Abstract
Research informed by practice is more likely to have a greater impact on society. However, forensic cases are confidential and thus, real-life data regarding the details of violent crime is usually withheld from the public and academia. Through a partnership between the authors institution and a UK police service, casefiles from 78 criminal investigations from 2012 to 2020 involving Bloodstain Pattern Analysis (BPA) were examined and quantified. The most common methods of assault and weapons used were identified as well as the frequency of different bloodstain pattern classifications. The results of this study will help inform researchers and supply forensic training providers with data derived from forensic practice. Despite a significant body of literature exploring impact patterns and software for calculating the Area of Origin (AO), impact pattern was classified at only 22% of scenes, with sharp-force trauma being the most prevalent form of assault. This paper recommends a review of the BPA terminology, to include additional commonly encountered patterns that are not defined by the current standard.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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.
