Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
Chapter 2: Literature review
Trends in forensic anthropological identification
Forensic anthropology is a branch of physical anthropology that deals with skeletonised human remains in a forensic context. More specifically, “it is the scientific discipline that focuses on the life, the death, and the postlife history of a specific individual, as reflected primarily in their skeletal remains and the physical and forensic context in which they are emplaced” (27). The use of skeletal biology in medico-legal investigations began in the 19th century. Thomas Dwight was dubbed the father of forensic anthropology, along with H. H. Wilder, Jeffries Wyman and Oliver Wendell Holmes. These four men are claimed to have established the field of forensic anthropology as it is known today. Their training was in a mixture of anatomy and zoology. Two of the men were involved in murder trials where they testified, giving evidence in court based on their “qualifications” (28).
It is however thought that George Dorsey (1868 – 1931) was the first fully qualified forensic anthropologist. He acquired his PhD in anthropology in 1896 and was only the second man to receive a PhD qualification in anthropology. Later in his career, Dorsey published on the implications of the human skeleton in medico-legal investigations and was also called as an expert witness (even though he had had no formal osteological training) in the famous Luetgert murder trial. Mr Adolph Luetgert owned a sausage factory and was having marital difficulties with his wife Louisa. His wife disappeared under suspicious circumstances, and only 6 days later did Mr. Luetgert report his wife missing. The Police were suspicious of Mr. Luetgert and his sausage factory- a bad smelling vat was found which supposedly contained potash, fat, tallow and bone scrapes, to make soap to clean the factory. When investigated further, bone fragments, two rings (one a gold wedding ring with the letters ‘L L’ engraved on the inside) and a corset stay were found in the vat. After two trials, Mr. Adolph Luetgert was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison. The chain of custody was heavily debated as it was thought that what was found was not handled correctly. Dorsey was the first anthropologist to testify in an American criminal trial, although his testimonies were questionable and controversial, which ultimately resulted in him leaving his academic appointments and his position at a museum (28).
Early in the twentieth century, researchers such as Ales Hrdlička were consulting on forensic cases, although the forensic work was not their primary interest. With the onset of World War II, the need for guidelines on human identification became the task of the anatomists, the most prominent of the time being T. Wingate Todd, a professor at Western Reserve University Medical School, who made significant contributions with skeletal age markers. Wilton Marion Krogman was prominent in the twentieth century in the development of physical anthropology and is also the very first author of a textbook in physical anthropology, published in 1962 (28). There was significant development and expansion of the field in the 1960’s, resulting in the formation of a separate section within the American Academy of Forensic Sciences in 1971. The Physical Anthropology section of the academy came about in 1972. In 1977, the American Board of Forensic Anthropology was created under the Physical Anthropology section of the Academy (28, 29).
The investigation of human rights brought a new facet to the field. A violent dictatorship that began in Argentina in 1976 finally came to an end in 1983. During the time that the dictatorship continued in Argentina, many people went missing. Anthropologist Clyde Snow travelled to Argentina to consult and assist in the recovery of the missing or disappeared people. Unmarked graves were being investigated, but with the lack of experience evident, Snow realised that training was necessary to acquire forensic evidence from these graves. A small group of students was trained by Snow, which ultimately resulted in the formation of the Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team in 1984. This team became involved in the exhumation of graves and the documentation of human rights abuses and they are still continuing their work today (28-30). Similar situations existed in other countries at the same time as Argentina. Countries such as Uraguay, Bolivia, Chile and Boznia- Herzegovina were similarly affected by violent dictatorships resulting in human rights abuses that were investigated after the dictatorships ended uncovering mass graves where individuals needed identification (31). Solla et al.(32), has published on cases were individuals went missing during the dictatorial era in Uraguay, were the bodies were finally identified through the use of anthropological analysis including skull-photo superimposition and DNA comparison (31, 32).
In the last decade of the twentieth century, a system of Mortuary Operational Response Teams (DMORTS) was established in the USA, which includes practising forensic anthropologists. The DMORT system falls under the National Disaster Medical System (NDMS). The DMORT teams include specialities such as Anthropologists, Pathologists, Odontologists and X-ray specialists, to name a few. The 10 DMORT teams have been in operation in American National disasters involving flooding, bombing, air disasters and hurricanes. In the aftermath of the World Trade Centre Disaster in 2001, all 10 teams were deployed simultaneously for the first time (28).
Forensic anthropology is also becoming an increasingly popular field of specialisation in South Africa. With the disturbing statistics on violent crime and death in the country, the need for this speciality is becoming ever more important. The discovery of deceased human bodies and skeletonised remains is a frequent occurrence in South Africa, further accentuating the need for such a discipline. Not all cases involve skeletal material. Regularly, cases present where the body is found and the identity of the individual is never determined. In Gauteng alone, more than 2000 bodies are buried annually where the identity of the individual was never established. This has led to an increase in research in the field of Forensic Anthropology, which includes developing identification standards for South African populations as well as alternative methods of identification. Research in Forensic Anthropology in South Africa has been carried out since the 1940’s and includes researchers such as Washburn, DeVilliers, Lundy and Feldsman, Kieser, Loth, Henneberg, Işcan and Steyn (4, 5, 29, 33-35) as well as Bidmos and Asala (36, 37) and Dayal (38) and L’Abbe (39) who is also the first South African diplomat of the American Board of Forensic Anthropologists (ABFA).
Cattaneo (40) explains that while anthropologists primarily deal with human skeletal remains, what is often requested is at the broadest end of the spectrum of the anthropological field, including human physiognomy. The field is developing dramatically and becoming multidisciplinary, with collaborative research with other specialists taking place. The need for the development of standards in facial reconstruction and identification is further highlighted because identification using methods such as skull-photo superimposition are becoming more and more widely used across the world (40). This means that methods used need to be standardised so that they are used consistently around the world.
The history of craniofacial identification and photographic superimposition
As early as 1883, it was realised that superimposition techniques could lead to identification by carrying out a comparison of the skull with a photograph of the deceased. By studying the skull, a forensic scientist is able to make deductions about the appearance of the face of the deceased (41). Scientists such as Welcker (1883), His (1895), Schaaffhausen (1875, 1883) and von Froriep (1913) played major roles in craniofacial identification. Their studies involved analyses of soft tissue thickness, and the relationship that exists between the soft tissue of the face and the skull (41, 42). Therefore the literature on facial reconstruction and skull-photo superimposition often overlap because these techniques are so closely related and very similar.
In the past, portraits, busts and death masks were used in order to establish the identity of an individual. However, with the advent of photography, many new possibilities for identification arose. A French criminologist, Alphonse Bertillon (April 24, 1853 – February 13, 1914), attempted to develop a method which made use of “a system of description and characterisation” (41) which could be used with photographs for identification and which he called “Bertillonage”. The Bertillonage method was also later adapted and improved (Stadmuller, 1932 adapting Welckers method to be used with Bertillonage (41)) by enlarging the photographs to be used in the analysis. Attempts were then made to match the photographs with photographs of the skull by using the same focal length at a standard distance, as was used in the Bertillonage method (41, 43).
Bertillon was a French police officer (criminalist) and biometrics researcher who developed a system of description and classification through the use of anthropometry and in so doing, created an identification system based on physical measurements which he took of the head and body. The measurements were used to develop a system of identification that would apply to one person only and would thus be specific to that individual. The system was ultimately found to be inconsistent, because often the measurements were being taken by different police officers who would take their measurements differently. It was also established that measurements taken of individuals with similar phenotypes, such as identical twins, would be identified as a single individual. The principle on which this system of measurements for identification purposes was based was inherently flawed because the methodologies used were subjective and not standardised and therefore other methods of identification were investigated.
When the practice of fingerprinting came into being in 1892, the use of the Bertillon method came to an end and fingerprints were subsequently used for personal identification. Although the Bertillonage method was discredited, Bertillon made other contributions to forensic techniques such as document examination and using galvanoplastics to preserve footprints and ballistics.
There were technical problems with the early methods of skull-photo superimposition-the most important being problems with the photography. When a photograph is available, the skull has to be placed in the same orientation as in the picture. If enlargements to life size had to be made, a point of reference was needed in the photograph to accurately apply this technique. In 1935, Brash and Smith carried out a successful photographic superimposition in the famous Ruxton murder case. Buck Ruxton, a medical practitioner had murdered his wife and her maid and had gone to considerable lengths to prevent the identification of their remains by removing their eyes, teeth and large portions of skin from their faces (44). A photograph of the deceased (Mrs. Ruxton) was available and within the photograph a point of reference could be used in order to successfully enlarge the photograph and carry out the superimposition (7, 41, 44, 45). The superimposition process involved overlaying a negative of the skull over a photograph of Mrs Ruxton in life. The skull and photograph had be scaled to the correct size and orientated so that facial traits were accurately aligned. In the photograph, Mrs. Ruxton wore a diamond tiara which was used as the point of reference for the scaling of the images (42). Outline drawings were made of the skull and face in the photograph and then superimposed.
Another famous case receiving much attention was the Dobkin case which occurred in London in 1942. Skeletonised remains were found in the cellar of a previously bombed Baptist Church. There was a great deal of speculation about the remains possibly being those of a victim of a German blitz raid. However, pathologist Keith Simpson analysed the remains and suggested that the remains could possibly belong to a lady by the name of Rachel Dobkin who had been reported missing for 15 months. Skull-photo superimposition was carried out using an ante mortem photograph of Rachel Dobkin and very compelling similarities were found. Rachel Dobkin’s husband was subsequently found guilty of her murder and the truth was discovered: Mr Dobkin had murdered his wife and placed her remains in the cellar of the bombed church to deceive authorities (42).
There was also an unusual case that occurred in Yugoslavia in 1976 where a scientist was tasked with identifying skeletal remains. The identification of these remains was carried out for religious purposes to positively identify a nun who had been buried in a communal grave. A series of superimpositions were carried out including six skulls from the grave, where the correct skull and remains were selected. Corroborative evidence aided further in the positive identification: the remains showed evidence of lesions on the spine which corresponded to the medical history of the nun (44).
The problem that was noted with the older methods was that if life sized photographs were not used for the superimposition, the result was that one skull may match photographs of different people (3). Gruner and Reinhard cited by Gruner (41) attempted to overcome these problems. They devised a method which used lines, drawings and marking points, taking into account the soft tissue thicknesses, to position a skull in the same orientation as in a photograph. This was done without having to determine the natural size, enlarging or calculating angulations, rotations or tilting. Gruner and Reinhard’s method was modified and adapted by Helmer and Gruner (46, 47) to include the use of video superimposition equipment. This method was also modified by Leopold in 1978, which made use of a large format camera and a projection screen between the skull and the camera (41).
The first case study in South Africa on skull-photo superimposition was published in 1986 (48). A skeleton including the skull with mandible was found in a shallow grave along with a firearm and ammunition. Potential identifying documentation in the form of a South African identity document was found with the remains. Although the identity document was found in close relation to the remains, one cannot assume that it belonged to the individual without proof. The identity document photograph, which was passport sized, contained an unsmiling face of an individual taken slightly from the left (48). The method of superimposition included making a life sized black and white print of the photograph. The area of the eyes in the orbits of the skull were faded or “whited out” so as not to produce a shadow effect in the print. The skull was then photographed at six different angles onto colour transparency film to match angles seen in the photograph. An overhead projector with a zoom lens was then placed at a right angle to the print, which was fixed to a vertical surface, at a distance so that the skull was projected as a life sized image. All six transparencies were projected individually onto the fixed vertical image so that the best match of morphological features between the transparency and image was obtained (48).
The results obtained from this case study indicated that the skeletal remains were those of the individual in the identity document photograph, but the authors did state that the identification was not indisputable, but rather “consistent with, but equivocal” (48).
Modernised techniques were developed and older techniques modified, with the advance of video monitors and video animation compositors. Clyde Snow was the first American scientist to make use of video cameras for photograph superimposition (24, 41, 42, 46, 47). This method included two video cameras that took pictures of the skull and the photograph independently. The photographs were then sent to a video animation compositor or mixer and superimposed over one another on monitors. The intensity of the picture could be varied and strict control of the proportions was achieved (41).
Abstract
Abstrak
Acknowledgments
Dedication
Chapter 1. Introduction
1.1.General
1.2. Aims and objectives of the study
1.3. Hypothesis
1.4 Importance of the study
Chapter 2. Literature review
2.1. Trends in Forensic Anthropological identification
2.2. The history of craniofacial identification and photographic superimposition
2.3. Skull-photo superimposition: How the technique is carried out in the United States vs. South Africa
2.4. The accuracy of skull-photo superimposition
Chapter 3. Materials and methods
3.1. Introduction
3.2. Materials
3.3. Methods
3.4. Repeatability study
3.5. Statistical analysis
Chapter 4. Results
4.1. Stage 1
4.2. Stage 2
4.3. Stage 3
4.4. Comparison of stage 2 and stage 3 results
4.5. The overall success of using stage 2 and stage 3 combined
4.6. Repeatability study
4.7. Difficulties experienced with the results
Chapter 5. Discussion
5.1. Summary of results
5.2. Limitations of the study
5.2.1. Photography
5.2.2. The use of landmarks in skull-photo superimposition
5.2.3. The scanned images of the skulls
5.2.4. The manual method and the new 3-dimensional method: a comparison
5.2.5. The use of edentulous skulls
5.3. Skull-photo superimposition: transferability of the technique
5.4. Skull-photo superimposition: Inclusion versus exclusion and the legal ramifications thereof
5.4.1. Inclusion versus exclusion
5.4.2. The legal ramifications of skull-photo superimposition
5.5. Future recommendations for the use of skull-photo superimposition in South Africa
Chapter 6. Conclusion
References
Appendix
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT
