Abstract
There is currently a serious problem with misuse and misunderstanding of bite mark evidence within the larger field of forensic odontology. Saks et al.1 heralds an impending ‘national dismantling of forensic odontology’. What the paper actually addresses is the very real problem of bite mark comparison, or matching, for purposes of suspect identification. Bite mark comparison, or matching or identification, is by no means the whole discipline of forensic odontology. There is valuable information that can and should be obtained from a bite mark, whether or not it can be, or is, used for comparison purposes. Forensic odontology includes identification of human remains and age estimation as well as bite mark evidence. Many professionals, including forensic odontologists, confuse themselves and other professionals by mistakenly equating bite mark analysis with bite mark comparison, or matching, for purposes of suspect identification. This misuse of the terms is a serious problem.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
