10 Cases That Changed How We Investigate Murder

Before we had the many tools of forensic science we employ in crime investigation today, it was easier to get away with murder. At the same time, it was easier to be convicted of a crime you didn’t commit. Over the years, but by bit, scientific ways of determining what happened were developed, and each are tied with its “first use” case. Consider Spanish scientist Mathieu Orfila, who was forced to solve a problem he himself identified.

Mathieu Orfila determined that, in cases when the victim had been buried for some time, the body might become contaminated with arsenic from the ground. The accused might then be executed for the death of a "victim" who had actually died of natural causes.

His philosophy came back to bite him in the 1830s, when he was called in to argue for the prosecution in the case of a man who was accused of poisoning his own son. The body had been exhumed, and tested positive for arsenic. The defense was insisting that it came from the ground in which the body was buried. Orfila fought back, first doing tests on exactly how a body in the ground picks up arsenic, and then testing the ground around where that particular body had been buried for traces of arsenic. He proved that, although a body might absorb arsenic from the ground, this one hadn't. The man was convicted, and from then on, those who exhumed bodies collected soil samples as well.

There are nine other stories like this, and a bonus, at io9 covering the use of fingerprints, ballistics, lie detectors, and more. -via the Presurfer


Comments (1)

Newest 1
Newest 1 Comment

Forensic science TODAY is hardly any better than "spectral evidence".

Fingerprints aren't unique. DNA has many false-positives from the improper way law-enforcement tries to use it. Anybody and everybody can claim to be an expert witness with no vetting from the court. Blood spatter analysis, footwear impressions and bite-mark comparisons have zero basis in science. Coroners are political appointees who don't need any medical credentials. There's no science behind, or training for, arson investigators. etc., etc.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/tech/forensics-on-trial.html

http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=12589
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Piggy is too aggressive. She's a threat. He would have her eliminated.

Rowlf is way too laid back He's not a killer.

Big Bird and Snuffy are way too innocent. Neither of them have a killer in him.

Fozzy, Beaker, Gonzo, and Lew are clearly mentally incapable. In fact, due to their limited mental capacity, they probably would have been included in Hitler's Final Solution and also been eliminated.

Maybe Animal, but he'd be his own Blitzkrieg. Hitler's men would see him coming a mile away. If he got close enough he could do it, but I doubt he'd make it.

Kermit is the only one in this bunch who is level headed enough to approach cautiously and calculatingly. He would have a plan, a disguise and an exit strategy. As boring as it is, Kermit is the man... er... amphibian for the job.

But if I were a betting man, I'd send Bert. That dude's gonna snap any minute. Might as well make it count.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
How can it be anybody but Crazy Harry? Seriously despite looking just like an insane terrorist bomber, the guy can pop out of anywhere and detonate huge amounts of explosives nobody even knew were there at a moment's notice.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Login to comment.
Email This Post to a Friend
"10 Cases That Changed How We Investigate Murder"

Separate multiple emails with a comma. Limit 5.

 

Success! Your email has been sent!

close window
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
 
Learn More