1 / 14

Identification principles and the use of forms and codes

Identification principles and the use of forms and codes. Tore Solheim 2010 Identification = to prove the identity of a person by objective comparison. Recognition of a person. Proof of identity Subjective Mistakes? Affectionate state Psychological trauma Later doubt

paco
Télécharger la présentation

Identification principles and the use of forms and codes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Identification principles and the use of forms and codes • Tore Solheim • 2010 • Identification = to prove the identity of a person by objective comparison

  2. Recognition of a person • Proof of identity • Subjective • Mistakes? • Affectionate state • Psychological trauma • Later doubt • Use with outmost caution

  3. Person identification • Comparison of a.m. with p.m. information • Objective • By neutral experts • Must never be wrong • Save relatives

  4. Identification • Who is responsible? • Police • Coroner/medical examiner • Judge • ID-commission (team) • How important? • Different countries • Correct body for burial? • Many unidentified bodies? • Recognition easy and cheap

  5. Work in respect of the dead and their families • Respect of the individual after death • Ethics of identification • Must use time and effort • Only the police have sufficient resources • Only the police have international co-operation • Interpol • Working committee • Forms with computer program (DVI-system) • Guide • Recommendation for international co-operation

  6. Odontologic comparison • Comparison of odontologic data • Radiographic comparison • Photographic comparison • Superimposition techniques • Facial reconstruction techniques • Final Identificationmust be a result of a compete evaluation of all evidence • Team work

  7. Odontologic comparison report • Conclusions • Odontologic identity established • Odontologic identity probable • Odontologic identity possible • Odontologic identity excluded • Subjective assessment • No guide • Statistical evidence

  8. Statistical considerations • Keiser-Nielsen • Od.id. established • At least 12 concordant uncharacteristic features • Calculation of possibilities • Possibilities are not the same as probabilities • Interrelation of fillings • Skinner want to reduce the population • The dead person can be anyone • Only the police can guarantee the missing person list (population) • A person not reported missing

  9. Wrong identification? • Identification by elimination • What is the possibility of a wrong identification • DNA comparisons • <1/1000 000 • Odontologic comparison? • Identity established???

  10. How frequent occurs another person with the same features? • Identityestablished • < 1/10 000 • Identity probable • < 1//100 • Identitypossible • >1/100 • Epidemiologic data??

  11. Forms • Forensic examinations -> written report • Also identification • A form • Saves time • Not forget anything • Help for inexperienced • All fields should be filled in • National forms • Often too simple • US after Sept 11. form from 2 to 40 pages • Prepared for big disasters

  12. The Interpol form • International co-operation • Revised several times • Comprises all 3 fields of Identification • 2 out of 15 pages for forensic odontology • Used in all Nordic countries • Designed for electronic use • Cross off boxes • DVI system computer program made in Denmark • Print the forms • Comparison sheet

  13. The odontologic form • A.M and P.M forms • F1 administrative page • F2 odontologic description • A legal report • Not a working document • Registrations should be complete • The report should stand alone • All important background information • Main police findings • Main forensic medical findings • All fields should be filled in

  14. The comparison form • Formulation of conclusion • Reason for the conclusion • Explain non-concordant details • Write which details the conclusion is based upon • Which details (filling) and which tooth • 4 amalgam fillings (17,27,36,35) • Signature of two dentists

More Related