Science in Crime Detection Author- Dr. Anil Aggrawal Click on the topic to access. More articles will be added shortly ! When did the murder take place ? Who handled the gun ? Did the communists kill the czar ? Was she actually raped ? What do the bite marks tell us ? The Vital evidence ? When the body turns Blue ! When the body turns into Wax ! Testing for Homosexuality What do the Fingerprints tell us ? What do the Bones tell us ? Examining the Scene of Crime How do we recognize a person from his skull ? Contusions - The vital evidence Speech spectograms catch criminals Murder by electricity Deaths due to accidents Use of infrared photography in forensic science Deaths in police custody Defence Wounds What do the abrasions tell us ? Death by Air injection Knowing about car headlights Clues from Putrefaction Death by Strangulation Forgery of Cheques Deaths from hanging Drowning Deaths An unusual case of skull fracture An unusual case of death IMPORTANT NOTE: THIS MATERIAL IS COPYRIGHTED BY THE AUTHOR AND MAY NOT BE REPOSTED, REPRINTED OR OTHERWISE USED IN ANY MANNER WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THE AUTHOR.

SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-38 CRIMES ALWAYS SPEAK Among the seven leading questions in the science of criminology, one important is ‘who’—that is, who is the murder victim. This question of ‘who’ arises in case of such dead bodies that are badly torn and mutilated. We know how murderers pack disfigured and even hacked dead bodies in boxes or bags and throw them at distant or deserted places, as to render the identification near impossible. There is another situation too in which the question of ‘who’ (identification) arises. When a flying aircraft crashes, usually not only all those on board—crew and passengers—get killed, but also their burnt or half-burnt bodies are distorted beyond recognition; thus a majority of these bodies are rendered as unidentifiable. The question in such tragic situation arises: ‘Who is who among the heap of dead bodies and their torn parts?’ It can be asked in such a context: What is the need of identifying the dead bodies, when the dead are dead and it is not a case of mass murder but one of mass death due to accident? This question ‘who’ arises in such cases mainly because the insurance companies, who have to pay huge claims to the kith and kin of the dead, refuse to pay till the fact is fully established that the particular insured person was really travelling by the ill-fated plane and had actually died in the accident. For the purpose, the insurers insist on death certificates issued by competent doctors. Now how can it be determined which body in a heap of 60–70 or more belongs to a particular person? How much havoc, loss of life and disfiguring of remnants of the killed people causes can be gauged by this example: when a Boeing 707 was flying at high level, it was struck by lightning, as a result of which it was changed into bits before it fell down. All the 81 persons on board died as a result. The parts of the plane and bodies of the killed or their parts and limbs got scattered over an area a mile in diameter. The bodies of almost all the passengers and crew members had been torn in bits and parts. To identify the dead among the heap of limbs and parts, forensic experts use a special system for identification. Wherever the parts and bits of human bodies like hands, feet, arms, face, fingers, legs or their parts, etc., are found, these are immediately tagged and then stored in safety. Each tag bears a number. The numbers begin from figure ‘one’. Thus every recovered part of human anatomy gets a number. Before delivering a part of a limb for testing, its number is inscribed on a small board which is planted at the particular spot where the limb or part of a limb was recovered. This is done in view of the possibility that if the head of a dead passenger is found at one place, his torso or other limbs may be found at different places quite apart from each other. It is important to record here that it is not necessary that all the body parts of the annihilated persons of the plane will fall along the ground. The way the wrecked plane falls down af- ‘G~’) free the man until his wife submits to the officer, how can one prove rape if she does so? No person in the right mind would imagine that such an act was not rape, yet the law would not recognise it so before 1983. The women had to prove she had not consented. The rapist was considered innocent unless proved otherwise. The change in rape laws in 1983 improved the situation to a great extent. Among other things, the punishment for rape was made more severe. Before, the punishment prescribed under Section 376 of the IPC provided for a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, but there was no minimum limit. Thus, in theory, a rapist could get away with a sentence of, say, just one month. In 1983, although the legislature failed to increase the maximum sentence to capital punishment, as was vehemently demanded by women’s organisations, it prescribed a minimum sentence of seven years’ imprisonment. Every rapist, on being found guilty thereafter, had to undergo a minimum imprisonment of seven years. Besides, an important provision—Section 376(2)—was added to the IPC. This section introduced the concept of some special kinds of rape and prescribed a minimum of ten years for these cases. Furthermore, in such cases, the imprisonment had to be of a rigorous nature only. These included rape by a police officer within the premises of a police station; rape by a public servant of his junior while taking advantage of his official position; rape by an official in a jail or remand home of an inmate; rape by someone on the staff of a hospital of a woman in the hospital; rape of a pregnant woman; rape of a girl under 12 years of age; and gang rape. Rape by persons who are in a position of authority, e.g. police officers, jail wardens, hospital staff, etc., is generally termed custodial rape. Gang rape is a situation when a woman is raped by one or more than one person from amongst a group of persons acting in furtherance of their common intention. The important thing is that in such situations each of the persons within the group will be deemed to have raped the woman even if each one of them did not actually have sexual intercourse with her. Thus, if five men catch hold of a woman and only one ravishes her in order to, for instance, humiliate her husband because of some old vendetta, all the five men will be imprisoned for a minimum of ten years. It is very difficult for the victim to prove absence of consent, especially in cases of custodial rape, so a special section was added to the Indian Evidence Act (IEA). According to the new provision—Section 114A of the IEA— in cases of custodial rape, gang rape and rape of a pregnant woman, if the victim states in court that she did not consent, then the court shall presume that she did not consent and the burden of proving consent shall shift to the accused. This was a major reform in the law. The legislature did not stop at this. There can be cases when a person in authority can get a woman to have intercourse with him “willingly” by offering handsome rewards in return. A superintendent of a jail can offer better living conditions to a woman prisoner if she “willingly” submits to him. Such cases will not amount to rape; nevertheless, they do signify abuse of official position. For such cases, four special provisions—376A, 376B, 376C and 376D—were added to the IPC and a punishment of five years’ imprisonment provided. In effect, if a person in authority has had sexual intercourse with a woman in his custody, he will firstly have to prove that the woman in question had consented. If he can’t prove this, he will be guilty of custodial rape and shall have to undergo a minimum rigorous imprisonment of ten years. Secondly, even if he is able to prove that the woman did consent, he may not be charged with custodial rape, yet he can be imprisoned for five years under Sections 376B, 376C and 376D. It would seem that enough changes have been made in the rape laws to bring it on par with that of Western countries. However, there are still some glaring deficiencies. For one thing, the law does not provide for separate and speedy trials for heinous crimes such as child rape. The definition of rape too is finite restrictive. For raping a woman, penile penetration must be proved. One can ravish a woman equally or much more violently by shoving, for example, an iron rod into her private parts. Yet such a man would not be held guilty of rape. Several such cases have indeed come to light. But the worst thing is the continued existence of Section 155(4) of the IEA, which provides that when a man is prosecuted for rape and if it is shown that the woman in question is of immoral character, then her evidence will not be taken into account. It may be argued that this provision offers protection to the accused against false allegations of a woman whose character is suspect. Yet consider Section 54 of the same Act. Among other things, it says that in cases of rape, the fact that the accused person is a bad character is irrelevant. In effect, for the purpose of proving that a man did rape the prosecutrix, it is irrelevant to show that he has a bad character. If the bad character of the prosecutrix is considered in cases of rape, why not the bad character of the accused too? In fact, it can be argued that these provisions are unconstitutional as they contravene the equality clause under Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. Is it not highly unfair to apply different standards to the accused and the complainant only in rape cases? (To protect the identity of the individuals, their names, as well as the various dates of occurrence have been changed)

SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-33 DOWRY D EAT HS On 23 April 1993, 25 year old newly married Namita died in a Faridabad hospital due to burn injuries sustained in her home. She had received burn injuries on 21 January of that year. For almost 2 months she struggled bravely with her burn injuries, but ultimately infection supervened and she had to succumb to her injuries. During her illness, she gave a statement to the magistrate to the effect that her in-laws frequently used to beat her for bringing insufficient dowry. This put her husband and parents-in-law in great trouble. To understand the case fully, let us begin at the beginning. Namita was married to Vinod, a 26 year old boy on 13 January 1992. At the time of marriage it was decided that Rs 1 lakh will be spent on marriage. Namita's father was a poor man, yet he somehow arranged for the money on loan, and paid the dowry as stipulated. However just 2 weeks before marriage, Vinod attended the marriage of one of his friends Shyam. Shyam was the son of a rich businessman, and he was getting married to an equally rich person's daughter. He got lavish presents in his marriage from his wife's side, including a brand new Maruti car. This turned Vinod's mind topsy-turvy. He also began dreaming of getting a car in his marriage. His parents Gyan Ram and Somwati who also attended the marriage also began having the same dreams. They forgot that their own social status was far below that of Shyam and his family. This caused a major rift between Vinod's and Namita's family even before the marriage. Although a dowry of Rs 1 lakh had been stipulated at the time of marriage, the parents of Vinod suddenly changed their stance and began demanding for more dowry, which now included a Maruti car as well. Namita's father told that he could not arrange for such a heavy sum, but his pleas fell on deaf ears. Actually Namita's father should have broken the marriage there and then, but he was a socially conscious individual and did not want to earn a bad name in the society. The marriage cards had been distributed to all the relatives, and if the marriage got cancelled now, it would a very bad name to the family. So he agreed to give a Maruti car as soon as possible after the marriage. But he had no idea, how he was going to arrange for a car. He was already up to his neck in debt. But since he had to marry his daughter, he agreed to give whatever his son-in-law desired. Needless to say, just after marriage, trouble started for Namita. In her in-law's house, there were 3 individuals, her husband Vinod, and his parents. She served all of them with full zeal and affection, yet she failed to win their hearts. The reason was that there eyes were set on a new Maruti car. Whenever Vinod saw his friend Shyam roaming around with his wife in the new Maruti car, his heart would miss a beat. He would also start dreaming about a similar car. He would come home, ask his wife when her father was going to give him a car, and on not getting a satisfactory answer beat her badly. His parents also frequently joined in the beating. On Deepawali of the previous year (1992), the matters assumed a very serious pitch. It had been told to Namita's father that he should positively arrange for a car by the Deepawali, which they wanted as a present for the first Deepawali after the wedding. But her father could only arrange for a new scooter and not the new car. This enraged all the three members of her in-law's house, her husband Vinod, her father-in-law, Gyan Ram, and her mother-in-law Somwati. They began openly cursing Namita's father, even in her presence. This made her very sad. She discussed about this matter with her husband Vinod too, but he was also mad after the car, so he also refused to listen to her. Meanwhile an interesting development had occurred. Namita's parents saw another girl whose parents promised to give a car to anyone who would marry their daughter. This made them mad with greed, and they somehow decided to do away with her. They had come to know, that in his lifetime, Namita's father would never be able to give them a car, and it was no use asking for the car again and again. On the other hand if they did away with Namita, and married their son to that other girl, they could get the car very easily. They told about this plan to Vinod, who also agreed to participate in the plan. On 21 January, Namita had gone to fetch milk in the morning, when the three hatched a devilish plan to do away with her. When she came back, they began beating her badly. Gyan Ram brought a wooden cane from somewhere and hit her hardly on the legs. The idea was to make her immobile so she could not run away for help. This broke the bone of her left leg, and she began limping. Then Somwati brought a can of kerosene and doused her sari with it. Vinod lighted a match and set her sari on fire. The fire at once engulfed Namita. Both her legs were severely burnt. The poor girl couldn't even run as her left leg had been broken by Gyan Ram. Now all the three began shouting that Namita had fallen in a tub of hot water and had sustained scalds. The neighbors collected in no time to Vinod's house. They saw a horrible scene there. Namita's sari had burnt completely and she was lying naked on the floor crying and sobbing with pain. The males were so ashamed that they immediately put a blanket over her. With the help of some females, they admitted Namita to the nearest hospital. I was contacted by the police when Namita was in the hospital and had given the statement that she had been beaten and burnt by her husband and in-laws. The in-law's story of course was that they were innocent. According to them, she had accidentally fallen in a tub of boiling water which was lying in the bathroom for taking bath. Since it was winter season, everyone in the household took bath with hot water. The boiling tub was lying there in the bathroom. Everyone used to take little water from there in a separate bucket, and mix cold water in it to his liking, so that the water became less warm and to the liking of each one concerned. According to them, the mistake that Namita did was to think that this water was ready for bath. So she took off her sari and entered the tub, which caused scalds on her legs. As for the fracture of her leg, they said, that on having got burnt, she jumped out of the bath and began running. In the way she slipped and must have sustained the fracture. On the face of it, their story seemed very plausible. It certainly accounted not only for all the injuries sustained by Namita, but even for why she was found naked in the verandah by the neighbors. But they forgot that science could catch their lies very easily. I saw Namita when she was in the hospital. I had requested the investigating police officer to take me there. What I saw was very scary. The bone of her left leg (technically known as Tibia) was broken. The doctors were trying to fix the fracture by a procedure known as external fixation (Please reproduce fig 3.25 (a) on page 41 here). When I looked at the underside of her legs, I was horrified to see how badly they were burnt (Please reproduce fig 3.25 (b) on page 41 here). She was in such a state of shock that she could not even pass the urine, and the doctors had to pass a tube through her genitals to make her pass urine. In short, she was in a really bad shape. But what I could immediately make out was that her burns were not scalds as claimed by her in-laws. Scalds are caused by boiling water and liquids while burns are caused by flame. If Namita had really received injuries by hot boiling water as claimed by her in-laws, her injuries should have been scalds, and not burns. Scalds have an altogether different appearance than burns. Scalds have blisters while burns do not have any blisters over the area of burns. I did not see any blisters over the burnt area, so I decided that Vinod and his parents' story was wrong. As for the fracture of the leg, it was a very massive fracture, with tibia breaking into 4 different pieces. This was a definite indication that someone had hit her with a hard weapon. By falling she could never have sustained a fracture of the leg. At the most she would suffered a fracture of her hip bone or thigh bone, and even that fracture would have been of quite a simple nature. Such a massive fracture of tibia definitely indicated that she had been beaten. The court accepted my arguments, and gave life imprisonment to all the three culprits. (To protect the identity of the individuals, their names, as well as the various dates of occurrence have been changed).

SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-125 For MARCH 2004 issue SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-125 WHAT IS BIOMETRICS? ‑Dr. Anil Aggrawal We have heard that recently the US is fingerprinting all the incoming travelers. This is in response to the increase threat of terrorism in the USA. Very soon newer technologies will be emerging, whereupon, it won’t be necessary to fingerprint people at all. Similar identification will be done by such things as retina scan, iris scan etc. We will hear the term biometrics a lot during the coming years. But first of all, what is Biometrics ? Well, Biometrics is a way of using technology to identify people by reading the features of parts of their bodies. These parts can be iris, retina, palate, fingerprints, footprints, palm prints – anything that is unique in the human body. As such it is part of a social control system. The basic idea is as old as humanity. People identified others from their tribe by their dress, facial markings and body tattoos. We identify each other by recognizing each other’s faces. But using technology to help recognize people has taken many forms. It began in the 1800s, when the police started taking fingerprints from criminals. Traditional ink fingerprints on paper cards are part of a low-tech information system for identifying individuals and storing information about them. Finger imaging Now new information technology reads fingerprints electronically. You put your finger onto a glass scanner plate like the ones in some supermarkets. The scanner reads your fingerprint and converts it into a digital code. This finger imaging technology is already used a lot in Australia. Woolworths supermarkets use finger scanning to record attendance times of about 100 000 employees. More than 1400 bank ATMs are unlocked by finger scanning the Armaguard representative with a mobile scanner that plugs into the back of the ATM. Finger scanning has some problems. Your fingerprint can be changed by a cut or scar, or worn down by heavy physical work. Then the technology might have trouble recognizing it. The scanner can also build up dirt and grease, making it hard for it to read properly. From this onwards, we will try to give you some home activity too. So you can do this activity at home, and understand the concept much better. The activity for this month is as follows: 1. Using an ink pad and paper collect ten different fingerprints. Select people who have had different work experiences and are of different ages and sex. You can find such people in your neighborhood, and you will be happily surprised that they would be very keen to help you out. Examine the fingerprints carefully. Do this twice to see if you can accurately match people to fingerprints. 2. Try to explain why fingerprinting may not be as accurate as other forms of identification. I may tell you that finger scanning is being used in a number of other applications today. Now we have smart guns, which will only shoot when the owner presses the trigger. The smart guns have sensors on them, which recognize only the fingerprints of the owner, and none else. So now if a dacoit snatches a gun from the police, or for that matter if anyone snatches gun from its owner, and tries to use it, he can’t because the gun will refuse to work. It will recognize the fingerprints only of the owner and not of the snatcher. Finger scanning is just one of the biometric systems already in use. Two other systems read parts of the eye. Retina scan The retina scan bounces a beam of light off the inside of your eyeball and reads patterns of blood vessels there. This also has problems. The reader has to be very close to your eye, and has to be very accurately lined up. Also, some people feel worried about having a beam of light sent into their eye. It is actually very much like you being examined by your eye doctor through an ophthalmoscope. He throws a beam of light at the back of your eye, and studies your retina. Retinas of all people have distinctive blood vessel pattern, and from this one can identify people properly. Iris technology The other part of the eye that can be read is the iris. This is the colored part of the eye, and everyone’s is different. This is easier to read than retina scans because it involves standard video technology, and is recorded from further away, about 22 centimeters away from the actual eye. Iris recognition technology was pioneered by John Daugman, of Cambridge University. It identifies people by the unique patterns of the iris — the colored ring around the pupil of the eye. This new and wonderful technology is fast and non-invasive. This technology will now used at London’s Heathrow Airport too. This new iris recognition technology enables selected passengers to look into a video camera at the passport control checkpoint and have their identity verified within seconds. The Heathrow program will be the first large-scale passenger processing trial in the world to rely entirely on biometric identification. Passengers taking part in the Heathrow trial will be pre-cleared by the U.K. Immigration Service. Passengers will still be required to carry passports but their permission to enter the U.K. will be based on the real-time verification of their iris pattern. The program is aimed at expediting passenger arrivals and reducing operating costs. Up to 2,000 North American citizens — customers of Virgin Atlantic and British Airways who travel frequently to the United Kingdom — will be able to enroll in the trial. The so-called “one-stop” identification process uses iris-recognition technology to identify passengers at all steps in the travel process. Powerful software translates the iris pattern into a frequent-flier number or passport number, and then communicates this with airport and airline computers to simplify check-in, baggage check, boarding and passport control. The system being used at Heathrow is called JetStream Passenger Processing and was developed by McLean, Va.-based EyeTicket Corp., in partnership with Simplifying Passenger Travel, an interest group of the International Air Transport Association. The association, formed to develop “one-stop” passenger processing for airlines and airports, includes more than 40 major airports, airlines, immigration authorities, and technology suppliers around the world, including British Airways, United Kingdom Immigration Service and Virgin Atlantic Airways. EyeTicket demonstrated the system at the International Air Transport Association’s World Air Transport Summit in Madrid some months back. After this demonstration, Thomas Windmuller, director of Simplifying Passenger Travel, said in a statement, “I expect we will see other trials launched at major airports throughout the world.” This technology can be used in a number of other applications as well, as can be seen in the accompanying photograph. Here a person is opening a lock by looking at it. The lock recognizes only the eye patterns of the owner, and will only open when the owner looks at it. No fear of lost keys etc! Just imagine, how convenient it can be. Other biometric systems Other biometric systems already being used include: measuring the geometry of your hand video recognition of your face voice recognition. These all have disadvantages: hand shapes can change or be affected by an accident people with similar faces can be mixed up people can change how they look people’s voices can change if they’re sick or upset limitations of the technology. One has to develop very complicated software to be able to do all this. Animal biometrics Biometrics hasn’t just been used to identify people. Other animals have things about their bodies that are unique as well. Many animals have noses that have slightly different patterns on them, just like people have different fingerprints. Sometimes people use things like animal nose prints to identify individual animals. Nose printing In the USA pedigree show dogs are nose printed to make sure there’s no pre-show switching. In Africa conservationists trying to help save the gorillas use nose prints to identify each gorilla, and zoos sometimes use nose prints to identify some of their animals. In some parts of the world livestock are nose printed. In Texas show lambs are nose printed. In Japan nose prints are used to identify cows. Cows cost a lot of money in Japan. To make sure you get what you paid for, each top quality cow comes with a set of papers that includes a nose print. This also helps make a positive identification in case a cow is stolen. This information about Japanese cow nose prints may appear amazing to you, but it is true, and this is a good example of biometrics. More and more, biometrics is being used to identify animals. As well as biometrics, genetic testing is starting to be used to identify animals. There is an activity involved here too. If you have a dog, try to take his nose prints. Ensure you use non-toxic ink and gain the permission and supervision of the owner (if you do not have a dog). Let me know on how easy or hard it was for you to differentiate the dogs. Genetic ID Genetic identification involves testing a person’s or animal’s DNA. Everyone has their own unique genetic blueprint. Genetic technology now lets people read the DNA of a person and positively identify them. Hence genetic identification is part of a control system. DNA testing is used for many purposes. It can be used to: find out who is the biological father of a child help identify human remains, like an unidentified body. It is often used for criminal investigations. Wildlife conservation Genetic identification can be used to help with wildlife conservation. For example, researchers use genetic identification to identify humpback whales. In the past, they took photos of the tail of each whale as it swam past. Each whale was identified by the shape of the tail and its markings. But this method was not always accurate. Now researchers in Byron Bay pick up from the water hundreds of tiny flakes of skin that naturally fall off when the whales surface or slap their tails. They analyze the flakes and read each whale’s unique DNA. Now they can keep track of exactly which whales are on the move, where they go, how long they live and so on. The most basic information that can possibly exist about a person is the actual genes that they’re built of, and that make them who they are. One way of looking at this issue is that DNA is the most personal information that there is. Genetic identification is often called genetic tagging, but it is not really tagging. Tagging involves people marking someone or something to identify it. Genetic identification is different. It’s like biometrics, it involves reading something that naturally exists about a person or animal, in this case its DNA. DNA in criminal investigation If someone commits a crime and leaves behind something from their body, it can be analyzed to work out the DNA of that person. What they leave behind might be some hair, blood, saliva or semen. Once the police know the DNA of the person they are looking for, they can test their suspects. When they find someone whose DNA is exactly the same as the DNA left behind, they know they’ve got the person they’re after. At the end of 2000 police in Sydney arrested a man for the murder of a young woman who was found dead in Darlinghurst three years before. The police took samples of saliva from the men who lived in a boarding house that backed onto the lane where the woman was found. One of the samples matched, and the police made their arrest. At the moment, the police in New South Wales don’t have the power to force lots of people to have DNA tests. In this case the men gave their samples voluntarily. So why did the person they arrested agree to give a sample? A similar thing happened earlier in 2000, after an elderly woman in the town of Wee Waa was raped. Because it was only a small town, the police asked all the men to volunteer to give a sample for DNA testing. Almost everyone did. The feeling in the town was that if you didn’t want to have the DNA test you must have something to hide. But a few men refused, even though they had nothing to do with the crime. Captions to the figure supplied finger.jpg: This is how the fingers are scanned in order to expedite the fingerprint recognition. eye.jpg: Evan Smith, a senior vice president of EyeTicket Corp., peers into a sensor that serves as a futuristic lock on a door at the Charlotte, N.C., airport. His eye is the key. This article has (1593) words Dr. Anil Aggrawal, M.D. Professor of Forensic Medicine Maulana Azad Medical College New Delhi‑110002

SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-124 For FEBRUARY 2004 issue SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-124 USE OF HAND GRENADES BY TERRORISTS ‑Dr. Anil Aggrawal Terrorism is on the increase, with daily news covering items of cross-border terrorism coming from across the borders. The terrorists are increasingly using grenades. Many readers have asked me what grenades are, how we identify them, how many types of grenades are there, and what injuries are caused by them. In this month’s installment, I hope to clarify some of the mystery surrounding various types of grenades. First introduced in the fifteenth century, grenades waited 300 years to take their name from the Spanish granada, or “pomegranate.” Early grenades were spherical charges (hence the descriptive name) with combustible fuses, the latter prone to detonate prematurely or else burn so long that the enemy had ample time for a return pitch. With the demise of siege warfare, grenades fell out of favor, making their reappearance on both sides of the Russo-Japanese war in 1904. Proliferation in World War I and later years saw grenades evolve into distinct offensive and defensive types, using both explosive and chemical munitions. With a wide variety of models including high-explosive (HE), smoke, incendiary, and riot control, grenades are ideal for use by criminals and terrorists, as well as their opponents. Under existing federal law, grenades are classed as “destructive devices,” and their possession is subject to various statute restrictions. Grenades are generally fired by either time or impact fuses. Time fuses are the most common, based on simplicity, economy, and overall reliability. The typical time fuse employs a spring loaded lever, held in place by a safety pin, and later by the thrower’s hand. As a grenade is thrown, the lever flies away, permitting the striker to hit a percussion cap. This, in turn, ignites a “delay composition,” with detonation of the main charge postponed for a period of seconds while the grenade is in flight. Impact fuses are more delicate and costly, striking a precarious balance between volatility in action and safety in transit. One common type has a small internal cavity, with a steel ball at one end and a fragile striker at the other. Initially restrained by a safety pin - and later by the force of acceleration in flight - the steel ball is thrown forward by sharp deceleration, impacting the striker to produce detonation. High-explosive charges are destructive in themselves, but if you’ve ever watched a “human cannonball” routine, you know the blast itself may not produce fatalities. Some sort of shrapnel is required to ventilate the enemy, with early grenades relying on the break-up of a cast iron casing. Poor results were gained at first, with some grenades disintegrating into dust and others hurling three or four huge chunks of metal, so designers started etching grooves around the casing, inaugurating the famous “pineapple” design. Modern fragmentation grenades normally use a thin steel casing, with tight coils of notched, square-section wire inside, providing a more symmetrical kill zone. A popular frag grenade among terrorists is the Soviet RGD5, also manufactured by the Chinese. Light enough to be thrown over thirty-five to forty yards, the RGD-5 has an average casualty radius of eighteen to twenty-two yards. Chinese versions of this grenade were used against British troops by the Front for the Liberation of South Yemen, and the Viet Gong used them extensively in South Vietnam. The Carlos gang carried several during the 1975 OPEC raid, with one member – Hans-Joachim Klein - hurling an RGD-5 at police before a bullet ricocheted off his submachine gun and drilled through his stomach. America’s standard grenade of the Vietnam era, now considered obsolete, was the spherical M 26. Tipping the scales at one pound, the M 26 was alternately used for stopping North Vietnamese Army charges and “fragging” unpopular officers behind the lines, proving equally effective at both tasks. Stolen in bulk by the Baader-Meinhof gang in 1971, a shipment of these grenades was traced by the serial numbers to the Japanese Red Army and the Carlos syndicate in France. It should not be supposed, from the decree of obsolescence, that no specimens of this grenade remain available. Replacing the M 26 as America’s standard fragmentation grenade is the M 67, with an average throwing range of forty meters and a casualty radius of fifteen meters. For extra security the M 67’s safety lever is retained by both the standard pin and a small wire clip, designed as a back-up in case the pin is accidentally removed. In practice, soldiers normally remove the clip first, leaving the pin in place until they are ready to lob the grenade at their target. A four- or five-second delay before detonation is standard on the M 67. A variant of the M 67, logically designated as the M 68, is essentially the same grenade with a different fuse, incorporating a combination of the standard impact and time delay mechanisms. The M 68’s impact fuse fires by means of an electric detonator and tiny thermal power supply, with action initiated by means of a percussion cap. The thermal power supply requires a second or two to generate sufficient electricity for detonation, but after that time has elapsed, the detonator will fire if the M 68 strikes a hard surface or is sharply jolted. As a back-up system, in case the impact detonator fails for any reason, the grenade’s power train keeps burning on its own, blowing the charge by pyrotechnic action within a maximum of seven seconds. Smoke grenades come in a variety of colors and sizes, with the standard U.S. model designated as the AN-M8. A burning type grenade, designed to generate white smoke for screening small unit activities, the AN-M8 is also used for ground-to-air signaling in combat situations, such as marking a helicopter landing field. The grenade’s cylindrical case is constructed from thin sheet metal, containing HC smoke mixture and a chemical starter compound. Light enough to be thrown for about thirty yards, the AN-MS generates smoke for an average period of 105 to 150 seconds. Incendiary grenades are designed primarily for destruction of buildings and equipment, but they may also have grisly antipersonnel applications. America’s standard incendiary grenade is the ANM14, similar in appearance to the AN-MS smoke grenade, but filled with a volatile mixture of Thermite TH3 and First Fire Mixture VII. In action, the AN-M14 generates a temperature of 2,200 degrees (Centigrade) for a period of thirty to forty-five seconds. Riot control grenades normally generate the same gases - CN and CS -, but a number of innovative designs are available, including several from Accuracy Systems, in Phoenix. One such, the M452 “Stingball,” has a one-second fuse designed to prevent throwback and achieve airbursts with a minimum of effort. The Stingball’s casing is molded from soft rubber, with the explosive charge in a central pocket, surrounded by numerous marble-sized soft-rubber balls. On detonation, these are fired in all directions, pelting members of a crowd with stinging force and (hopefully) dispersing their formation. For a little something extra, Accuracy System’s M45C, the “Comboball,” includes a dose of CS gas to keep things interesting. Stun grenades are another popular item with antiterrorist units, designed to blind and deafen gunmen, sometimes knocking them unconscious, with a minimum of risk to hostages. Accuracy Systems offers a full range of antiterrorist munitions, including the M429 (“Thunderflash”), the M470 Magnum, the M450 (“Multiflash”), and the M451 (“Multi-Starflash”) grenades. The basic model M429 is specially formulated from cardboard, to minimize flying shrapnel, designed to produce a stunning blast and brilliant flash of light. The M470 Magnum provides roughly twice the M429’s concussive force, for use outdoors, while the M450 ejects seven distinct submunitions, emitting a series of blasts in a two second time span. Finally, the M451 throws in the kitchen sink, with multiple blasts, dazzling flashes, and sizzling-hot sparks to stun and disorient human targets. The Rocket’s Red Glare Terrorists are generally deprived of artillery, but in recent years they’ve made up the difference by resorting to use of portable (and often disposable) rocket launchers. Less than five feet long in many cases, modern air-to-ground and antiarmor weapons are designed for maximum mobility in combat situations, providing individual foot soldiers with the ultimate in firepower short of tactical nuclear weapons. Weapons like the American “Stinger” and LAW rockets (Light Antitank Weapon) have found their way into terrorist hands already, with various groups vying hungrily for newer, more lethal hardware. The Soviet RPG-7 is standard equipment for terrorists around the world, provided by Eastern Bloc countries and makeshift production lines in the Middle East. The RPG’s shoulder-fired launcher measures 39 inches overall, with a bore diameter of 1.5 inches, and weighs 15.4 pounds. The cumbersome rocket weighs 4.95 pounds and protrudes from the muzzle, sporting a payload 3.3 inches in diameter. Maximum range for a stationary target is 555 yards, with accuracy reduced to 330 yards for moving targets. On impact, the rocket can penetrate 12.6 inches of armor plating. Widely used against Americans in Vietnam, the RPG has also surfaced in South Africa, in the hands of the terrorist African National Congress. Members of the IRA appreciate the weapon, and by October 1981 they had fired at least 185 Soviet rockets at British army posts and vehicles, losing twenty-one launchers in various raids. In January 1973, the Carlos gang staged two attacks with RPGs at Orly airport, trying to destroy El Al airliners, but the gunners missed their targets each time, damaging a Yugoslavian plane and an airport terminal building. On September 15, 1981, the Baader-Meinhof gang fired an RPG rocket at a vehicle occupied by General Frederick Kreusen, U.S. Army Commander in Europe, but Kreusen was spared major injury despite a direct hit on his armored Mercedes. The Soviet SAM 7 “Strela” is a surface-to-air missile, measuring 51.2 inches overall, fired from a 53-inch portable launcher. Weighing 20.25 pounds, the rocket is powered by a three-stage solid propellant motor, with a maximum range of 3,792 yards and a maximum altitude of 6,560 feet. In flight, an infrared heat-seeking guidance system takes the SAM 7 to its target - presumably the engines of a fighter plane, military helicopter, or civilian airliner. In the Yom Kippur War of October 1973, SAM 7s scored the few successful hits achieved by Arab antiaircraft batteries upon Israeli fighters. By that time, the weapon had already made its first appearance in terrorist hands, with the arrest of five Palestinians in Ostia, Italy. Renting a top-floor apartment three miles from Rome’s airport, the guerrillas had two missiles in their closet when police arrived, aborting their plan to shoot down the first available El Al liner. SAM 7s were also used by the Zimbabwe African People’s Union, downing two Rhodesian Viscount airliners during the bitter guerrilla war that resulted in the foundation of modern Zimbabwe. More recently, in October 1988, a SAM 7 was confiscated from IRA gunners in Northern Ireland. The American M47 Dragon is an antitank weapon, tube-launched, wire-guided, and optically tracked by one gunner. In practice, the disposable Fiberglas launcher is supported on a folding stand, with the operator seated on the ground, the muzzle of the launcher resting on his shoulder. The rocket’s nose contains a shaped charge and fuse, the middle section sporting sixty side thrust rocket motors that operate in pairs. The gunner merely has to choose his target, keeping it in sight until he scores a hit, at which time he removes the tracking mechanism and attaches it to a new launching tube. Captions to the figures supplied A car damaged by a hand grenade. Electrical detonators in cross section. A: Instantaneous detonator; B: time detonator. Remnants of electric detonators found at safe burglary scenes. This article has (1974) words Dr. Anil Aggrawal, M.D. Professor of Forensic Medicine Maulana Azad Medical College New Delhi‑110002

SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-123 For DECEMber 2003 issue SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-123 DETAILED INVESTIGATION EXONERATED THE ACCUSED! ‑Dr. Anil Aggrawal A prospect we all regard with horror is that an innocent person might go to jail, or worse, be executed for a crime he or she did not commit. There have been some celebrated overseas cases, most notably the post-execution exoneration of Timothy Evans, a case that played a large part in the repeal of capital punishment in England. In 1950, Evans was convicted of murdering his wife and child in London and was hanged. Some years later the notorious serial killer, Reginald Halliday Christie, who had been convicted of the murder of his wife and five other women at 10 Rillington Place, London, confessed that he had also murdered Evans’ wife. We now find, with rapid advances in the sciences surrounding DNA, that this nightmare is more common than anyone supposed, at least in the United States. On April 8, 2002, Ray Krone, who was convicted and sentenced to death in 1992, was the 100th Death Row DNA exoneration in the USA. An analysis of the first 70 exonerations shows how the inexact legal system can be brought to heel by an exact science. Elements in the trials of the first 70 Death Row residents to be freed show that their trials were shot through with false witness testimony (17), incompetent defence (23), false confessions (15), prosecutorial misconduct (34), plus a frightening 61 cases of mistaken identity. The Button case The Western Australian case of John Button, who faced the gallows when he was charged with the wilful murder of his girlfriend Rosemary Anderson in 1963, is one Australian case that demonstrates that our legal system, which prides itself on fixing its own mistakes, is not immune. It is true that the system finally released John Button from his inner prison, but it took almost 40 years for the science to catch up with the law, or vice versa. John Button turned 19 the day his particular nightmare began. He was 58 when he walked into the central police station in Perth and finally witnessed the destruction of his criminal record. His 19th birthday dinner at his parents’ Perth suburban home had been pleasant, until he and Rosemary, aged 17, had a tiff. She flounced out and started to walk home. John jumped into his car, a 1962 French-designed Simca Aronde, and followed her, trying to persuade her to get in. But she was determined to walk. When she disappeared under a train-track subway, he stopped the car, lit a cigarette and waited. He knew that on the other side was a deserted industrial strip. The darkness and the loneliness might make her change her mind. But when he drove through four minutes later, he spotted her lying in the sand several metres from the road, fatally injured. Thinking there was a crazed hit and run driver at large, he carried the bleeding girl to his car and rushed her to a doctor’s surgery. The doctor called an ambulance and the police. When the cops arrived they noticed damage to the left front corner of Mr Button’s car. He told them he had had a minor accident when he ran into the back of a Ford Prefect car three weeks before and had not had the damage fixed. The police turned up a report of this accident. But it looked suspicious. He was the boyfriend, there had been an argument, he was on the scene, there was damage to the car and there was blood on the car which, it transpired, was transferred from the girl and his own bloodstained hands as they brushed past it. He also had a bad stutter, which investigating police took as nervousness at the questions he was being asked. After about five hours in police custody and learning that his girlfriend had died in hospital, Mr Button signed a confession that had been typed out by a detective. The jury at his trial convicted him of manslaughter, and he was sentenced to 10 years hard labour. Had he been convicted of wilful murder, as charged, he could have hanged. Cooke’s confession There his case would have rested had it not been for the arrest four months later of Eric Edgar Cooke, a 32 year old father of seven who had confessed to eight murders, including the killing of Rosemary Anderson. He provided great detail of how he had spotted her just after she walked under the subway, waited for the traffic to clear then lined her up with a car he had stolen that night, a 1962 Holden. He described how she flew over the bonnet, over the roof and disappeared. He had then driven the car to a park 3 km away and crashed in into a tree to disguise the damage. The Holden’s owner was contacted and he and police records confirmed that his car was found crashed into a tree in Kings Park the next morning, just as Mr Cooke described. As would be expected, John Button appealed on the basis of this confession. Cooke gave evidence at the appeal, but the judges, already sickened by the details of his other crimes, refused to believe anything he said. They said he was inventing the story to delay the death sentence he had been handed for other murders. He was hanged in October 1964. John Button was released from jail after five years, but never gave up trying to clear his name. In 1998, a journalist, Bret Christian agreed to publish the superb biography of Eric Cooke for author Estelle Blackburn. The book purported to include new evidence from two witnesses who had come forward during Ms Blackburn’s research. Their stories cast doubt on the conviction of John Button. The book’s publication received wide publicity and the new evidence led to the WA Attorney General agreeing to re-open Mr Button’s case. Public expectations were raised that the new evidence would exonerate Mr Button. The many people affected by the death of Ms Anderson and Mr Button’s conviction were traumatized all over again. Following publication of the book, Bret re-interviewed both new witnesses. It quickly became apparent to Bret that they had nothing to add to the available evidence, and so it proved in court two years later. Bret felt strongly that in the interests of justice and the peace of mind of the many people affected, something now had to be done to resolve the question of Mr Button’s guilt, publicly and once and for all. Bret went looking for the equivalent of DNA evidence. Search for an expert Court files included good police photographs of Mr Button’s car, alleged to have been the murder weapon. A search for the world’s leading expert on pedestrian crashes found William “Rusty” Haight in the United States. He is a former police officer with engineering training and is well qualified in both the theory and practice of pedestrian crash reconstruction. He has driven in more than 700 staged crashes, analysed the results and testified in scores of court hearings. Now with a private consultancy based in San Diego, he was then employed by the engineering department of a Texan university. A large amount of his time was spent instructing police officers in traffic crash investigation. After Mr Haight agreed to review the available evidence, he said that no firm conclusion could be reached about which car killed the girl. The problem was that no cars of the vintage of those said to be involved had ever been crash-tested in a car vs. pedestrian situation. Bret then arranged for Mr Haight to travel to Western Australia to carry out such tests. He brought with him a biomedical human-form dummy, that behaves exactly as a human body in a pedestrian crash situation. Bret had purchased three 1962 Simca sedans and a 1962 Holden sedan. The tests were designed to show whether the prior accident damage to Mr Button’s car could have masked further damage caused by an impact with Ms Anderson. Mr Haight also wanted to measure the displacement of the dummy to one side of the car. Ms Anderson’s body was found well off the road. Different vehicle profiles cause different displacement distances. The Holden has a square-fronted look while the Simcas have rounded lines. Crash investigation A major problem with Cooke’s evidence at John Button’s original appeal was that the car he stole was fitted with a steel sun visor. The appeal judges simply did not believe that a body could have been flung over the top of the car and displaced well to the left-hand side without being caught by the visor or ripping it off. They ridiculed Cooke as he stuck firmly to his story in the witness box. At the test venue, video equipment was installed to record the impacts from various angles for court purposes, including cameras inside the cars. Still photos were also taken before, during and after the tests. The dummy was stood on the bitumen road and held upright with a breakable knot from a “gallows” contraption that the investigators built. This knot presented no resistance when the dummy was struck by a car. The three Simcas were crash-tested at speeds of 27, 31 and 37mph (43, 50, 59km/ h). The amount of damage to each car varied with the speed, but its position on the cars was consistent. It was stark and obvious in each case. The leading edges of the cars sustained some damage, and there were pronounced dents to the rear of the bonnets caused by the dummy’s head striking the metal. Mr Haight explained that the physics is quite simple. The centre of gravity of an adult is above the top of the striking edge of the bonnet. On impact, the body begins to rotate around the axis of the leading edge, causing the head to impact towards the rear of the bonnet, depending on the length of the bonnet and the design of the car. At highway speeds, this head strike often occurs on the windscreen. The body continues to cartwheel. Because of the shape of the front of the Simca, something like an upturned boat, the dummy was flung to one side before contacting the windscreen and ended up on the road within a metre of the side of the vehicle. The three test Simcas sustained none of the damage shown in the police photos of Mr Button’s car. And Mr Button’s car had none of the massive bonnet damage suffered by the test cars. After the three Simca tests, Mr Haight was able to declare immediately that Mr Button’s Simca could not have struck Ms Anderson with sufficient force to kill her, or even seriously injure her. Mr Haight concluded that the damage that so aroused the suspicions of the original investigating police, was all caused by the earlier collision between the Simca and the Ford Prefect. Mr Haight’s Simca tests also failed to displace the “body” more than about one metre to the side of the car - nothing like the two to three metres described by witnesses at the time. There remained only the test of the Holden fitted with a visor to check the veracity of Cooke’s statement that he had driven the car at the girl at 35-40 mph and she had been flung over the top of the car. No photographs are available of the damaged Holden Cooke stole that night, but there is a detailed account from the panel shop that repaired it for the insurance company. Mr Haight hit the dummy with the Holden at 35mph (56km/h) just to the left of centre of the bonnet. To everyone’s surprise except Mr Haight’s, the dummy behaved quite differently from when it was hit by the Simcas. The Holden sustained quite severe damage to the leading edge of its bonnet and some head damage to the rear of the bonnet. The dummy then cartwheeled towards the roof of the car. It struck the visor above the left hand side of the windscreen. Mr Haight said in his evidence that the visor did play a role in the body motion, but not the role suggested by the Crown at Mr Button’s original appeal in 1964. The visor flexed and distorted, but popped back into its original shape without even cracking the paint. There was no discernable damage to the visor. But contact with the visor caused the dummy to deflect laterally to the left of the car, a distance of 6.5 feet (2 metres), well within the range described by the witnesses who came upon the original crash in 1963. The forward or down-range projection of the dummy by the Holden was also markedly different from that of the Simcas, and indeed most other cars Mr Haight has tested. Mr Haight was able to declare in court that the death of Rosemary Anderson could have occurred exactly as Cooke had described it, but that it was not possible for Mr Button’s car to have killed her. Court finding Strict legal rules govern the acceptance of fresh evidence by appeal courts. They will not allow evidence that was available but not used at the time of the original trial. In the same way that modern DNA evidence is now admissible to re-open old cases, the crash tests fitted the "fresh evidence" criteria because the science of surrogate crash reconstruction had not developed in 1963-64. The three Court of Criminal Appeal judges accepted his evidence, emphasized the importance of the sun-visor evidence and quashed Mr Button’s conviction. The judges said Mr Haight's evidence was compelling and convincing. It was the longest time lapse between conviction and exoneration in Australia’s legal history. Some important points to be noted 1: After the Perth crash tests Mr Haight was invited to take the dummy to Sydney for crash testing on vehicles fitted with roo bars. Mr Haight refused. One hit with a kangaroo bar would completely dismember his $2,500 dummy, he said. Keep that in mind next time you cross the road. 2: Car manufacturers carry out crash tests to assess the safety of occupants. However none carry out pedestrian crash tests. Mr Haight believes they fear lawsuits if they knowingly market vehicles with front end shapes that may cause untoward pedestrian damage. 3: Another murder appeal is now before the West Australian courts in which Mr Haight’s crash test evidence could be critical. It is the case of Darryl Beamish, a deaf mute who was in jail for a 1959 axe murder for which Eric Cooke also confessed. At Mr Beamish’s original unsuccessful appeal, the judges cross-referenced Cooke’s evidence with that of the Button appeal, again declaring him a liar. Referring back to the Button case, the then Chief Justice wrote, “Cooke claims to have had little damage to the car he was driving”. “What damage there was resembles in some measure that which was found on Button’s car. The mathematical odds against such a coincidence beggar the imagination.” Mr Beamish was sentenced to hang. His sentence was commuted and he served 15 years. Captions to the figure supplied A police photo of John Button’s car taken after he was charged. John Button’s car fitted against the Ford Prefect he crashed into weeks before the fatal crash. A sequence of four photos of a crash test with one of the Simcas. On this occasion the dummy was placed to be hit with the right side of the car to show that if it is hit right, it goes right, and if it is hit left, it goes left. The mask Mr Haight is wearing is to protect him from shattered glass in case the windscreen smashes. The third Simca showing bonnet damage. Rusty Haight with another of the Simcas, showing the massive bonnet damage. The dummy and John Button. The dummy has just cleared the sun-visor and is being displaced to the left of the Holdenr. The damaged Holden showing the distance the dummy landed to the left of the car. This article has (2704) words Dr. Anil Aggrawal, M.D. Professor of Forensic Medicine Maulana Azad Medical College New Delhi‑110002

SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-122 For NOVEMber 2003 issue SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-122 WHAT IS CHILD ABUSE? ‑Dr. Anil Aggrawal This time I am going to tell you about a very bizarre phenomenon – Child abuse. This is a phenomenon, in which parents beat their children by various means. Why they beat? Well there are several reasons. They may be step parents, or sometimes the child is not of the sex they wanted. May be it is a female baby and they wanted a male baby. The range of investigations for modern day law enforcement officers is unparalleled in the history of criminology. Investigators must use innovative techniques in order to solve today’s more sophisticated, bizarre criminal acts. For example, cases of an obscure form of child abuse - Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy (MSBP) - are being seen more and more frequently. MSBP is a form of child abuse that involves long-term physical abuse, usually by a parent. However, in order to conduct MSBP investigations effectively, it is necessary to understand the complexity of the disorder and the unorthodox investigative procedures that may be necessary to prosecute the case successfully. This article discusses the disorder and how officers should approach the investigation of this crime. DEFINING THE SYNDROME Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy is a form of child abuse in which the abuser fabricates an illness in a child. When the child is taken for medical care, the parent tells physicians that there is no apparent cause for the illness, knowing that this will most likely result in the hospitalization of the victim for tests or observation. It is during this period of hospitalization that the actual abuse usually occurs. In one known case of MSBP, a mother injected fecal material into the victim; in another case, a mother suffocated and then revived her child on several occasions during the hospitalization period. Symptoms of MSBP are generally recognizable by the time the victim reaches 14 months of age. However, MSBP is usually not diagnosed until the child is approximately 3 years of age. The mortality rate for this type of abuse is high. There are both mild and severe cases of MSBP. In mild cases, the parent fabricates a history of a non-existent condition in the child. For example, some parents contaminate their children’s feces with blood and claim that they passed the blood. In severe cases of MSBP, a parent actually harms the child in order to create symptoms of an illness. Suffocation or blood poisoning are typical in this form of MSBP. OFFENDER AND VICTIM CHARACTERISTICS Most MSBP offenders are mothers of the victims. However, there have been cases where the offender was the father or a person outside of the family. MSBP offenders are uncharacteristically calm in view of the victims’ baffling medical symptoms, and they welcome medical tests that are painful to the children. They also maintain a high degree of involvement in the care of their children during treatment and will excessively praise the medical staff. They seem very knowledgeable of the victims’ illnesses, which may indicate some medical study or training. They may also have a history of the same illnesses being exhibited by their victims. In addition, MSBP offenders typically shelter their victims from outside activities, such as school or playing with other children, allowing only certain persons to be close to them. They may even speak for the victims when anyone approaches them. MSBP offenders are attentive to their victims, even though they are harming them. They seem to find emotional satisfaction when their child is hospitalized because the hospital staff believes that their attentiveness indicates that they are good parents. Victims of MSBP can be of either gender. They are often immature for their age, due to their forced dependency on the abusing parent, and female victims may assume multiple roles. For example, they may take on a motherly role as they imitate their closest role model - the offender - and then regress to the role of a sick, weak, dependent child. CHARACTERISTICS OF NON-OFFENDING PARENT MSBP victims are rarely abused by their fathers. Passive and indifferent, the father does not play a primary role in the care of the sick child. His hospital visits with the victim are limited, and although he may be suspicious of the baffling course of his child’s illness, he is unable to stop the child’s abuse. THE VICTIM’S SIBLINGS There is a good chance that younger siblings of MSBP victims will also be abused. When offenders stop abusing their victims - either because the child gets older and more mature or because the child dies - they may look to their other children in order to continue the abuse. A study of the medical history of these children may indicate whether there is a pattern of abuse within the family. RECOGNIZING MSBP Because cases of MSBP are often times first recognized in hospitals or doctor’s offices, it is imperative that the medical community be aware of this type of abuse. MSBP should be suspected if illnesses in children remain unexplained after medical testing, and there is a history of multiple visits to different hospitals and physicians. Primarily, observing an ill child during a hospital stay can support a suspicion of MSBP. In such instances, the suspected victim should be placed in an open ward, where there is less opportunity for the offender to continue the abuse. This also gives hospital personnel a chance to observe any changes in the patient’s symptoms. If the symptoms cease and then recur when the victim is again readily accessible to the offender, in all likelihood, MSBP is taking place. A TEAM APPROACH When law enforcement officials are contacted concerning suspected cases of MSBP, it is critical to use a multidisciplinary approach to the case. Medical staff, child protection teams, social services personnel, and hospital administrators, as well as prosecutors and law enforcement personnel, should assist in the investigation. The early involvement of prosecutors is especially helpful in MSBP cases because there is little existing case law to which investigators can refer for guidance. Therefore, it is important to coordinate the investigation with those who will prosecute the case. Medical staff, including physicians and nurses who have attended the victim, may suspect abuse before law enforcement’s involvement in the case, and therefore, may be able to contribute valuable information to the investigation. However, for security reasons, investigators should limit the number of staff who are aware of the investigation. Investigators should gain the cooperation of some primary care personnel during the investigation, and after the investigation is completed, officials should strongly consider seeking psychological treatment for both the victim and the offender. Many States require that investigators inform social services of any child abuse investigations they conduct. Those in social services can help investigators follow particular guidelines and meet set time constraints for resolving this type of case. It may also be necessary to have social services waive certain requirements because MSBP investigations are sometimes lengthy due to the confidentiality aspect. Child protection teams work directly with the medical staff and serve as excellent liaison between law enforcement and medical personnel. Because interagency agreement is important in these investigations, it is a good idea to hold regular meetings to discuss how the case is being managed. Cooperation between all of the involved agencies is imperative in cases such as these. Although all team members should approach cases from their respective jurisdictions, the common goal should be to ensure the safety of the victims. If the abuse is not stopped, the family will relocate, and the abuse will continue. As the cycle of abuse continues, the victim is subjected to further risk of permanent injury, painful medical tests, or even death. EVIDENCE In order to stop the cycle of abuse, investigators must obtain sufficient admissible evidence to convict the abuser. A particularly effective way to obtain proof in MSBP cases is to use concealed cameras to videotape evidence. For example, ceiling cameras can record a wide range of movement, and they can be easily hidden in hospital rooms. However, placement of video cameras in hospital rooms will likely require a court order.1 In making application for such an order, investigators should stress the necessity of videotape evidence so that judges will better understand exactly what is needed in MSBP cases. Frequently, obtaining a court order for videotaping is considerably less complicated when the request omits sound because judges do not have to consider wire tap laws. However, sound is not a critical element in videotapes of MSBP cases that involve suffocation, poisoning, or fabrication through simulation. If investigators suspect that a child is being poisoned, they should collect relevant evidence, such as tubing, I.V.s, and needles. Other possible evidence might include towels that offenders use to suffocate their victims or medicine bottles that suspected abusers bring into the hospital. Investigators should also check bio-hazard containers and garbage cans for evidence. In addition, they should check receptacles used to store urine or stool if foreign matter is present in these items. And finally, in hospitals, investigators should be aware of any missing syringes or other medical equipment. Because MSBP offenders sometimes use items of opportunity, they obtain instruments from hospitals to abuse their victims. ARREST OF OFFENDERS When there is sufficient proof in an MSBP case, investigators should arrest the offender quickly. This will preclude relocation, further injury to the child, or self-inflicted injury by the offender. However, arresting an abuser in front of the victim causes unnecessary trauma to the child, who may view the offender as an ideal caretaker. At this juncture in the case, investigators may find it helpful to elicit the help of medical personnel who can reasonably explain the situation to the child. INTERVIEWING THE OFFENDER Some investigators are affected by the fact that certain offenders are suspected of child abuse. However, in order to interview the offender successfully, it is important to always maintain a neutral position. During the interview, many offenders will continue to deny their guilt, even when confronted with videotapes that prove intentional abuse. In some cases, they may not even recognize that they have a problem until the magnitude of the offense is brought to their attention. However, a subtle suggestion to offenders that their continued denial of guilt could lead to the untimely death of their child may be a useful interview technique. Although MSBP offenders intentionally abuse their children, they may truly love them. That love may eventually extend beyond the fear of punishment and the shame they feel to provide an excellent avenue of dialogue between the offender and the interviewer. This dialogue is especially important in cases of unidentified poisonings, where the ability of medical personnel or investigators to determine the source of the poison directly affects the future health of the child. When interviewing MSBP offenders, investigators should understand that the offenders need to have a feeling of self-worth. It is important for investigators to discuss the offenders’ families and personal histories in an effort to build a rapport with them. It is also important for investigators to be aware that it is likely that the offenders were also abused as children. CONCLUSION Although Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy is a problem already recognized by the mental health community, it is a problem that must also be recognized by the law enforcement community, which must remain alert to any existing cases. Sadly, previous unexplained deaths of children may actually have been preventable homicides if recognized early as cases of MSBP. The education of both law enforcement personnel and those in the medical community, coupled with a commitment by law enforcement to prosecute cases of MSBP, may be the only hope for halting this type of abuse of children. The lives of innocent children may depend on the swift recognition and immediate prosecution of those suffering from this bizarre form of abuse. Captions to the figure supplied Some common forms of child abuse. Top row - from left to right: Punching, Slapping, Lashing. Bottom row - from left to right: Raping, Scalding and Burning This article has (1957) words Dr. Anil Aggrawal, M.D. Professor of Forensic Medicine Maulana Azad Medical College New Delhi‑110002

SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-121 For OCTOber 2003 issue SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-121 CAN VIOLENCE BE PREDICTED? ‑Dr. Anil Aggrawal This time I am going to talk about a very interesting subject – Can violence be predicted? If we could develop a way to predict violence, we could take appropriate steps to curb it, and the crime rate, especially that of homicide in our society would come down a great deal. That would indeed be a very great contribution of criminology to modern society. A few things have to be understood at the outset. First of all, homicide is very infrequent in our society. And the prediction of all infrequent things – be they earthquakes, or sunspots or homicide – is very difficult. According to Uniform Crime Reports, the 1982 rate of homicide in the USA was just about 9 per 100,000. That is out of all 100,000 crimes committed, only 9 were those of homicide. Even if we consider only violent crime, homicide still makes up only about 0.4% of all violent crimes. Predicting an event which has such a low frequency is definitely dangerous business. Prediction of violence can have many practical applications. First and foremost is of course, that we could take interventional steps to prevent homicide. Furthermore, if prediction of violence was possible, quite likely, in cases where courts have to grant bail to dangerous criminals, they would first ask scientists, if it was okay to release those suspects on bail. The scientists could examine the personality of the suspect and advise the court whether violent behavior could be predicted from them or not. If it could be predicted, the courts would not grant bail, otherwise they would. There is another very practical use of prediction of violence. In Texas, USA, when it has been proved that a person committed a murder, the courts would grant capital punishment only when it could be demonstrated that there was a continued probability of future violent conduct from that criminal. From a prediction standpoint, one can say that there are certain high risk individuals , i.e. those persons who have a very high probability of showing violent behavior. In addition there are certain high risk situations , i.e. those situations where a person is more likely to show violent behavior. For instance certain forms of mass murder are seen more commonly when a person is fired from his job, or when he humiliated, or when domestic problems supervene. One area that has to be looked at is, what will be the rate of accuracy of such predictions? Another area that we have to look at is, what will we do, once we are indeed able to predict violent behavior. How are we going to curb violence then? What will be the interventional strategy? What will be its cost? Can we, kind of introduce mass inoculations against violent behavior? Alan Gruber, a prominent neurologist wrote in the New York Times of September 17, 1985, “I would submit to you we can predict human aggressive behavior 90% of the time”. But the question is, can we accurately predict 90% of the time? That is a word often left out. Can we accurately predict? Some years back, it was reported in the US, that some income tax officials were murdered when they went out for field tax audits. They found out that there was a two or three fold increase in the number of assaults during audits. Consequently they asked investigators to look into this whole incident. And perhaps let them know what kind of situations would lead to such assaults. These would be termed high risk situations. A training program was then developed for IRS (Internal Revenue Service, equivalent to our own Income Tax department) officers to consciously avoid those situations. A very interesting study was done by Henry J. Steadman, Chief of the Bureau of Evaluation Research, New York State Office of Mental Health, Albany, New York. He along with a colleague Felson, interviewed more than 500 individuals. One third of those individuals were ex-mental patients, one-third were offenders and the rest were randomly selected from the general population. They interviewed them concerning disputes that had occurred in their lives with primary emphasis on their most recent one. Three types of incidents were focused upon: when they got angry and did nothing; when they got angry and screamed; and finally when they got angry and pushed, hit, kicked, shoved someone. Some interesting findings emerged from this study. It was found that The more serious incidents more often involved younger people and males More serious incidents occurred when the involved party/parties were drinking When strangers/third parties were present, there was a higher level of seriousness. Interestingly all three groups – mental patients, offenders and general population – tended to be serious in the presence of strangers/third parties. When gun/knives were used, the disputes more often involved property. Disputes that ended in yelling and anger, were more often domestic ones. In disputes that ended being less serious and harmful, it was seen that people used some form of “account giving”, i.e. they used verbal mechanisms to defuse the situation rather than having them going on to become more serious. This was an area where mental patients were less skilled. They less often gave accounts to try to cut off the level of intensity of a dispute. Steadman and his colleague suggested that this was something therapists might think about in terms of training mental patients to function in the community. S. Armstrong has developed his “seersucker theory”, which says, “No matter how much evidence exists that seers do not exist, suckers will pay for the existence of seers”. Steadman quotes this in his paper to stress that actually prediction of homicide is very difficult, yet we would probably continue to believe in it. There are violence-prone individuals and there are violence-prone situations. One can reduce homicide, if both are reduced to some extent by some mechanism. The stress should be on preventing a violence prone-individual meeting a violence-prone situation. Some things that can be done by the physicians/psychiatrists are: Ask patients about their past history of violence, including arrests and incarcerations. Questions like this can be asked: What’s the most violent thing you have ever done? Have you ever threatened your wife? Have you hit her? Use of disinhibiting agents, such as alcohol, barbiturates, amphetamines, hallucinogens, inhalants. Use of availability of weapons One question that has been raised again and again is whether the criminality of a person depends on his genetic makeup or on his environment. Studies have been conducted on various kinds of twins – both monozygotic and dizygotic. Monozygotic twins are those that have the same genetic makeup. Dizygotic twins have different genetic make up. Environmental influences are the same in both monozygotic and dizygotic twins. It has been seen that persons who share common genes are more likely to be like each other as far as criminal conduct is concerned. Similarly criminalities in adopted children has also been studied, and conclusions are the same. The adopted children only share the environment, but not the genetic makeup of their parents. If the parents have criminal tendencies, the adopted children do not tend to show them. This means that genetic makeup is important. Some kind of screening of such children is important. It is also seen that people of certain genetic makeup have more criminal tendencies. For instance, people who are XYY tend to show more criminality that the rest. Some scientists have studied XYY configuration in male prisoners and have come to the conclusion that this configuration was associated with greater violence. Another important area, which doctors are looking forward to now, is a place in the brain called the limbic system. It comprises of cingulum, hippocampus, thalamic and hypothalamic nuclei as well as the basal ganglia, mid brain and the amygdala. The last three are now also included in the limbic system by modern brain physiologists. Captions to the figures supplied This article has (1424) words Dr. Anil Aggrawal, M.D. Professor of Forensic Medicine Maulana Azad Medical College New Delhi‑110002 My notes: This article is Based on the following papers: 1. Predicting Violence leading to Homicide by Henry J. Steadman, Ph.D., Chief, Bureau of Evaluation Research, New York State Office of Mental Health, Albany, New York. Bull. N.Y. Acad. Med. Vol. 62, No. 5, June 1986, pages 570-578 2. Comments on Dr. Steadman’s Paper by John R. Lion, M.D., Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, pages 579-581 3. Medical Deterrents by Stephen Nordlicht, pages 582-588

SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-117 There was no article next month (July 2003) For JUNE 2003 issue SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-117 MURDER BY A VEHICLE ‑Dr. Anil Aggrawal This time we are going to talk about Vehicular Murders. Many of our readers may be unaware of this term. However vehicular homicide remains the real “heavyweight” of murders. Somehow, murder by stabbing, shooting or strangulation seems like small potatoes when compared to the horror of being chased down by a two-ton vehicle, headlights flashing and horn honking, traveling at least 75 mph. In a recent film Jism, the lover of the heroine tries to kill the hero in the end by a fast running vehicle. Incidentally he remains unsuccessful, and gets killed himself. Had he been able to kill successfully the hero, it would have been classified as a vehicular murder. In fact it was this incident, which spurred me on to write something about it in this issue. Vehicular homicide is rare because of the size of the weapon involved, be it a car, van, truck or even motorcycle. It is likely to be seen by several people who can identify the vehicle, the physical description of the driver (usually a man who makes no attempt to disguise himself) or the license plate information. It is worth noting, however, that perpetrators of vehicular homicide (if they are smart criminals) try to use license plates that do not correspond to the actual vehicle in use. Running down the Victim The most common way for this type of murder to occur is for the victim to be run over or struck by the vehicle by surprise. This is usually done while the victim is entering or exiting her home or place of business, either in the early morning or the late evening. The reasons for this are obvious: The vehicle and the person driving it cannot be easily identified. Hired Drivers In many cases of this type, the murderer is hired. What usually happens is that a person looking for someone to commit this type of homicide seeks a criminal, but that criminal is almost always of a low-level stature. It may be a teenager who is hoping to step up in his criminal element by doing this type of murder. Or it may be done by some low-level soldier in organized crime who is hoping to move up in the hierarchy. The person selected does not need any experience or finesse. All he needs to do is operate a vehicle and have some information on the victim. In some cases, the person or organization doing the hiring locates a vehicle for the perpetrator. It is the killer’s responsibility to dispose of the vehicle, which is usually done by leaving it in a poor section of town where it can be stripped quickly, thus avoiding good fingerprint or trace evidence detection. This killer will not be highly compensated, certainly not as much as an experienced hit man. One has almost never heard of someone getting more than a fifty thousand Rupees for this type of murder. We once heard of a suspect who bragged that when he was in the lower tier of organized crime, he was involved in doing “rim jobs,” meaning that he killed or injured people who owed his organization money. He called them rim jobs because he said he knew he had connected when he felt the bones of the victim snap beneath the rims of his tires. Motives There can be many motives for vehicular homicide. The police have investigated cases involving contract killings where a person was killed for hire, elimination killings where a person (a wife, a husband, a lover, a business partner) had to be killed and revenge-type murders where a driver is cut off in traffic and reacts by stalking and later killing the other driver while she is leaving her vehicle or home. Another motive for vehicular murder is jealousy, where the perpetrator (the lover or enraged spouse) wishes to eliminate the person who is creating the lovers’ triangle. Since this killer is often of the middle class, he doesn’t own weapons and has not often engaged in violent behavior. He doesn’t want a face to-face confrontation and feels incapable of stabbing someone to death. The car makes the murder seem less direct. The police have also investigated cases where ex-convicts are released from jail only to hunt down the police officers who put them behind bars, killing them as they approach their vehicles while leaving or coming home. In one such case, the police officer was killed as he departed his personal vehicle and walked to the police precinct where he was due to report for the midnight to eight o’clock shift. So, as you can see, vehicular homicide, although not used too often by seasoned murderers, appears to be deliberately planned. Of course, there are instances where vehicular homicide is committed by a person who is under the influence of alcohol or drugs. And although these are typically defined under state laws as vehicular homicide, they are not actually premeditated murders and are therefore not covered here in this piece. It is worth noting that vehicular homicides do not involve theft or robbery because, as noted earlier, the murderer does not stop her vehicle at all during the commission of the crime. Methods Consider this scenario: A man has been contracted to kill a hypothetical victim Rita Bhatia as she exits her vehicle after parking it in front of her home at approximately 12:30 A.M. Rita has just come off the four to midnight shift at the local shop. She locks her doors and walks slowly across the street, fumbling for the keys to her front door. Suddenly, a car turns the corner. With tires screeching, headlights glaring and acceleration up to speeds of 70 to 80 mph, it does not appear to be stopping. Rita turns and is immediately blinded by the glare of the headlights. The driver bears down on her, and she goes flying like a rag doll into the air, fifty to one hundred feet, as the vehicle roars away. The killer, confident no one has seen him, drives home and secures his vehicle in the garage. He knows he will be paid handsomely for a job well done. But, did he really carry out the homicide in such a way that he won’t be caught? Did he drive at high speed without applying the brakes before hitting Rita Bhatia? If he had hit the brakes, the tires would have screeched and skidded, possibly causing neighbors to look out their windows and witness the actual impact. Did he drive with his bright lights on so as to distract the victim (or anyone else seeing his approach) and prevent her from getting a good look at his face as he struck her? Did he make sure that, after striking her, he only slowed down a little so as to round a curve or get accessibility onto a major road, thereby not attracting any further attention? Did he make sure to stop calmly at stop signs or red lights, possibly merging into traffic or turning right on red to avoid waiting at a light? The contract murderer would be sure to employ all these tactics in a “successful” vehicular homicide. Some vehicles are stolen “to order” for this particular type of murder, since it is easier for the murderer not to have the vehicle in his possession shortly after the murder. Following the homicide, the vehicle is driven to a clandestine location where it may be dismantled totally and slowly sold for scrap or crushed and discarded in landfills. Many of these murderers use older vehicles that are dispensable and not worth much money so they can be discarded after the murders. The marks that may be left at the scene, such as skid marks, tire marks, dirt from impact, blood tissue and hair, chipped flakes of paint and broken equipment such as trim or headlights, are frequently clues for the detective to catch the murderer. Keep in mind, though, that this type of murderer never stops at the scene of the accident to collect this evidence. He continues on and takes a chance on the police not matching the actual vehicle to the murder scene. In a particularly violent accident, bloodstains and tissue may also be found on the radiator, the door handles and other parts of the vehicle, such as the grill and headlights. When the accident takes place on a dirt road, particles of soil may adhere to the fenders and the tires. If the chemical composition of the soil is characteristic of a particular location, it may be possible for the detectives to associate the vehicle with the scene of the accident. A suspect vehicle will be placed on a service station jack so a highly trained detective can study the understructure for various clues, such as impressions in the grease or the fibers, blood and tissue of the victim. So if the killer wants to avoid suspicion, he usually travels hours away from the scene, sometimes into another state, to have any physical damage to the car repaired. It is also common for these murderers to go through car washes ten to twelve times, usually in many different locations so as to not cause suspicion by visiting the same one a dozen times. However, a large majority of these murderers wash their cars at self-service car washes where they can use the high-pressure hoses at their discretion. The one drawback of self-service car washes is that the murderer can’t wash the underside of the car. That is why the trained detective always notifies car washes in the immediate area as well as the owners of self-service car washes about the suspect. The investigators may even put surveillance teams at these locations, since many self-service car washes do not have people on the premises to look for vehicles matching the description of the murder vehicle. Investigation and Capture The examination of the suspected vehicle is done by detectives immediately upon receiving information that a vehicle may be the one in question. Vehicular homicide experts say that proper examination and evaluation of physical evidence are the keys to solving these types of murder. First investigators look for dents and scratches, which can be tricky since it’s difficult to determine how recent the damage is and the exact cause of it. Clues of the victim’s impact with the vehicle lead to further investigation by the detectives. They also check for broken parts because pieces of glass may remain in the headlight or may fall into the grill. A broken emblem or side mirror also attracts the detectives’ attention. A forensic analysis of the headlights or taillights can reveal if the lights were on or off at the point of impact. Filament structure and examination can determine whether or not the murder was committed with the vehicle’s headlights on or off. This is important in showing intent, and intent to kill is very important in the trial of a suspected murderer. If the lights were off, the suspect was probably attempting to run down the victim. The trained gumshoes also look for fibers, since contact with the victim’s clothing may leave fibers or even cloth on the vehicle. And if the vehicle struck the victim with sufficient force, an outline of the clothing pattern may be seen on the paint of the murderer’s vehicle. Other valuable evidence includes glass fragments from the headlights or sidelights and pieces from the vehicle’s grill or hood ornament, which is usually found on a luxury vehicle. Additionally, metal fragments and paint flakes that may have fallen from the vehicle, tire impressions and other pieces of trim that may have been knocked off or may have fallen off (radio antenna, fender, trim, hubcaps) are useful in aiding the detectives in the capture of the murderer. Trace evidence; the whereabouts, friendships, enemies and work habits of the victim; and forensic evidence at the scene lead the police to determine the victim’s patterns. But as is true with other killings, the most important piece of evidence at the scene of a vehicular homicide is the body. So detectives focus on the victim and, in particular, the victim’s clothing, which should be removed and studied for the following: grease from the understructure of the vehicle, tire marks, which may be irregular because of the yielding action of the clothing, and paint (the buttons and sometimes the cloth may retain paint from the car). Sometimes the victim’s chest or back bears a distinct tire mark, a hood mark, an ornamental mark or an impression from the grill or bumper of the murderer’s vehicle. As mentioned earlier in this piece, this type of murderer often borrows a vehicle from a friend or relative or rents one and reports it stolen shortly after the accident. It is also common for a vehicle to be stolen simply for the use of murdering someone. The vehicle, however, is usually stolen immediately prior to the intended use so as not to attract attention to it prior to the killing. Many a vehicular homicide suspect has been caught with a stolen vehicle days before the actual homicide, only to be arrested for grand larceny and not for the actual intended murder. Of course, through confessions and informants, we have learned that murder was the intended use of the vehicle, but the actual suspect can only be charged with receiving stolen property or grand larceny. Captions to figures: 001.jpg. When struck by a car from behind the point of impact is to the legs either above the knee or below the knee and injury is caused by the protruding parts of the vehicle. Other injuries occur to the front of the head and outstretched arms as the body pitches forward on to the ground. 002.jpg. When struck from the side there may be single points of impact on one leg and injuries to the upper part, namely the head, shoulder and arm of the opposite side of the body. 003.jpg. The back of the legs of a pedestrian who was struck from behind by a motor car. The mark on the lower right leg was caused by the bumper bar and the lacerations behind the right knee were caused by the headlight part of the vehicle. A sharper projecting part of the vehicle, possibly a pointed structure on a headlamp, produced the puncture wound in the back of the left knee. The position of these wounds on the body corresponded to projections on the vehicle in that the parts of the vehicle and the wounds were the same distance from the ground. 004.jpg. Abrasions on the back of the hand of a pedestrian who was struck from behind by a car; as he fell forward the back of his hand grazed along the road surface. His other outstretched arm broke as he instinctively tried to protect himself from striking the ground. 005.jpg. This man was struck from the right side by a car, and the abrasion on the left shoulder is due to impact with the ground. There was also a deep laceration on the left side of the scalp with fracturing of the skull, and the peculiar angle of the neck is due to the fact that the upper cervical spine had fractured as well. 006.jpg. If the body is struck from behind and the legs pushed forwards then the body may rise into the air and the skull strike the windscreen. It may pass through the windscreen into the car or may bounce off the windscreen and slide backwards over the roof of the car to land behind the vehicle. Severe head and neck injuries may result from this kind of collision. This article has (2647) words Dr. Anil Aggrawal, M.D. Professor of Forensic Medicine Maulana Azad Medical College New Delhi‑110002

SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-120 For OCTOber 2003 issue SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-120 MURDER IN HOLLYWOOD - The Case of Dorothy Stratten ‑Dr. Anil Aggrawal We have all heard about murders, but this time, I will tell you about the murder of a very interesting person – of a playmate from Playboy! Her name was Dorothy Stratten. 1 Rapes which climax in murder are a continuing affliction of our society. To counter this affliction, Dr. Thomas T. Noguchi, a very famous forensic expert from California, set up a Sexual Assault Evidence Data Processing Unit in his Forensic Science Center in Los Angeles. Evidence collected by this unit aided the Los Angeles Police Department in many ways, from establishing the motive for a killing to actually identifying the murderer. For example, the first item in the Sexual Assault Evidence Data sheet, under “General Evidence Collection,” is “Nail Scrapings Collected.” In a rape the victim often claws or scratches her assailant’s face and body. But even though police might suspect a man whose face bears such a scratch, the suspect will always claim he received the wound in an innocent matter. Forensic science can prove it was made by the victim. I remember particularly a case in which a pretty young girl was found dead, her dress in disarray above her thighs. Her throat had been cut, and there was evidence of semen in her vagina. In sum, an obvious rape/murder. When LAPD (Los Angeles Police Department) detectives questioned her boyfriend, they noticed he had a small scratch on his cheek, but it was so small it could have come from shaving, as the suspect insisted. However, our scientists had preserved a tiny roll of skin-found under one of the victim’s fingernails. They rolled it flat - and it exactly fit the scratch on the suspect’s face. That led to intensive interrogation, and he eventually confessed to the murder. Another important item under “General Evidence Collection” is “Bite Mark Evidence.” Sexual assailants sometimes bite their victims, and forensic dentistry can now reconstruct the teeth of the murderer from such a bite mark. The most famous case of bitemark identification occurred in Florida, where, at long last, a serial killer named Theodore Bundy was apprehended. Bundy, a clean-cut, attractive man of about thirty, began his killing spree in the Northwest. He had a specialty: beautiful college girls with long dark hair. He would approach these coeds, lure them into his car, rape and kill them, then toss them into a lonely area of the forest. By the time their bodies were discovered, they had been ravaged by animals and insects and provided no clues to investigators. After a series of such murders, Bundy moved on to a Southwestern college and murdered several girls there. Then - always on the move to further confuse and frustrate detectives - he went all the way to Florida. But there one night at a Miami college he altered his usual pattern. Instead of luring one of the coeds into his car, he invaded her room in a small dormitory, raped and killed her, then did the same to her two roommates when they returned unexpectedly. No doubt, continuing his modus operandi, he would have left Florida and started a new round of killings in a distant state - but he had at last made one mistake in his continuing orgy of murders. He bit the buttock of one of his victims. And then, fleeing the scene, he was stopped for a traffic violation by police in Tampa, who noted that his driver’s license was a forgery. While he was being questioned, news of the deaths in Miami and the missing murderer came through. There was other evidence against Bundy, but none as conclusive as the reconstruction of his teeth that forensic dentists were able to make from that single bite mark found on one of his victims. Introduced in court as evidence, it matched Bundy’s teeth perfectly. He was convicted of murder, and a serial killer was stopped in his rampage, because of a bite - and forensic science. Forensic science has many tools besides dentistry to investigate rape/murders, from microscopy and serology, which detect spermatozoa, to ballistics, which identifies firearms employed, to psychology, which seeks to profile the killer. All of these factors came together one day in the investigation of a crime in Hollywood which shocked the nation. 2 A beautiful girl lies dead of a shotgun wound. A young man lies near her, also killed by a shotgun, which is on the floor near his feet. A double murder by an intruder, or murder followed by a suicide? That was the actual scene of the death of Dorothy Stratten, a “small town” girl who had come to Hollywood to pursue a career as a model and actress. The dead young man was Paul Snider, her hometown boyfriend, later her husband, and their tragic story began in Vancouver, Canada, where Dorothy Hoogstraaten was serving ice cream cones at a Dairy Queen when a young man with a mustache and trendy jeans entered. Paul Snider ordered a cone and studied the fresh complexioned, voluptuous young girl, and saw what he had been looking for: a potential Playmate for Playboy magazine. The magazine offered thousands of dollars to those girls willing to bare their bodies for Playboy’s readers. The young woman behind the counter was the perfect girl-next-door type that the magazine craved - and Snider could get a commission. He told Dorothy he was a promoter and “producer,” persuaded her to go to dinner with him, and a romance blossomed. With one catch. Dorothy refused to take her clothes off before the camera. But eventually Snider prevailed, the pictures were sent to Playboy, and it is a tribute to Dorothy Stratten’s beauty that less than two days after Playboy received them she was on her way to Hollywood. Hugh Hefner’s Playboy Mansion is a notorious part of the Hollywood scene, crowded with lovely young girls and often visited by male Hollywood stars, directors and producers. Stratten was moved right into the house. Hefner, the founder of Playboy, told her she might be not only a Playmate of the Year, but a candidate for the Playmate of the Quarter-Century. Snider, elated with her success, flew down to Los Angeles, where he announced to Hefner that he was Dorothy’s manager. According to reports, Hefner did not like Snider, whom he described as a small-time hustler. Worse for Snider, Hefner introduced the naive young beauty to Peter Bogdanovich, a skilled and respected motion picture director, who had seen his career founder through his love for another young model and actress, Cybill Shepherd. He had cast Shepherd in certain expensive movies for which her talents were apparently not suited, and in the end both Shepherd and his career had gone into temporary eclipse. Nevertheless, such was the beauty of this young girl from Vancouver that Bogdanovich felt himself fatally attracted again. He cast Dorothy in a movie he was making in New York, and once the two were on location in the city they fell in love. Meanwhile, Snider’s world was falling apart. Determined to cash in on Dorothy’s success, he had earlier persuaded her to marry him, thus strengthening his hold on her. But now he felt he was losing her. He had also been barred from the Playboy Mansion - the ultimate snub to someone of Snider’s makeup. Rejected and humiliated, he decided to take action. When Dorothy returned from New York, she did not move in with him. She wanted a divorce. Snider hired a private detective to follow her. On August 15, 1980, the private investigator alerted friends of Snider’s who lived above him to the fact that neither Snider nor Stratten had emerged from Snider’s apartment after a meeting in which they were supposed to thrash out their problems. Within minutes a dreadful scene was discovered in that apartment, and an investigator from the coroner’s office, Michael A. Shepherd, was on his way to the scene. 3 When Dr. Noguchi became Chief Medical Examiner in 1967 there was no full-time investigator’s staff in the coroner’s office. Dr. Noguchi installed such a staff and it has done excellent work through the years. Skilled investigators who can go to the scene of a crime, search it professionally for clues to the cause and circumstance of death, collect vital evidence, and make a detailed report of all criminalistic and other relevant factors at the scene are now an integral part of the forensic process. In the Stratten case, investigator Shepherd filed a particularly excellent description and forensic analysis of the scene. Decedents are a 20-year-old female and 20-year-old male, who are married, but separated, pending divorce action. Decedent 80-10485 is the 1980 Playmate of the Year (professional name: Dorothy Stratten). Decedent 80-10486 is her husband.... Coroner observed both Decedents in a first floor bedroom. Both were unclothed, both in full rigor. Decedent Hoogstraaten, 80-10485, was cool to the touch, lying semi-crouched across the end of a low bed... She was lying with both legs on the carpet, and right shoulder on the carpet, with her buttocks raised. She had blood stains, possible hand prints, to her buttocks, and left leg. She had trauma to both knees. She had an entrance [wound], close to the contact shotgun wound to her left cheek, with much blood loss. She had lividity consistent with her position. She had non-consistent blood stains to her left shoulder and left arm. There was blood splatter on the east wall and curtains, next to her head. She had lost the tip of her left index finger, possible gunshot wound. Beneath her was a towel, with a hole and blood stains. Near Decedent Hoogstraaten’s head, but at an angle away from her, a “love seat” sexual appliance was on the floor. It was set into a position for possible rear entry intercourse. Decedent Snider, 80-10486, was cool to the touch, lying prone on the rug, lying head to the east, in line with the end of the bed ... He was lying with both hands beneath him, at lower chest level. A shotgun was observed under him, lying under Decedent, stock toward his neck, barrel toward the right knee. He had an entrance shotgun wound to the right side of his head, with open wound between his eyes, and drain from the wound behind his left ear. The left eye was bulging from the socket. His right hand had long blond hair in it (recovered by Coroner in Miscellaneous Evidence). The wound to the right side of his head had a blackened portion about it.... Decedent’s right index finger was extended, with the rest of the right fingers curled. The fingers of the left hand were curled. Lividity matched his position, to include an outline of the shotgun. He had trauma to his right thumb. An expended round of 12 gauge #4 buckshot load was recovered from the weapon, a 12 gauge Mossberg pump shotgun. It is two feet-two inches from the depressed position of the trigger to the end of the barrel. An expended round of similar type and an unexpended round were recovered from the floor, about both bodies. At this time, no notes were found. A tape recorder was checked at the scene, with negative results. At this point, no one has come forth with statements of intent of action or frame of mind of violent action, by either Decedent, toward the other Decedent. To the layman, such a report might seem shocking and chillingly impersonal, but it is essential in the accurate reconstruction of any crime. And it is only the first step in a much broader forensic investigation, which includes autopsy and the careful laboratory analysis of evidence found at the scene. In the Dorothy Stratten case, it was immediately apparent that an intruder had not committed a double murder. Evidence pointed conclusively to murder followed by suicide. Yet a question remained when it was alleged that Dorothy Stratten was subjected to a sexual assault before her death. Here again, forensic science provided the answer. Alert to that possibility, the investigator at the scene took fingernail scrapings and hair samples for analysis, and a sexual-assault test was performed. There were no laboratory findings of sexual abuse, only of “possible sexual activity.” Thus, Dorothy Stratten’s last moments of life before Paul Snider shot her in the head, then put the gun to his own head and pulled the trigger, must be left to conjecture. Captions to the figures supplied dorothy.jpg: Dorothy Stratten dorothy_stratten.jpg: Another picture of Dorothy Stratten snider.jpg: Paul Snider (1951-1980), He killed his wife, Dorothy Stratten, and then committed suicide. snider_dc.jpg: Death Certificate of Paul Snider snider_grave.jpg: Grave of Paul Snider stratten_dc.jpg: Death certificate of Dorothy Stratten This article has (2149) words Dr. Anil Aggrawal, M.D. Professor of Forensic Medicine Maulana Azad Medical College New Delhi‑110002

SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-119 For SEPTEMBER 2003 issue SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-119 THE BRAIN TUMOR THAT MADE A MURDERER OUT OF A BOY ‑Dr. Anil Aggrawal Can a brain tumor make a murderer out of an innocent intelligent boy? Yes, and that is our this month’s story. Forensic science has a great role to play in such murders. Because it was forensic science which proved in the end that this murderer we are going to talk about had a tumor in brain. Well, let us get our story from the beginning. Charles Whitman was born on June 24, 1941. He was the eldest of three boys, his father, also named Charles, owned his own plumbing business. Most family friends said he was the model son, good-looking, intelligent, popular and all that stuff. He was an Eagle scout, an alter boy and an accomplished pianist. The only downfall in this seemingly perfect life was his father. It seems old Charles Sr. like to make sure that everyone knew who was boss of the house, and didn’t mind reinforcing his rules with violence. Remember - The ‘American Dream’ comes at a price. Charles Jr.’s life got better in 1959 when he moved out of home and joined the Marines. He received a scholarship to attend the University of Texas, where he met his wife Kathy. But, as with all things good in this world, it didn’t work out. He was court marshaled for money lending and gambling, which led to him loosing his scholarship. He left the marines in 1964. Following this Whitman went back to University. he was in a hurry to graduate so he took on a big workload, taking extra classes. He was also studying to be an estate agent, and also worked part-time so his wife didn’t have to support him. In March 1966 Whitman’s world began to fall apart. His parents broke up and his temper began to get worse. He spoke to his friends about leaving his wife as he was scared he would start to beat her, but they talked him into staying in the relationship. Around this time he also spoke with the University psychiatrist whom he told that he felt like he would “go up on the tower with a deer rifle and start shooting at people.” He made a second appointment with the shrink but never showed up. The end finally came on July 31, 1966. He sat down at his desk and typed: “I don’t quite understand what is compelling me to type this note. I have been to a psychiatrist. I have been having fears and violent impulses. I’ve had some tremendous headaches in the past. . . . After my death I wish an autopsy on me performed to see if there’s any mental disorder . . . I intend to kill my wife after I pick her up from work. I don’t want her to have to face the embarrassment my actions will surely cause her. . . Life is not worth living” After he picked his wife up from work he took a pistol over to his mother’s apartment. In the ensuing struggle she had all the fingers on one hand broken. She was also stabbed in the chest. But she was still breathing, so Whitman pushed her down onto the ground and put a bullet into the back of her head, killing her instantly. He then picked her up and put her to bed to make it look as if she were sleeping. Next to the body he left a note attacking his father. The note signed off with - “I love my mother with all my heart.” When he got back home he added to the bottom of his letter - “12.30 a.m. Mother already dead.” He then went into the bedroom and stabbed his wife to death. He then added to his letter again - “3.00 a.m. - Wife and mother both dead.” He left the house at 9.00 a.m. the next morning and bought a second hand .30 M-1 carbine from a hardware store. He then went on to another store and bought hundreds of rounds of ammo. At 9.30 he was in Sears and Roebuck purchasing a 12-gauge shotgun. He then went on to a tool supply shop where he rented a trolley. He then took his supplies home where he altered the weapons a little, and even stopped for a chat with the postman. Later the postman spoke about how he knew that what Whitman was doing with the guns was illegal, but he didn’t think there was any harm in it. Whitman then grabbed his own guns and put them with these two new ones (seven in all) in a metal trunk. He then put on a pair of grey nylon overalls, placed the gun trunk into his car and left to fulfill his destiny. When Whitman reached his destination point, a 307 ft clock tower at the university of Texas, it had reached 98º F. A bloody hot day by all standards. Whitman dragged his trunk to the tower elevator where he went to the 27th floor (as far as it went). He then took the trunk out of the elevator and walked toward a woman working behind a desk there. She was Edna Townsley, 51, and she was about to die. Whitman smashed her in skull with a rifle butt, but she was still alive at this point. He then dragged his guns up the four remaining flights of steps and walked out onto the platform overlooking most of Austin. A few minutes later a family left the elevator and started to head upstairs to the tower top when Whitman jumped out and fired three shots into the group. He killed Mark Gabour, 15, and his aunt Marguerite Lamport, 45. He also injured two others. Whitman then barricaded the door, walked back to the receptionist, Edna Townsley, and put a shot into her already smashed head, killing her this time. He then went outside on to the viewing area of the tower where he found protection from the chest high, 18 inch thick, limestone parapet that surrounded the viewing area. His first shot was fired at the people below at around 11.45 a.m. It was fired from his .35 Remington rifle and ripped through the leg of Alec Hernandez, 17, who was delivering newspapers around campus. He then fired at random at any and everything that he felt worthy of his bullets. The first call went through to police at 11.52 a.m. and soon after every single available policeman in Austin was at the scene. One cop, Billy Speed, 22, was sheltered behind a balustrade when a Whitman bullet tore though him, ending his life. About 100 yards away an electrician step out of his van to see what was going on when he copped a bullet in the chest, he was soon dead also. One of the most successful tactics used by Whitman was the use of the injured as bait. As someone would try to help an injured victim who was in the open, Whitman would pick them off. This happened to Paul Sonntag, 18, who ran to help his girlfriend, Claudia Rutt, who was shot by Whitman while shopping. As Sonntag bent to help Claudia he was cut down. Both died before anyone else could reach them. But the killing was not confined to a small distance. One guy, Harry Walchuk, 38, was a few hundred yards away looking at magazines at a newsstand when a bullet ripped his throat out, killing him. Whitman was working his way around the lookout area and firing in all directions. So much so that the police thought there was a gang up in the tower doing the shooting. But they would soon learn. Most of the deaths occurred in the first 20 minutes of the massacre. He was deadly accurate, hitting most victims in vital organs, in particular around the heart. It would seems that the Marines had taught him well. Police boarded a helicopter to try and get a good shot at Whitman, but 30 minutes later it was given up as the wind was playing havoc, and there was a fear Whitman might hit the Chopper. So eventually police stormed the building. Three officers made it into the tower, where they met up with a former Air Force man, Alan Crumb, who they deputized on the spot. They then went upstairs to make sure they had some level of justice for the community. At around 1.20 p.m. two of the officers, Ramiro Martinez and Houston McCoy, along with Alan Crumb stormed out onto the tower to confront Whitman. They say that he attempted to shoot them but they got him first, but as there is no evidence of this all we have to go on is the fact that Whitman was filled with bullets (at least six from Martinez’s pistol, two shotgun blasts to the body at close range and one shotgun blast at point blank range into his head.) and there was not a scratch on any of the “hero’s”. A few hours later Whitman’s name was released to the press. When his father heard the news he rang police and asked them to check on Whitman’s wife and mother - and we all know what they found there. Once a body count was made it seems that Whitman had scored 15 dead on arrivals. One of the injured died soon after, and he also shot a woman though the stomach who was eight months pregnant, killing the fetus/baby, which would take the count up to seventeen if you believe that counts. The count was as follows: 1 – mother 1 – wife 2 – eight months’ pregnant lady (counting as two) 13 – other persons All in all Charles Whitman created himself a place in America’s history as one of the most influential spree murderers of this century - if not the most. You may ask at this point, “Who is a spree murderer?” Well, a spree murderer is someone who kills a number of people at the same time, but in different locations, just like Charles Whitman did. He killed his mother in her apartment, then returned to his apartment and stabbed his wife, and lastly went up the tower and killed an additional 14 people, including that pregnant lady. Readers may like some of this interesting Bit. When Whitman bought the Ammunition for the day’s activities a clerk asked him why he needed so much, he replied, “To shoot some pigs.” Whitman’s autopsy showed that he a small brain tumour in the part that controls emotional responses. From here there were two different findings. One report says that the tumour was malignant and would have killed him within a year, and contributed to his complete loss of control. But another report released prior to that one says that the tumor was benign and could not have caused any pain. Either way, at least it proved that Whitman wasn’t crazy by thinking he had something wrong in his head. In 1972 Whitman’s guns were sold by the Austin police for only $1500 to a collector in Kansas. The tower was reopened for the public in July, 1967. It then became a very popular place for suicide attempts. At least three every year until it was closed again in 1975. It was then reopened again, and the suicide jumpers came back until a few months ago when it was closed down for good. Well, what does one say about such a legend. This killing was, and still is, one of the greatest ever. This took the whole genre into a new league. Another great point about this killing was that Whitman was considered an “All-American Boy”. It always makes me laugh when these ‘perfect’ boys turn on the society that seems to love them so much. Whitman died on August 1, 1966. His victims : 16 + an unborn baby! Surely he remains one of the most famous spree murderers in history. The question that arises is, that if he were caught alive, would he have been found guilty. I think no. Because he had a tumor in his brain, and most likely the psychiatrists would have given him a clean chit. He would have got the verdict of “guilty but insane”! Captions to the figures supplied whitman.gif : Charles whitman whitman_dead.jpg : Charles Whitman lying dead. remington.gif : The Remington, used by Charles. His Remington was fitted with a 4x leupold scope. carbine.jpg : M1 Carbine. Developed during World War II as a replacement for the 1911-A1 pistol, the M1 Carbine is short and light. The gun was the brainchild of David M. “Carbine” Williams who apparently did much of his design work for the carbine while serving time for “moonshining”. Later Williams helped engineers at Winchester perfect his basic design. The original gun was designated by the US military as the M1 Carbine. Later a selective-fire version was fielded in an effort to create a more potent weapon; this became the M2 version of the carbine. Finally a selective-fire version that could accept early infrared viewers was created and designated the M3. In addition there were many experimental configurations of the firearm created for the commercial as well as foreign military markets. But the M1 and M2 were the only ones to ever be made in great numbers. This article has (2248) words Dr. Anil Aggrawal, M.D. Professor of Forensic Medicine Maulana Azad Medical College New Delhi‑110002

SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-118 There was no article previous month (July 2003) For AUGUST 2003 issue SCIENCE IN CRIME DETECTION-118 THE SEXUAL MURDERS ‑Dr. Anil Aggrawal This time we will talk about sexual murders. Viewing the victim of a sexual murder is extremely difficult and disturbing, even for the most seasoned detectives and crime scene personnel. Detectives who investigate this type of crime seem to remember each and every detail precisely the way they observed it the day the crime was reported or uncovered. If you speak with these same detectives ten, twenty and even thirty years after the event, they can still relate in perfect detail the scene, their investigation and their interview with the suspect as if the murder just happened. Detectives handle hundreds of other violent crimes, but the sexual killers seem to be the heartbreakers. In most cases, the victims are young and vulnerable and suffer greatly prior to their deaths. Sexual killings are, in several experts’ opinion, the most violent, and the victims the most visually graphic to witness. The empathy for the victim is far greater for the crime scene detectives and personnel who process the scene than for other investigators involved in the case. A bond is formed between the forensic personnel and the victim because of the time spent with and the closeness to the victim at the scene. This is also true of the medical examiner at the time of the autopsy. The medical examiner autopsies hundreds of men, women and children who have died for any number of reasons, but the sexual murder victims are the most disturbing. In today’s society, where you can usually find someone willing to perform any type of sexual behavior for a price (or, in many cases, for free), it is hard to believe that these killings still occur. Yet all we have to do to get a taste of criminal deviant society is look at the many reminders we see daily. When we are having our morning coffee, we see the latest statistics of our missing young in our newspapers. In the US, one can see this information even on the side of the milk carton! As we read the morning newspaper, we undoubtedly come across a story of either sexual abuse or a sexual killing. During our morning commute, we observe at least one billboard for a missing children’s hot line. And in the evening, we watch a program dealing with missing or exploited persons. Sexual homicides are the most complex of all homicides. They can involve one deviant sexual act or an elaborate ritual that is repeated from victim to victim. Profile Usually, the sexual predator killer is male. There are few females who kill for sexual reasons. Occasionally, a female helps her male partner obtain the victim or she assists in the actual killing, but to find a female killing for sexual pleasure is very rare. Motives and Methods The sexual killer may or may not have been abused as a child, but, in most cases, he experienced some type of sexual abuse that influenced his behavior as he matured. Sexual abuse can be inflicted by one or both of the parents, some other relative, a friend of the family or a stranger. The sexual perpetrator begins by fantasizing every aspect of the crime, from the initial contact to his last moments with the victim. This includes the way the victim appears. When you have a series of these killings, the victims almost always share common characteristics, such as age, height, appearance and, in some cases, occupation. It is important to remember that the victims of sexual homicide are the most vulnerable society has to offer. Children, both male and female (but statistics tend to favor the female child), and young women are almost always the victims. A sexual killer has strong compulsions for deviant acts. The only way he can satisfy himself is by having his victim perform exactly as he commands, fulfilling his sexual needs. The sexual killer shares a lot of characteristics with the serial killer. Both the sexual and serial killer are on the prowl, looking for vulnerable victims. They secure their victims in the same manner, they may kill in the same manner and they dispose of their victims’ bodies in basically the same manner. Like the serial killer, if the sexual killer is left to continue, he kills until he is apprehended. The investigators have learned from interviewing these individuals that they continue their sexual acts with the victims until they experience a certain feeling of ecstasy. This type of sexual predator refers to this as a mental orgasm. This is not ejaculation, but a feeling of great energy and an emotional release that occurs only in the mind. Some sexual killers refer to this as a rush. Investigation and Capture Investigations vary with the incident. Usually with these types of killings, there is more than one victim, so the police will begin by looking at the MO (short for Modus Operandi or the usual method of killing), such as types of victims, method of killing, method of disposing of the bodies, location, where the bodies were disposed of, and will examine any evidence left at the scene. They will then begin to make a profile in an attempt to locate the killer. If warranted, a task force will be formed where a number of detectives will follow up on all leads developed on the case. The police will focus their efforts on stakeouts at dump sites or pick-up sites, and possibly use decoys in an attempt to draw the killer in. Capture will usually result from an unconscious mistake made by the killer or just good police work. When captured, the killer will usually confess to a good interrogator. It is important to remember that if the killer experiences a mental orgasm, the detectives, medical examiners, forensic personnel and even the forensic laboratory workers may not find semen in, on or near the victim. Not all sexual killers have a physical ejaculation. They may just have a mental orgasm and thus leave no physical evidence. When there is an ejaculation and the assailant is wearing a condom, the condom lubrication left on the victim can be collected, analyzed and compared for future evidence against him. This is a technique of which few police officers are aware. Two Common Sexual Killer Profiles There are basically two general types (what experts refer to as profiles) of sexual murderers. The first is the more intelligent, methodical killer, similar to Ted Bundy. The second is more impulsive and may use a partner in the killings, as did Henry Lee Lucas. The Ted Bundy Profile Ted Bundy was a handsome, charming and very deadly sexual killer who terrorized Florida in the 1980s. Bundy was a law student and a Young Republican and often kept his arm in a sling to appear less threatening. Women who stopped to help him with his groceries were abducted, raped and beaten to death. Bundy was executed by the state of Florida in 1989 for the deaths of twenty-two women, but he was believed to have been responsible for even more. In the Bundy-type profile, the killer usually has above average intelligence and uses this intelligence as a tool to overcome obstacles. He attracts his victims with his charming personality and good looks, making them feel at ease until he has total control of them. When he carries out his fantasies, he does so with cool cunning, which will be a great advantage to him because the police tend to key in on the nervous suspect. This type of sexual killer is not distracted by weird fantasies or delusions. The Bundy-type killer doesn’t usually have long-term life goals and is extremely self-centered. Despite his charm and good looks, he does not interact well socially. His only sexual encounters are those of convenience; “love” and “marriage” are not terms in his vocabulary. The Bundy-type killer shows no shame or remorse for his actions. He is more than likely a loner who feels no one is good enough to become a friend of his. This killer starts his fantasy with a plan or a strategy about what will occur and may even make contingent plans in case the initial ones are altered. Because he seeks strangers, he feels a need to become familiar with his victims. He asks a series of well-thought-out questions to become familiar with them. He attempts to control all aspects of the crime. He demands that the victim speaks, acts and behaves in a certain manner. If the victim is not submissive, the Bundy-type killer becomes very aggressive and demands that she conforms; if she doesn’t, he just kills her. In planning for this contingency, the killer brings his weapon or weapons with him. When he kills, he often uses guns or knives and rarely uses his hands. Because these murders are so well planned, the killer usually has a restraining device ready to use because the act of restraining the victim is part of the fantasy. When examining the Bundy-type scene, the crime scene technicians find little or no evidence, and there is a good possibility that the actual scene of the crime will never be uncovered. Once the act is completed, the body is removed and placed in a different location than the scene of the crime. This is done primarily to cover up the crime and to distance himself from his victim. Since this killer is a loner and not likely to have marital or other such ties, he is extremely capable of moving from one location to another to avoid apprehension. Similarly, he usually acts alone rather than use a partner. Finally, the Bundy-type killer may keep the victim alive for a time or keep the victim’s corpse around, believing there is no rush to dispose of the victim. I would like to give here – for the benefit of our readers, a quick checklist of all characteristics of Ted Bundy type Profile. Here it is: Ted Bundy Profile Checklist Very intelligent Charming personality Physically attractive Works alone Makes detailed plans, with contingencies Asks victims a series of questions to become familiar with them Controls all aspects of the crime scene Prefers to use a ruse rather than physical violence to abduct the victim Has weapon when abducting the victim Has restraints ready Demands victim act in a certain way Leaves little evidence at the crime scene Removes body from the killing scene The Henry Lee Lucas Profile Henry Lee Lucas and Otis Toole traveled US highways looking for victims. Upon finding a suitable candidate, one of the pair controlled the victim while the other took charge of the getaway. After they felt they were a safe distance from the pickup site, they tortured, sexually abused and killed their victim. It is believed Lucas and Toole killed hundreds of people this way. They now await execution in Texas. The Lucas-type killers were usually reared fatherless or with little contact from their fathers. They almost always had strong matriarchal figures - mothers, grandmothers, aunts - who took care of them. It is not uncommon for them to have been born into poor or lower-middle-class neighborhoods. Because of low self-esteem and the lack of proper supervision, they are more than likely of below-average intelligence. They are society’s outcasts and probably live alone. They have little or no contact with the outside world and frequently move from one low-paying, unskilled job to another. Another difference between the two types of sexual killers is that the Bundy type is very interested in any post killing media coverage. For example, he clips articles out of newspapers and videotapes news media coverage. If given a chance, he is more than ready to offer assistance to the media if they request it. The Lucas type hides in fear after committing his murders. He may keep written notes or clippings from a newspaper to assist him in his fantasies and set up altars or discreet hiding areas to secrete his souvenirs. But remorse is quite possible, and he may attempt to seek some type of counseling or religious forgiveness. It is not uncommon for him to return to the crime scene to assure himself he left nothing behind that may link him to his crime. When this Lucas-type kills, it is usually with little planning; an occurrence of some kind draws his attention and stimulates a response. This could be a beautiful woman walking down the street, a young girl or boy in a vulnerable position or a hitchhiker who looks like an easy victim. He usually does not kill persons with whom he has relationships, but will instead seek strangers. He knows, however, where to find his victims-a local tavern or some such familiar area he frequents or the route he travels to and from work. There is little or no verbal contact between the Lucas-type killer and his victim before or during the commission of the murder. Since this type of murderer is extremely haphazard, selecting his crime scenes at random and conducting little to no preplanning, the killing is swift and violent and the crime scene technicians will find a fair amount of evidence left behind. Remember, his victims are usually found on the spur of the moment, so he must quickly gain control over them, take them to remote locations and, upon completion of his sexual acts, kill them. There have been many arrests of these types of killers because eyewitnesses or the police themselves observed the murders. Because of the swiftness of his action, the Lucas-type killer needs no type of restraints to control his victim. More than likely, he commits his sexual acts on his victim after she is dead. Little or no effort is made to cover or conceal the victim’s body, and any weapons used are usually left at the scene. These weapons can be sticks, pipes, rocks, boards or, unlike with the Bundy type, the killer’s own hands. Because of the Lucas type’s carelessness, foolishness and low intelligence, the police usually have little problem apprehending him, especially if he has a prior criminal record. In addition, if the killer has committed multiple killings, all are easily linked to the suspect because of similarities in the crime scenes. In most cases, the victim’s body is not even removed from the initial killing scene. The Lucas-type sexual killer may take on an assistant if he feels one is necessary. This is usually the case because this type of sexual killer has low self-esteem and feels he needs someone of greater intelligence to assist him. If the partner is female, the killer may use her to ease the suspicions of an intended victim. For example, if a female hitchhiker is looking for a ride, she is more likely to get into a vehicle with another female present than alone with a male. Or the killer may use his female associate to lure victims to a remote location. Women generally suspect harm more from men than they do from other women, so the female accomplice is often able to bring victims to where the killer waits with less difficulty than if the killer himself attempted it. In extremely rare cases, the partner assists in the act. In one such case, a young couple was visited at home by a male friend who was recently released from jail. To celebrate his release, the couple decided to throw an impromptu celebration with alcohol and drugs. As the night progressed, all parties involved became highly intoxicated and the newly released acquaintance talked his friend’s wife into having sex while her husband was passed out on the couch. While they were thus engaged, the husband awoke. He began protesting in a loud and violent manner, causing the ex-con to reach into his pants pocket and remove a handgun. With the wife’s assistance, the ex-con secured the husband with bathrobe ties and made the husband watch while the other two both enjoyed themselves in front of him. While this was happening, the two photographed themselves so the husband could have mementos of the evening. When the husband again showed his disgust at his wife’s behavior, the ex-con shot him. After the murder, the wife and the excon continued to have relations. When the time came to remove the victim from the scene, the wife went to the garage, retrieved a saw and, with the assistance of her new lover, proceeded to remove her husband’s limbs. Prior to doing this, however, they removed his penis, and the wife began to use it in a sexual fashion while the ex-con took more photographs. Once the victim was properly dissected and bagged, he was subsequently removed from his apartment and buried in a wooded area. The wife stayed on with her new lover and assisted him in collecting more victims for his sexual killings. When two male sexual killers work together, things are a bit different. Rather than lure a victim to a remote location, a male-male team usually snatches the victim with force. One of the men subdues the victim while the other drives them to the murder scene. Often, the two males will have different reasons for killing. Lucas was a necrophiliac, for example, while Toole was more concerned with cannibalism. Their common ground was extreme sadism and a lust for homicide. Their incredibly high body count attests to how well their interests meshed. Henry Lee Lucas Profile Checklist Here is a quick checklist of the profile we have just discussed Below-average intelligence Little contact with outside world Hides in fear after crime and may feel remorse May return to the scene Makes no plans, acts on the spur of the moment Little or no verbal contact with victim Leaves much evidence Kills quickly and violently Needs no restraints, but often carries restraining equipment Uses whatever weapon he finds at the scene (hands if necessary) Does not remove body from killing scene May have a partner This article has (2647) words Dr. Anil Aggrawal, M.D. Professor of Forensic Medicine Maulana Azad Medical College New Delhi‑110002