Title

P229 – The Development and Use of STR DNA Identification Evidence, the Beginning of the End of Bite Mark Evidence in the United States

11:01
Thursday August 20th
Station 14
Duration: 12 minutes 
04. Forensic biology
Christopher Plourd

Historically Forensic odontology has multiple primary applications. These applications include dental identification, bite mark analysis, dental age estimation, and standard of dental care. This presentation will focus on the history of forensic odontology in the United States as it relates to bite mark analysis. It will explore the STR DNA exonerations of three individuals. Ray Krone who was sentenced to death in 1992 for a murder in the State of Arizona; Robert Stinson who was convicted of murder in 1985 in the State of Wisconsin; and Keith Harward convicted of murder in 1982 in the state of Virginia. Each of these individuals did not commit the murder they were charged and convicted of because of flawed bite mark analysis. Bite marks were first used during the Salem Witch trials in 1692, but it did not gain national attention until 1978 when the State of Florida prosecuted serial killer Ted Bundy, and a key element of the state’s case was bite mark analysis. The Bundy case was the seminal case for the use of bite mark evidence in American courts. Over the next 30 years, numerous convictions, well over 100, based on bite marks cemented the evidence into the legal system as validated, legitimate, reliable, and admissible. Krone’s, Stinson’s and Harward’s convictions were some of them. This presentation will evaluate the rise of Bite Mark analysis and the turning point of the advance of STR DNA testing and the use of DNA data bases that has led to its demise as an accepted forensic science discipline. The questions surrounding bite mark analysis and comparison culminating in the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) 2023 report “Bitemark Analysis: A NIST Scientific Foundation Review” and the basis for NIST’s conclusions as well as discussing the fate of bite mark analysis as an accepted forensic science discipline.

Bite mark analysis was accomplished by evaluating an injury bruise pattern in human skin and comparing that pattern to representations of a suspect’s dentition. The underpinning of such bite mark comparison rested on the ability of an expert to accurately distinguish between dentitions and associate a particular dentition to the injury bruise pattern. STR DNA Exonerations of those convicted on bite mark evidence will be discussed along with scientific research that has called into question its validity as a forensic discipline.

Author

  • Christopher Plourd (Judge of the Superior Court, State of California, County of Imperial, United States of America)

On the same topic