Complementary investigations can help the forensic pathologist, the anthropologist and the archaeologist:

2021 ◽  
pp. 21-40
Author(s):  
Fabrice Dedouit ◽  
Céline Guilbeau Frugier ◽  
Caroline Capuani ◽  
Fatima-Zohra Mokrane ◽  
Frédéric Savall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Forensic Pathologist

Confronting Forensic Pathologists

2021 ◽  
pp. 192536212110325
Author(s):  
Victor W. Weedn
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Forensic Pathology ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
Forensic Pathologist ◽  
Sixth Amendment ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
Forensic Scientists

Background: The Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause gives defendants a right to confront their accusers. Method: U.S. Supreme Court cases that interpreted this right as applied to forensic scientists were reviewed. Results: Melendez-Diaz, Bullcoming, and Williams examined constitutional rights to confront forensic scientists. Lower courts have specifically examined their application to forensic pathology. Whether autopsy reports are considered “testimonial” varies among jurisdictions and has not been definitively settled. Defendants are generally able to compel testimony of forensic pathologists. Where the forensic pathologist is truly unavailable, the surrogate expert should be in a position to render an independent opinion.

Malpractice—role of the forensic pathologist in Germany

2004 ◽  
Vol 144 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 265-267 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Dettmeyer ◽  
J. Preuß ◽  
B. Madea
Keyword(s):  
Forensic Pathologist

National Association of Medical Examiners Position Paper: Medical Examiner, Coroner, and Forensic Pathologist Independence

2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judy Melinek ◽  
Lindsey C. Thomas ◽  
William R. Oliver ◽  
Gregory A. Schmunk ◽  
Victor W. Weedn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Position Paper ◽  
National Association ◽  
Medical Examiner ◽  
Forensic Pathologist ◽  
Medical Examiners

scholarly journals Face identification by computerized superposition method: Methodology and two case reports

2008 ◽  
Vol 136 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 38-45
Author(s):  
Sandor Takac ◽  
Slobodan Nikolic ◽  
Miroslav Milosevic
Keyword(s):  
Case Reports ◽  
Face Identification ◽  
Superposition Method ◽  
Forensic Pathologist ◽  
Positive Identification ◽  
First Case ◽  
Brain Operations

INTRODUCTION Skull-face photograph superposition is one of the methods of identification. Digitally recorded and stored within the computer, the images of the skull and face could be superimposed on the monitor. The method requires cooperation among the anthropologist, odontologist, forensic pathologist and the computer technician so as to avoid objective and subjective errors in the identification. CASE OUTLINES We present two cases of positive identification by superimposition. In the first case, it was a 65 year-old male with several brain operations, thus surgical skull bonetrepanations could be seen as the irregularities on the forehead, and were used as the antropological identificational figure. In the second case, it was an 83 year-old female, whose positive identification was made according a photograph taken at least 26 years before death. CONCLUSION Face identification by computerized superposition method is useful in all cases where both the skull and the photograph of the missing person are present, and where other methods of identification have failed due to multiple reasons.

Protocol and misusing its name

2016 ◽  
Vol 291 ◽  
pp. 54-62
Author(s):  
Józef Gurgul
Keyword(s):  
Point Of View ◽  
Penal Code ◽  
Forensic Pathologist ◽  
External Inspection

This article addresses the criteria that are decisive in determining whether a given document can be referred to as Protocol within the meaning of the provisions of Chapter 16 of the Penal Code. From this point of view, the two-staged medico-legal postmortem inspection, consisting of an external inspection and autopsy (opening of the corpse) can be de lege lata documented by drawing up a medico-legal report, which is not considered a Protocol. The autopsy, artificially separated from an inspection (cf. Art. 209, par. 4 of the Penal codc), is carried out “in the presence” of a prosecutor, not under his supervision or with participation, by a forensic pathologist who is not authorized to draw up a Protocol. In the light of the above, Art. 209, par. 4 of the Penal Code should be amended for the sake of truth and justice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document