Talk:Forensic identification

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 12 August 2020 and 25 November 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Myrakesti.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:23, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2021 and 10 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cbaranoski.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:23, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Verhagem.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:40, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Law Enforcement

Please explain why law enforcement tag has been removed from the article. It is a topic which should be studied by every investigator, police or otherwise. Peterlewis 17:07, 15 May 2007 (UTC) how can we identify whether the skeleton is of a woman or man???i.e male or female? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.162.93.10 (talk) 04:51, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced the tag, based on reading the scope information at the LE wikiproject, it looks like this belongs. -- Arthur (talk) 19:22, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Additional subject suggestions

Cars (paint flakes, glass shards, jtire tracks, sound)
Locations/dates (landmarks, weather, direction of sunlight, sounds (common in fiction), trace materials and organisms found on evidence)

Paradoctor (talk) 14:40, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Animal identification (same issues as for humans EXCEPT for nonhumans)
Split Testimony MaynardClark (talk)
Forensic identification specialist (and how to get certified)
Skin bacterial communities in conjunction with forensic identification
Plant identification...maybe? -Verhagem (talk) 21:34, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Additional resource suggestions

Alacs, E. A., Georges, A., FitzSimmons, N. N., & Roberston, J. (2009, December 16). DNA detective: a review of molecular approaches to wildlife forensics. Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology, 6(3), 180-194. doi:10.1007/s12024-009-9131-7 This article not only emphasizes the importance of forensic identification within wildlife populations, but it furthermore explains the ways that forensic identification can be used to determine certain species, the sex and lineage of the species, and how it can be traced back to it’s place of origin. It is a helpful source because it provides important information concerning one of the many ways forensic identification is used today.

Champod, C., Evett, I. W., & Kuchler, B. (2001). Earmarks as evidence: a critical review. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 46(6), 1275-1284. Champod, Evett, and Kuchler provide an in depth review about earmarks and how these can be used to individualize earmarks and how they can be used to bring a potential criminal to justice. Among other things, the review touches on the nature of the process and how everyone’s ear is unique, much like fingerprints. This would be a good addition to the article because it explores a topic that is not the norm way of identification and could open doors to new research.

Holobinko, A. (2012). Forensic human identification in the United States and Canada: A review of the law, admissible techniques, and the legal implications of their application in forensic cases. Forensic Science International (Online), 222(1), 394.e1-394.e13. doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1016/j.forsciint.2012.06.001 The authors present an examination of the accepted methods of forensic human identification and why or why they are not admissible in court. I view this as a good source to use for adding to the article because it considers the law aspect of forensic identification. Since this article is in the law enforcement WikiProject scope, I think a law-focused section could be added.

Kanthaswamy, S. (2015, October). Review: domestic animal forensic genetics – biological evidence, genetic markers, analytical approaches and challenges. Animal Genetics, 46(5), 473-484. doi:10.1111/age.12335 Kanthaswamy’s detailed review about animal forensic identification provides multiple situations in which animal DNA can be used to help solve cases such as murder, sexual assault, theft, animal attacks, and even arson. There is a lot of resources he based his information on which makes this a really strong review. This is helpful for me because it focuses on domestic animals and applications that can be useful in the United States, as opposed to wildlife overseas. It will contribute in making the article more diverse and reliable.

Kimwele, C. N., Wambwa, E., Stokes, M., & McElroy, D. (2004). Molecular forensic identification of East African wildlife game species. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 44(6), 713. This article covers similar topics as “DNA detective: a review of molecular approaches to wildlife forensics” but it focuses more on identifying animal species by the meat, both raw and process, that is illegally traded. It’s an important topic to add to the article because it brings awareness to the problem but also educates people on the ways DNA can be extracted and sequenced from a plethora of animals. This will strengthen my animal identification section and provide another wildlife source so I’m not pulling information from just one review. -Verhagem (talk) 13:41, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Lead Section

Forensic identification is the process of analyzing forensic evidence, such as fingerprints, DNA, or chemical traces to most often determine what happened at the scene of a crime, who was involved, and occasionally how it happened. The process and progression of forensic identification dates back to the 1800s when forensic scientists were given permission to investigate Jack the Ripper’s victims. During that time period, there were no school specific to forensic science meaning most forensic scientists were self-taught. However, in 1950, the University of California at Berkeley establish the School of Criminology. The 1900s experienced several advances in forensics, some of which included the enactment of the Federal Rules of Evidence, the development of polymerase chain reaction technique, the assessment of mass spectrometry and gas chromatography for use in forensics, using comparison microscopes for ballistic tests, and the establishment of the DNA database. These all aided in the development into how forensic identification is practiced today and is still evolving in the 21st century. Forensic identification is largely used for identifying human remains as well as animal remains. Since, historically, this is a relatively new form of gathering evidence in criminal cases, those who specialize in forensic identification continues to make headway with new discoveries and technological advances to make convictions more accurate. DNA evidence was first introduced to the courts in 1980 and the first exoneration as a result of DNA was in 1989. There have been 336 additional exonerations since then. In addition to the positive effects DNA brought to the courts, many were skeptical of it’s validity and reliability. Because of this, faulty and inconsistent DNA measures were weeded out, bringing forth the popular DNA typing that is currently used. Forensic evidence has evolved into the foundation of scientific research and causation. With that being said, forensic identification goes beyond crime scenes. It is also utilized for product identification, network classification, and distinguishing fraudulent or pirated distributions.

Sources:
Cole, S. A. (2009). Forensics without uniqueness, conclusions without individualization: the new epistemology of forensic identification. Law, Probability and Risk, 8, 233-255. doi:10.1093/lpr/mgp016
Lehrer, M. (1998, December 18). The role of gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. Instrumental techniques in forensic urine drug testing. Clinics in Laboratory Medicine, 18(4), 631-649
National Laboratory of Enteric Pathogens, Bureau of Microbiology, Laboratory Centre for Disease Control. (1991). The polymerase chain reaction: An overview and development of diagnostic PCR protocols at the LCDC. The Canadian Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2(2), 89–91.
Saks, M. J., & Koehler, J. J. (2005, August 5). The Coming Paradigm Shift in Forensic Identification Science. Science, 309(5736), 892-895.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/free-innocent/improve-the-law/fact-sheets/dna-exonerations-nationwide
http://www.ncsl.org/research/civil-and-criminal-justice/dna-laws-database.aspx
http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/uchistory/general_history/campuses/ucb/colleges.html#criminology
http://www.casebook.org/intro.html
www.uscourts.gov/file/rules-evidence

Here a some of my thoughts on a few additions I thought would be good for the article!
I would like to add more information to the animal identification section. There is so much information regarding domestic and wildlife animal identification. Those two topics have the potential to stem into law enforcement and provide answers as to why forensic identification for animals is so important. I am also thinking about adding more to the human identification section. It briefly covers the many applications of identification, but I think it should go into more detail so that the article and the resources provided will satisfy the reader. More specifically, I want to do a section over skin bacterial communities and how they influence identification. I want to add a section that details what what a forensic identification specialist is and how to become one. I am also thinking about adding more external articles that relate more closely to the bio-medical aspect of this topic. --Verhagem (talk) 04:35, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Forensic identification. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100617081150/http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~huangyz/cvpr08_Huang.pdf to http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~huangyz/cvpr08_Huang.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:48, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Forensic identification. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050609074529/http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20041011/printer.html to http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20041011/printer.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:45, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal for WikiProject

A proposal has been made to form a WikiProject for forensic science. Please add your name to the list if you wish to contribute to this endeavour. TimothyPilgrim (talk) 17:24, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Fairfax

Tom Fairfax (real name Roger Payne) was jailed for life in 1968 for cutting the throat of Claire Josephs, 20, at her flat in Bromley, South-East London. He pleaded not guilty at trial. There were no witnesses and no motive was established. The Daily Mirror says here: "The prosecution relied heavily on evidence from Margaret Pereira, an expert in blood forensics at Scotland Yard. Fairfax was one of the first killers to be convicted solely on forensic evidence. More than 60 fibres matching Claire’s dress were found on his clothes and a spot of blood matching her rare type was found in his car." But this was just blood type, not DNA. Could this be added somewhere here or elsewhere? There's another source at the The Times here. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:54, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In fact Fairfax has had a book written about him by Joy Grant Hicks. I think he may be sufficiently notable to have his own article. Also reported in the Daily Mail. Blog source here Martinevans123 (talk) 15:01, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Claim of uniqueness

As I was reading the section on 'DNA identification' I was very surprised to see the claim "As with fingerprints, an individual's DNA profile and characteristics are unique." I added a citation needed tag to this because I would love to see any reliable source for the claim. This section references the main page for "Forensic DNA analysis" which makes no such claim of 'uniqueness' in this context. Basically, it is my understanding that this claim is fundamentally and factually incorrect, both for fingerprints and DNA. However, before deleting or editing, I am open to hearing alternative opinions on the matter. — RB Ostrum. 16:34, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, on re-reading, there are several similar statements elsewhere in this article. As a result, I think this issue is a bit broader than my comment above indicates insofar as it applies to various entries in the article and not only the section on 'DNA identification'. — RB Ostrum. 16:43, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Seminars in Forensic Science

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 January 2023 and 6 April 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ringettem7, Hockeyetc08 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Nameless and unknown (talk) 01:13, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]