Apple bitemark identification of a suspect. Simple case report of a bitemark
in an apple found after a house break-in.
1977 Sognnaes RF. J Cal Dent Assoc; 4:22-8
Battered child death involving enigmatic bitemark evidence. Cases report
describing bitemark evidence in a child abuse case. Describes comparison
technique and the legal outcome. Uses SEM.
1977 Sognnaes RF. New Eng J Med; 296:79-85
Forensic stomatology. Three part series. Sognnaes reviews the forensic
literature in a three part series as part of the Medical Progress section.
Various methods of forensic evaluation of bitemarks are discussed.
1978 Sognnaes RF. Dental Survey;
54(12):12-24 Forensic oral measurements. A review of the
"state-of-the-art" of forensic dentistry.
1979 Beckstead JW, Rawson RD, Giles W.
JADA; 99(1):69-74 Review of bite mark evidence. A general review.
1979 Morrison HL. J Forens Sci;
24(2):492-502 Psychiatric observations and interpretations of bite mark
evidence in multiple murders. Interesting paper in which the author describes
over 400 hours of contact time with a serial murder who bit many of his
victims. Whilst not answering "why do people bite?" author raises
interesting questions. The psychological aspects of bitemarks are yet to be
firmly established.
1979 Rawson RD, Bell A, Kinard BS, Kinard
JG J Forens Sci; 24(4):898-901 Radiographic interpretation of
contrast-media-enhanced bite marks. Describes a techniques of radiographing
soft -tissue that has been removed from cadavers. Study used postmortem bites.
1980 Glass RT, Andrews EE, Jones K 3d. J
Forens Sci; 25(3):638-45 Bitemark evidence: a case report using accepted and
new techniques. Case report with bitemarks found on a murder victim. Authors
describe the use of novel techniques including microbiologic and histologic/histochemical.
Preparation and presentation of evidence are discussed.
1980 Holt JK. J Forensic Sci Soc;
20(4):243-6 Identification from bitemarks. A collection of case reports
describing different methods of augmenting bite photographs and production of
3D models of bite injuries.
1981 Furness J. Am J Forensic Med Pathol;
2(1):49-52 A general review of bitemark evidence. A personal recollection of a
forensic dentist, describes case work and issues around bitemarks in English
law. No papers cited.
1981 Sperber ND, Lubin H. J Am Col Health
Association.; 29(4):165-7 Bite mark evidence in crimes against persons. Paper
describes bites for college and university health workers and security
personnel. Techniques for photographing the injuries are presented.
1981 Jakobsen JR, Keiser-Nielsen S.
Forensic Sci Int; 18(1):41-55 Bitemark lesions in human skin. Case of severe
bitemarks on the back of a male victim. The authors used a volunteer to repeat
the bite injuries for comparison. Ethical issues surround the use of human
volunteers in bitemark studies.
1982 Dorion RB. J Can Dent Assoc;
48(12):795-8 Bite mark evidence. General review.
1982 Webster G. Forensic Sci Int;
20(1):45-52 A suggested classification of bitemarks in foodstuffs in forensic
dental analysis. Author states that it is the labial surfaces rather than the
biting edges that are responsible for bitemarks in food. Webster suggests an
alternate terminology to bring uniformity in describing such evidence.
Bitemarks in food are rare in criminal cases, although recently cheese has
yielded DNA from a bite.
1982 Sognnaes RF, Rawson RD, Gratt BM,
Nguyen NB. JADA; 105(3):449-51 Computer comparison of bitemark patterns in
identical twins. Using computer technology and radiographic bitemark analysis
the authors conclude that occlusal arch form and individual tooth positions,
even in identical twins are in fact unique. This paper is frequently cited as
evidence of dental "uniqueness". Highly cited paper, frequently used
as part of the dental uniqueness argument.
1982 Rudland M. Med Sci Law; 22(1):47-50
The dimensional stability of bitemarks in apples after long-term storage in a
fixative. Paper describes the method for preserving a variety of apple types.
Used a pre-defined mark which was examined over a period of ten years, with
little distortion noted.
1983 Irons F, Steuterman MC, Brinkhous W.
Am J Forensic Med Pathol; 4(2):177-80 Two bitemarks on assailant. Primary link
to homicide conviction. Two bitemarks were found on a suspect in a homicide.
The authors state that the injuries matched the victims' teeth and the suspect
pled guilty to the offence.
1983 McCullough DC. Am J Forensic Med
Pathol; 4(4):355-8 Rapid comparison of bitemarks by xerography. Case report of
bite in cheese, the detective used a photocopier to record the evidence.
1983 Ligthelm AJ, de Wet FA. J Forens
Odontstomatol; 1(1):19-26 Registration of bitemarks: a preliminary report.
Used bites on sheep to investigate methods of recording bitemarks. Utilized
SEM to compare back to the human volunteers who bit the sheep.
1983 Deming JE, Mittleman RE, Wetli CV J
Forens Sci; 28(3): 572-6 Forensic science aspects of fatal sexual assaults on
women. The authors review the case files of 41 female victims of proven fatal
sexual assault. Describe bitemarks as not infrequent in such crimes.
1983 Vale GL, Noguchi TT. J Forens Sci;
28(1):61-9 Anatomical distribution of human bitemarks in a series of 77 cases.
Paper which examined the author's own cases to establish common bite
locations. Seminal paper, establishes the nature of bites and likely crimes.
1984 Rawson RD, Brooks S. Am J Forensic
Med Pathol; 5(1):19-24 Classification of human breast morphology important to
bitemark investigation. Describes the range of breast morphologies found and
their likely impact on bitemark analysis.
1984 Walter RD. Am J Forensic Med Pathol;
5(1):25-9 An examination of the psychological aspects of bitemarks. Paper
attempts to examine some of the psychological threads which appear to be
operative for the perpetrator of bite marks. Serious discussion, often cited
but very poorly understood. Note that this is RD Walter, not RA.
1984 Corbett ME, Spence D. Br Dent J;
157(8):270-1 A forensic investigation of teeth marks in soap. A bite mark in
soap was used as evidence in the prosecution of a homicide of a 2 year old
girl.
1984 Elliot TR. Rogers AH. Haverkamp JR.
Groothuis D. Forens Sci Int; 26(2):131-7 Analytical pyrolysis of Streptococcus
salivarius as an aid to identification in bitemark investigation Authors
describe "finger-printing" strains of Streptococcus salivarius. The
results of the analysis of isolates from two individuals are presented,
illustrating the differentiation of S. salivarius at strain level according to
the origin of the isolate.
1984 Brown KA. Elliot TR. Rogers AH.
Thonard JC. Forensic Sci Int; 26(3):193-7 The survival of oral streptococci on
human skin and its implication in bitemark investigation. Authors describe
their experiments for recovering bacteria from saliva. Found that after 6..25
hours on skin viable bacteria could still be removed.
1984 Dorion RB. J Can Dent Assoc;
50(2):129-30 Preservation and fixation of skin for ulterior scientific
evaluation and courtroom presentation. Describes a method for removing and
preserving human skin exhibiting bite injuries. Author uses acrylic which is
placed on the skin, cyanoacrylate glue used to stick the acrylic ring to the
skin and the tissue excised. Three year preservation achieved little or no
post fixation shrinkage. No discussion of how the lack of shrinkage was
assessed. Numerous photographs illustrate the procedure well.
1984 Krauss TC J Forens Sci; 29(2):633-8
Photographic techniques of concern in metric bite mark analysis. Author
advises the use of a rigid ruler for scale, proper camera positioning in
relation to the scale, and a method to evaluate the distortion in a
two-dimensional print that records a three-dimensional object is suggested.
Disregarding these factors makes metric bite mark analysis inappropriate.
1984 Rawson RD. J Forens Sci; 29(1):245-53
Statistical evidence for the individuality of the human dentition. A general
population sample of bite marks in wax was used to determine how unique bites
are. Authors conclude that the analysis confirm the unique nature of human
bites. Seminal paper.
1984 Rawson RD. J Forens Sci; 29(1):254-9
Incidence of bitemarks in a selected juvenile population: a preliminary
report. A study of the frequency of bite marks among sheltered children. Found
an incidence of 1 545 bite marks per 100 000 population. Analysis of the age,
sex, and location of bite marks is presented.
1984 Karazulas CP. J Forens Sci;
29(1):355-358 Presentation of bitemark evidence resulting in the acquittal of
a man after serving seven years in prison for murder Author describes case in
which he appeared for the defence with another odontologist testifying for the
prosecution. 3 months of bitemark analysis.
1984 Rao VJ, Souviron RR. J Forensic Sci;
19(1):326-30 Dusting and lifting the bite print: a new technique. Utilising
the powder and brush method employed in lifting fingerprints, one of the
authors was able to lift tooth prints on the body surface of both living and
dead victims. Possibly a useful technique but never revisited.
1985 Krauss TC, Warlen SC. J Forens Sci;
30(1):262-8 The forensic science use of reflective ultraviolet photography.
The procedure for reflective ultraviolet photography in bite mark cases is
presented. Technique is described as simple and inexpensive. 3 8
1985 Havel DA Journal of Biological
Photography. 53(2):59-62 The role of photography in the presentation of
bitemark evidence. Paper explains the various photographic techniques that can
be used with bitemark evidence.
1985 Walter RD. Am J Forensic Med Pathol;
6(3):219-21 Anger biting - the hidden impulse. Examines principle of anger
related biting, describes memory loss of biting incidents and offers a
framework to resolving anger biting by decompressing the emotional content.
Needs a serious assessment.
1985 Leung AK. Injury; 16(7):503-4
Pseudo-abusive human bitemarks in a Chinese infant. Unable to locate this
article. Can anyone help?
1985 Drinnan AJ, Melton MJ. Int Dent J;
35(4):316-21 Court presentation of bitemark evidence. Instructs readers on
court presentation techniques and gives details on how to avoid common
pitfalls. Opens with the acceptance that an individual's bite is unique. Quote
twin study as support for this and supported by Rawson et al. Discusses the
polarisation of expert opinions. Describes Frye.
1985 Bernstein ML. J Forens Sci;
30(3):958-64 Two bitemark cases with inadequate scale references. Both cases
illustrate that a technical infraction in processing and recording bite marks,
though serious, need not automatically disqualify the analysis.
1986 Sperber N. Forensic Sci Int;
30(2-3):187-93 Identification of children and adults through federal and state
dental identification systems: recognition of human bitemarks. Mainly a
discussion of human dental identification - the paper contains a small section
on human bitemarks to complete the forensic dental review.
1986 David TJ. J Forens Sci; 31(3):1126-34
Adjunctive use of scanning electron microscopy in bitemark analysis: a 3D
study. An examination of a case in which adjunctive use of scanning electron
microscopy (SEM) demonstrated the presence of unusual three-dimensional
characteristics in a bite mark. Commonly described yet uncommonly used in case
work.
1986 Rawson RD, Vale GL. J Forens Sci;
31(4):1261-8 Analysis of photographic distortion in bitemarks: a report of the
bitemark guidelines committee. States that some degree of distortion is found
in all bitemarks. A method of analysing the distortion is presented. Recommend
a 90o angle for bitemark photography.
1986 Rawson RD, Vale GL, Sperber ND,
Herschaft EE, Yfantis A. J Forens Sci; 31(4):1235-60 Reliability of the
Scoring System of the American Board of Forensic Odontology for Human Bite
Marks. The various methods of determining
the validity of the scoring guide are presented with statistical data
generated from scores reported by recognised forensic science experts. States
that this paper represents the first truly scientific approach to bitemark
analysis. Emphasise the need for peer review. The paper was ultimately
disregarded as overly complex and the system never gained credibility with
forensic dentists.
1986 ABFO Inc. JADA; 112:383-6 Guidelines
for bitemark analysis. This paper, written by the members of the Bite Mark
Committee, presents guidelines for the proper investigation of bite injuries.
The article cites Hale's 78 paper as an instigator in the process of
establishing protocols. These guidelines include a discussion of the
controversial bitemark scoring system. Despite being described as
"dynamic" these guidelines have not been updated.
1987 Warnick AJ, Biedrzycki L, Russanow G.
J Forensic Sci; 32(3):788-92 Not all bite marks are associated with abuse,
sexual activities, or homicides: a case study of a self-inflicted bitemark. A
case of self-inflicted bite mark during an episode of myocardial ischemia is
presented. Paper alerts odontologists to the non-criminal bite.
1987 Ligthelm AJ, Coetzee WJ, van Niekerk
PJ. J Forensic Odont;
5(1):1-8 The identification of bite marks using the reflex microscope. Used
bitemarks in cheese, apples and chewing gum. The use of the reflex microscope
is described. Not used in case work.
1987 Dorion RB. J Forens Sci; 32(3):690-7
Transillumination in bite mark evidence. Author describes the value of using
transillumination in the examination of bitemarks. Author describes the
technique's use when bites are poorly defined, barely visible, or obscured by
other superimposed bite marks or traumatic injury patterns. Controversy
surrounds the removal of tissue from victims of crime. Does the increase in
evidentiary value justify this mutilation?
1988 Zarkowski P. J Law & Ethi Dent;
1(1):47-57 Bite mark evidence: its worth in the eyes of the expert. Excellent
review of the legal status of bitemarks. States " [BMs] evolved from a
weak beginning….never progressed through a testing phase to measure accuracy
and reliability" Recommends cautious use.
1988 Hyzer WG, Krauss TC. J Forensic Sci;
33(2):498-506 The Bite Mark Standard Reference Scale--ABFO No. 2. The ABFO
scale is now universally adopted by not only forensic dentists but also many
other forensic professionals. This paper describes the design and
constructional features of the scale and offers guidelines for its effective
application to bite mark photography. Paper describes an important tool in BM
investigations.
1988 Vale GL, Rawson RD. J Forensic Sci;
33(1):20 Discussion of "Reliability of the scoring system of the ABFO for
human bitemarks" A "back-track" from the scoring system,
advising caution when using the index and recommending more research. Brought
to an end the point system - no further work was carried out.
1989 Gundelach A. J Forensic
Odont;7(2):11-6 Lawyers' reasoning and scientific proof: a cautionary tale in
forensic odontology. Describes a legal case and states that a cautious
approach to bitemark evidence should be taken. Yet another paper which advises
caution when using bitemark evidence. Little attention paid to such articles.
1990 Whittaker DK Dental Update;
17(9):386-90 Principles of forensic dentistry: 2. Non-accidental injury,
bitemarks and archaeology. The paper reviews the role of the forensic dentist
with respect to non-accidental injury to children, analysis of bite marks, and
archaeological investigations. Another review on this subject.
1990 West MH, Barsley RE. Mississippi D
Ass J; 46(4):7, 11-2 First bite mark convictions in Mississippi. Case reports
of bitemark cases in this State.
1990 West MH, Barsley RE, Frair J, Seal
MD. J Forensic Sci; 35(6):1477-85 The use of human skin in the fabrication of
a bite mark template: two case reports. In this article skin was used as a
template for the reproduction of a bite. In one case the victim's skin was
used; in the other, the skin of a anatomically similar person was used. The
use of inked dental casts, photography, and transparent overlays significantly
reduced the errors common to analysis of bite marks in these highly curved
areas. Novel technique although not well accepted.
1990 Pierce LJ, Strickland DJ, Smith ES Am
J Forensic Med Pathol; 11(2):171-7 The case of Ohio v. Robinson. An 1870 bite
mark case. This trial represents an early and perhaps the first attempt to
admit bite-mark evidence in a court of law in the United States. First case -
historical value only.
1990 Barsley RE, West MH, Fair JA. Am J
Forensic Med Pathol; 11(4):300-8 Forensic photography. Ultraviolet imaging of
wounds on skin. This article discusses the photographic techniques involved in
reflective and fluorescent UVL. Documentation of skin wounds via still
photography and dynamic video photographic techniques, which utilise various
methods of UV illumination, are covered. The use of advanced photographic
techniques has been questioned in courts.
1991 Dailey JC. J Forensic Sci;
36(2):565-70 A practical technique for the fabrication of transparent bite
mark overlays. A quick, inexpensive, and accurate technique for generating
transparent overlays, using office photocopy machines, for use in bite mark
case analysis is presented. Photocopy technique was the 1st attempt to produce
an objective overlay with precision.
1992 Robinson E, Wentzel J. J Forensic
Sci; 37(1):195-207 Toneline bite mark photography. A high-contrast film
technique previously used primarily in the graphic arts field has been refined
and applied to forensic odontology.
1993 Mailis NP. J Forensic Odont;
11(1):31-3 Bitemarks in forensic dental practice: the Russian experience.
Cases from Russia are described.
1993 Figgener L. J Forensic Odont;
11(2):71-5 Points of contact between quality issues and forensic aspects.
Issues related to jurisprudence.
1994 Ligthelm AJ, van Niekerk PJ J
Forensic Odont; 12(2):23-9 Comparative review of bitemark cases from Pretoria,
South Africa. The purpose of this study was to record the experiences with
bitemark cases presented to forensic odontologists at the University of
Pretoria from 83-93 and to compare them with trends and findings elsewhere.
Some details on anatomical locations may be useful.
1994 Wood RE, Miller PA, Blenkinsop BR. J
Forensic Odont; 12(2):30-6 Image editing and computer assisted bitemark
analysis: a case report. Three different approaches for comparison with the
bitemark photograph were utilized: comparison with radiographs of
amalgam-filled impressions of dental casts, a transparent overlay technique
and comparison with photographs of a simulated bitemark inked onto the hand of
a volunteer.
1994 Thompson IO, Phillips VM. J Forensic
Odont; 12(2):37-40 A bitemark case with a twist. This is a case report in
which the bite patterns of two suspects were compared to a bitemark on the
breast of a murder victim. Each suspect had sufficient concordant features to
have been found guilty of producing the bitemark. The irony in this case is
that the bitemark was not inflicted by the murderer.
1994 Aboshi H, Taylor JA, Takei T, Brown
KA. J Forensic Odont; 12(2):41-4 Comparison of bitemarks in foodstuffs by
computer imaging: a case report. Marks in cake discovered at a crime scene
were examined and compared with the teeth of a suspect arsonist. The
comparison was made by computer imaging analysis and a remarkable similarity
in arch shape was observed.
1994 Jessee SA Paediatric Dentistry;
16(5):336-9 Recognition of bite marks in child abuse cases. Health
professionals must be attentive to any and all signs of child maltreatment.
Bite marks are one of several visual expressions of active child abuse.
Another paper describing this important issue.
1994 Barry LA Bull Hist Dent; 42(1):21-7
Bite mark evidence collection in the United States. A legal historical review.
Better reviews exist, see above.
1994 Nuckles DB, Herschaft EE, Whatmough
LN. General Dentistry. 42(3):210-4 Forensic odontology in solving crimes:
dental techniques and bite-mark evidence.
This article is misplaced and can be found after the 95 Rothwell review. Usual
review of technique and legal issues.
1995 Nambiar P, Bridges TE, Brown KA. J
Forensic Odont; 13(2):18-25 Quantitative forensic evaluation of bite marks
with the aid of a shape analysis computer program: Part 1; The development of
"SCIP" and the similarity index. In this study, an interactive shape
analysis computer program ("SCIP"-Shape Comparison Interactive
Program) has been employed in an attempt to derive experimentally a
quantitative comparison, in the form of a Similarity Index (S.I.), between the
"offender's" teeth and the bite marks produced on a standard flat
wax form.
1995 Nambiar P, Bridges TE, Brown KA. J
Forensic Odont; 13(2):26-32 Quantitative forensic evaluation of bite marks
with the aid of a shape analysis computer program: Part 2; "SCIP"
and bite marks in skin and foodstuffs. In this study, "SCIP" was
employed in an attempt to quantify the comparison, in the form of the
Similarity Index (S.I.), between the "offender's" teeth and the bite
marks produced on foodstuffs and on human skin, under experimental conditions.
1995 Free EW, Brown KA. J Forensic Odont;
13(2):33-5 A bitemark and a fracture? Case presents an interesting problem of
interpretation of odontological evidence relevant to the identification of the
offender, and raises issues concerning proper procedures for the utilisation
of expertise in forensic odontology. First case in Dutch law.
1995 Jakobsen J, Holmen L, Fredebo L,
Sejrsen B. J Forensic Odont; (13)2:36-40 Scanning electron microscopy, a
useful tool in forensic dental work. Another description of the use of SEM in
bitemarks, presents four example cases.
1995 Rothwell BR. JADA; 126(2):223-32 Bite marks in forensic dentistry: a review of legal, scientific issues. This article explores the legal and scientific basis of bite mark evidence.
1996 Naru AS, Dykes E. Science &
Justice. 36(1):47-50 The use of a digital imaging technique to aid bite mark
analysis. Describes the use of a computer based overlay technique and uses a
case example to illustrate the method.
1996 Vale GL. J Cal Dent Assoc;
24(5):29-34 Dentistry, bite marks and the investigation of crime. Another
review of the bitemark science - includes case examples
1996 Aksu MN, Gobetti JP. Am J Forensic
Med Pathol; 17(2):136-40 The past and present legal weight of bite marks as
evidence. Legal review. This paper was followed by a letter from Ann
Norrlander who criticised many of the points. Better legal reviews available.
1997 Naru AS, Dykes E. Science &
Justice; 37(4):251-8 Digital image cross-correlation technique for bite mark
investigations. Describes the production of a complex computer program for
assessing bitemarks. Describes a series of experiments to validate the system.
1997 Williams RG, Porter BE. J Oklahoma
Dent Assoc; 88(2):29-30 Forensic dentistry. Documentation of bite-mark
evidence using multiple computer-assisted techniques. Describes a computer
technique - however describes using a pencil to highlight the incisal edges
prior to scanning - subjective?
1998 Sweet D, Parhar M, Wood RE. J
Forensic Sci; 43(5):1050-5 Computer-based production of bite mark comparison
overlays. This paper describes this technique to enable the odontologist to
produce high-quality, accurate comparison overlays without subjective input.
1998 Wright FD. J Forensic Sci;
43(4):881-7 Photography in bite mark and patterned injury documentation. Part
2: A case study. The evidence recovered at each photography session is
discussed and photographs are presented for review. Suggestions concerning the
need for more research are presented.
1998 Sweet D, Bowers CM. J Forensic Sci;
43(2):362-7 Accuracy of bite mark overlays: a comparison of five common
methods to produce exemplars from a suspect's dentition. Five common overlay
production methods were compared using digital images of dental study casts as
a reference standard.
1998 Atkinson SA. Med, Sci & Law;
38(1):34-41 A qualitative and quantitative survey of forensic odontologists in
England and Wales, 1994. Forty forensic odontologists in England and Wales, as
listed for the British Association for Forensic Odontology in Spring 94, were
surveyed by post. Interesting paper with some useful statistics.
1998 Whittaker DK, Brickley MR, Evans L. Forensic Sci Int; 92(1):11-20 A comparison of the ability of experts and non-experts to differentiate between adult and child human bite marks using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis EMP Fifty colour prints of human bite marks were sent to 109 observers who were asked to decide using a six point rating scale, whether the marks had been produced by the teeth of an adult or a child. Interesting results found.
1999-2001 articles here