SlideShare uma empresa Scribd logo
1 de 1
Baixar para ler offline
AD 49 Agrippina minor ordered her husband’s mistress Lollia Paulina killed and identifies the decapitated
heard by inspecting the teeth for peculiarities she recognized.
1218 Signature authentication on official documents, when many could only make their X was achieved
by having the signer bite into the warm wax sealing the document.
1453 The first formal report of a dental identification was of John Talbot, the 1st Earl of
Shrewsbury, who died in the battle of Castillion, France. The battle, which was won
by France, marked the end of the Hundreds Years’ War.
1692 In the colonies during the Salem Witch Trials, the reverend George Burroughs bit his victims. His
bite pattern and those of other people were compared to patterns on the victims skin. The judges
readily accepted the bite marks as evidence of his guilt. This was the first use of bite marks in the
colonies to solve a crime. Burroughs was convicted and hanged for his crimes.
1777 Paul Revere, a man of many talents, was a coroner, metal smith, and also a
dentist. He identified the remains OD Warren who had been shot through the
head during the battle of Breeds Hill. Warren was buried with others as an
unknown, since it as common battlefield practice for the enemy to strip the
fallen of uniforms and possessions as souvenirs. After the war, in an effort to
honor Warren the unidentified soldiers were disinterred. Revere had previously
constructed a dental prosthesis for his friend enabling him to identify one of the
bodies as General Joseph Warren and rebury him with full military honors.
1837 Controlling child labor, which was extensively used during the Industrial Revolution was a
problem. Stature was a common means of establishing age. Dr. Edwin Saunders established that the
pattern of the eruption of an individual’s teeth was a better criterion.
1849 The first murder trial based on circumstantial dental evidence occurred. Charred fragmentary
dental remains were found in an assay furnace in the laboratory of John White Webster, a professor
of chemistry and mineralogy at Harvard’s medical school. The remains were identified as those of
Dr. George Parkman. Dr. Nathan Coley Keep was able to recognize a peculiar notch in the lower
jaw a dental prosthesis he had constructed. Webster allegedly killed his faculty colleague over an
unpaid loan. Webster was tried, convicted, lost an appeal and was sentenced to death. This case
based only on circumstantial evidence is a classic case, illustrating that a conviction based solely on
circumstantial evidence can be upheld and is still studied by students in law school today.
1864 Dog tags were not issued or required of soldiers during the Civil War. Troops
were concerned that if they were killed would be buried as unidentified. Some
pinned scraps of paper, which weren’t very durable, in their clothing. Others
carved their names in pieces of wood. Enterprising peddlers made and began
selling the first commercial metal identification “dog tags”.
1870 The first documented use of bite mark evidence in court in the
United States was Ohio vs. Robinson, Mansfield, Ohio. Ansil
Robinson, a prominent businessman was suspected of biting and
murdering his mistress. Five bite marks were found on her arm.
Charged with murdering her, he was tried and acquitted despite
the fact that his teeth matched the 5 bite marks on the victim’s arm. Lacking established rules
of evidence and trained odontologists to testify, Robinson, a prominent businessman in the
community was acquitted. Many “friends” were allowed to testify on his behalf. By 1890 bite marks
began to be recognized as evidence leading to identification.
1897 The first textbook on dental identification, “L’Art Dentaire en Medicine Legale” was
published by Dr. Oscar Amoedo, a Cuban. He is considered the father of forensic
odontology and was responsible for the identification of many of the fatalities in
the tragic Charity Bazaar fire in Paris, France.
1915 The International Association (IAI) is founded. It is now
the oldest and largest forensic association in the world. This
professional association represents a diverse, knowledgeable
and experienced membership that assembles each year to
educate, share, critique and present methods, techniques and
research in the physical science disciplines.
1924 The early physical analysis of bite marks is believed to have begun with the noted German forensic
odontologist A. Sorup. He used transparent paper upon which the outline of the biting edges of a
suspect’s teeth were traced to compare with life to compare with life size photographs of the bite
mark. These were the precursor of the more recent overlays in use today.
1930 In Quebec, Canada an infant was murdered. This was the first case in Canada in which a bite mark
on skin was introduced as evidence in court.
1945 Berlin, Germany. The advancing Russian Army
recovers charred human remains from outside a
bunker. An autopsy was conducted and captured
medical and dental records enable them to confirm
the remains are those of Adolph Hitler and Eva
Braun. This identification was never shared
with the allies.
1946 Welty and Glasgow devised a system in which as many as 500 punch cards could be sorted in one
minute by a computer. The following year Taltersall wrote that he thought this system would be very
beneficial in compiling dental data.
1948 One of the first published accounts involving a conviction based on bite marks
was the case, in which pathologist Keith Simpson used bite marks on the breast
of the victim in the conviction of Robert Gorringe for the murder of his wife,
Phyllis.
1948 Scientists recognizing the importance of the advancement of forensic sciences formed the American
Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS), a professional organization, developed to educate its
members and mentor the next generation.
1950 The military, assigned the responsibility for the identification of battle
casualties, recognized the difficulties of relying on the time honored “dog
tags”. They realized, as had the Scandinavians, that dental x-rays and
records were a scientific method and began using them. Many soldiers
were not wearing their dog tags or they had been scavenged.
Fragment of Adolf Hitler’s mandible.
Sketch of Eva Braun’s left side teeth.
1953 The identification of the DNA helix by Watson and Crick
promised to be the next scientific means of human identification,
supplanting the use of dental x-rays and pattern analysis by forensic
odontologists.
1954 An early case, Doyle vs. State, occurred in Texas. The bite mark in this case was on a piece of cheese
found at the crime scene of a burglary. The accused was asked to bite another piece of cheese for
comparison. A firearms examiner and a dentist examined the patterns and both conclude that the
tooth marks were made by the same teeth. The conviction in this case set the stage for bite marks
found on objects and skin to be used as evidence in the future.
1962 The first formal training in forensic odontology was established by the Armed Forces Institute
of Pathology, Washington, D.C., primarily to train military dentists and other governmental
investigators of criminal activity.
1965 Scientists reviewing archived records captured by the U. S. Army in Berlin
at the end of WW II, discovered dental and skull radiographs, plus medical
records which independently enabled them to identify Adolph Hitler and
Eva Braun, information that the Russian Army had withheld from their 1945
autopsy.
1966 Dr. Gosta Gustafson, Lund, Sweden, published the second text on forensic
odontology, the first in English. He went on to train the next generation of
Scandinavian forensic odontologists.
1973 Repatriation of the discovered remains of prisoners of war and those missing in action (POW /
MIA) began with the establishment of the Central Identification Laboratory, Hawaii (CILHI) at
which dental identification from dental x-rays and records played a significant role.
1975 A landmark case, People v. Marx occurred in California. A
woman was murdered by strangulation after being sexually
assaulted. She was bitten several times on her nose. Walter
Marx was identified as a suspect and dental impressions were
made of his teeth. Impressions were also taken of the woman’s
injured nose. These samples along with other evidence was
evaluated using a variety of techniques. Three experts testified
that the bites on the woman’s nose were indeed made by Marx
and he was convicted of voluntary manslaughter.
Evolution
of
X-ray of Hitler’s skull taken by
Dr. Erwin Giesing 9/19/1944
1988 Computer assisted software for the dental identification of human
remains was developed by the U. S. Army Institute of Dental Research
with CAPMI4, followed by a succession of increasingly sophisticated
software.
1989 The development of WinID3 by Dr. James McGivney, introduced the advantage of incorporating
digital images of the ante and post mortem X-rays.
1991 Forensic odontology played a significant role in the assembly and identification of the fragmentary
remains of 15 individuals discovered in the apartment of serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer.
1995 The strategic Planning Committee of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences
reported that the quality and standards applied by different boards for granting
certification varied widely. The Academy recognized the importance of oversight
in the credentialing of forensic specialists by accrediting the certification boards. A
task force now known as the Forensic Specialties Accreditation Board (FSAB) was
developed with grant assistance from the National Institute of Justice to develop
a voluntary program to objectively assess, recognize and monitor the various forensic specialty
boards which seek accreditation by the FSAB. The FSAB was incorporated as an independent
organization in Colorado on June 23, 2000.
1976 The Forensic Sciences Foundation (FSF), an educational arm of the American Academy of Forensic
Sciences, received an award from the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, to establish
examining and certifying boards for proficiency in forensic odontology and another in questioned
document examination. This was in response to requests from judicial and governmental agencies
for a means of identifying qualified experts.
1976 Warren Harvey published a text, Dental Identification & Forensic Odontology, with an extensive
chapter on bites and bite marks.
1978 People vs. Bundy, Tallahassee, Florida firmly established the forensic
value of human bite marks as evidence in a criminal prosecution, ending
the coast to coast odyssey of Theodore (Ted) Bundy who was responsible
for the murders of at least fifteen young women.
1980 The National Funeral Directors (NFD) realizing the importance of having appropriate equipment
and supplies available immediately in the event of a major disaster, developed the first portable
morgue (DPMU) and recruited volunteers in several forensic science specialties. It was the
predecessor of the current federally established mobile morgues. The DPMU supported the Disaster
Mortuary Operational Response Teams (DMORT) for disasters in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and
Del Rio, Texas.
Forensic
Odontology
1996 In David Faigman’s text, Modern Scientific Evidence, Chapter V, the ABFO Workshop # 4 was
erroneously cited as a proficiency test. The frequently referenced error rate published in the text
has been cited in news stories. The source of this information which has apparently been difficult
to locate, allegedly found a 63% rate of false identifications. It actually was an unauthorized
contribution to the text, inappropriately written by a Diplomate of the American Board of Forensic
Odontology. A White Paper published by the ABFO, when the misinformation was discovered,
pointed out that the 1995 workshop was actually an informal exercise and was not designed,
considered a valid scientific setting, nor a proficiency test.
1996 The Family Assistance Act was passed by Congress in response about
inadequate treatment from families of disaster fatalities. It developed
standards which airlines and other public modes of transportation were
required to develop. The basic complaint stemmed from the lack of
communication with the families regarding the progress being made in the
identification of the families. This lead to the development of the National
Disaster Medical Service (NDMS) which incorporated a Disaster Mortuary
Operational Response Team (DMORT) which was assigned the identification
and disposition of the fatalities. Forensic odontologist became essential members of these teams.
2000 By approval of a resolution, the Board of Directors of the International Association for
Identification, forensic odontology was recognized as the
IAI’s Thirteenth Forensic Discipline.
2002 In response to the threat of additional terrorist threats, the Department of Homeland Security is
established and DMORT and again forensic odontologists served as temporary federal employees.
2001 Terrorists attacked the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and were
thwarted in an additional attack by passengers which caused the airliner
to crash near Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Forensic odontologists again
contributed their expertise in the identification of the fragmented and
burned remains, since the teeth are highly resistant to destruction
2003 The functions of the Central Identification Laboratory (CILHI) and the Joint Task Force – Full
Accounting Command JPAC) were combined to form JPAC/CIL the joint POW/MIA command
responsible for the responsibility of recovering, identifying and repatriating the remains of
members of the armed forces. Military board certified forensic odontologists were assigned tours of
duty.
2006 The Federal government activated the National Disaster
Medical Service and the Disaster Mortuary Operational
Teams in response to Hurricane Katrina, Hurricane Rita
and subsequent disasters. Again forensic odontologist
played a substantial role.
2006 The Midwest Forensic Resource Center (MFRC) awarded the first of three grants for the
odontological research quantifying the characteristics of human teeth in relation to the analysis
of bite marks. The award lead to the development of a methodology and software application to
develop a scientific means of bite mark analysis. This provided essential data for further research.
2009 The National Academy of Sciences published a report, “Strengthening Forensic
Science in the United States; A Path Forward.” The report cites the committee
opinion that that the forensic comparative disciplines, which are not taught
in academia, as somehow lacking in a scientific grounding, as opposed to the
Newtonian sciences.
2010 The National Institute of Justice awarded a three year, $715,000
grant to researchers at Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
to study the replication of human bite marks in living skin and the
probability any patterns replicated can be correlated with their
source with a degree of probability.
2011 The second edition of a comprehensive text, Bitemark Evidence; A Color Atlas and Text, was
published with chapters contributed by board certified forensic odontologists.
2013 The final report on the NIJ research cited above was peer reviewed and published on the National
Criminal Justice Reference Service, ncjrs.gov. It demonstrated that contrary to a popular
assumption, it is possible under ideal circumstances to replicate bite marks in porcine skin and
correlate some to their source in a data set with a high degree of probability,
2014 The last two decades have seen several texts on forensic odontology
published. Although DNA has been cited as the only scientific means
of identifying a human bite mark with a known source, research has
indicated probability may also be a means of correlating a bite mark with
its source. DNA is not always recovered, or has been severely degraded.
2014 In spite of the increase use of DNA in bite marks and
human identification, forensic odontology will not be
outmoded in cases of civil litigation involving standards
of care, injuries and the interpretation of dental records
and oral radiographs. The identification of remains
through the use of dental radiographs and records can
be accomplished more quickly and is less expensive than
the use of DNA.

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Semelhante a 2mock up of Odontology

History of forensic dentistry
History of forensic dentistryHistory of forensic dentistry
History of forensic dentistrydentpress
 
Scientific Foundation of Fingerprint Identification
Scientific Foundation of Fingerprint IdentificationScientific Foundation of Fingerprint Identification
Scientific Foundation of Fingerprint IdentificationJury Rocamora
 
Forensic science 2011
Forensic science 2011Forensic science 2011
Forensic science 2011Bruno Mmassy
 
1.2--POWERPOINT--History_of_Forensics.pptx
1.2--POWERPOINT--History_of_Forensics.pptx1.2--POWERPOINT--History_of_Forensics.pptx
1.2--POWERPOINT--History_of_Forensics.pptxPlutarcoCastro1
 
Anthony serero-rad-investigation
Anthony serero-rad-investigationAnthony serero-rad-investigation
Anthony serero-rad-investigationanthony-serero
 
introductiontoforensicscience-141011231729-conversion-gate01.pdf
introductiontoforensicscience-141011231729-conversion-gate01.pdfintroductiontoforensicscience-141011231729-conversion-gate01.pdf
introductiontoforensicscience-141011231729-conversion-gate01.pdfalizain9604
 
ACFrOgAga3dNd2sR-yAX-Y0m_Kaq-BE27Tj6ouay6Pcc2wyCM27xQN7JjaA1iQLWr8u3ppBp2kNiu...
ACFrOgAga3dNd2sR-yAX-Y0m_Kaq-BE27Tj6ouay6Pcc2wyCM27xQN7JjaA1iQLWr8u3ppBp2kNiu...ACFrOgAga3dNd2sR-yAX-Y0m_Kaq-BE27Tj6ouay6Pcc2wyCM27xQN7JjaA1iQLWr8u3ppBp2kNiu...
ACFrOgAga3dNd2sR-yAX-Y0m_Kaq-BE27Tj6ouay6Pcc2wyCM27xQN7JjaA1iQLWr8u3ppBp2kNiu...manish719012
 
Fingerprint history0911
Fingerprint history0911Fingerprint history0911
Fingerprint history0911timr2700
 
Introduction to forensic science
Introduction to forensic scienceIntroduction to forensic science
Introduction to forensic scienceAbby Varghese
 
1._Introduction_to_Personal_Identification.pdf
1._Introduction_to_Personal_Identification.pdf1._Introduction_to_Personal_Identification.pdf
1._Introduction_to_Personal_Identification.pdfArhakirAlpapara
 
Historical Development in Criminalistics-1.pptx
Historical Development in Criminalistics-1.pptxHistorical Development in Criminalistics-1.pptx
Historical Development in Criminalistics-1.pptxGeoffOgunde1
 
History of forensics 2012
History of forensics 2012History of forensics 2012
History of forensics 2012Leah Morgan
 
PERSONAL-IDENTIFICATION-CHAPTER-1-1.pptx
PERSONAL-IDENTIFICATION-CHAPTER-1-1.pptxPERSONAL-IDENTIFICATION-CHAPTER-1-1.pptx
PERSONAL-IDENTIFICATION-CHAPTER-1-1.pptxCastroMarcoAngelo
 
FC102-chapter-2 (1).pptx
FC102-chapter-2 (1).pptxFC102-chapter-2 (1).pptx
FC102-chapter-2 (1).pptxjaymanalo717
 
History of Friction Ridge Identification
History of Friction Ridge IdentificationHistory of Friction Ridge Identification
History of Friction Ridge IdentificationHeather
 

Semelhante a 2mock up of Odontology (20)

History of forensic dentistry
History of forensic dentistryHistory of forensic dentistry
History of forensic dentistry
 
Scientific Foundation of Fingerprint Identification
Scientific Foundation of Fingerprint IdentificationScientific Foundation of Fingerprint Identification
Scientific Foundation of Fingerprint Identification
 
Forensic science 2011
Forensic science 2011Forensic science 2011
Forensic science 2011
 
1.2--POWERPOINT--History_of_Forensics.pptx
1.2--POWERPOINT--History_of_Forensics.pptx1.2--POWERPOINT--History_of_Forensics.pptx
1.2--POWERPOINT--History_of_Forensics.pptx
 
FINGER_PRINT_HISTORY.ppt
FINGER_PRINT_HISTORY.pptFINGER_PRINT_HISTORY.ppt
FINGER_PRINT_HISTORY.ppt
 
Anthony serero-rad-investigation
Anthony serero-rad-investigationAnthony serero-rad-investigation
Anthony serero-rad-investigation
 
introductiontoforensicscience-141011231729-conversion-gate01.pdf
introductiontoforensicscience-141011231729-conversion-gate01.pdfintroductiontoforensicscience-141011231729-conversion-gate01.pdf
introductiontoforensicscience-141011231729-conversion-gate01.pdf
 
ACFrOgAga3dNd2sR-yAX-Y0m_Kaq-BE27Tj6ouay6Pcc2wyCM27xQN7JjaA1iQLWr8u3ppBp2kNiu...
ACFrOgAga3dNd2sR-yAX-Y0m_Kaq-BE27Tj6ouay6Pcc2wyCM27xQN7JjaA1iQLWr8u3ppBp2kNiu...ACFrOgAga3dNd2sR-yAX-Y0m_Kaq-BE27Tj6ouay6Pcc2wyCM27xQN7JjaA1iQLWr8u3ppBp2kNiu...
ACFrOgAga3dNd2sR-yAX-Y0m_Kaq-BE27Tj6ouay6Pcc2wyCM27xQN7JjaA1iQLWr8u3ppBp2kNiu...
 
Fingerprint history0911
Fingerprint history0911Fingerprint history0911
Fingerprint history0911
 
Introduction to forensic science
Introduction to forensic scienceIntroduction to forensic science
Introduction to forensic science
 
1._Introduction_to_Personal_Identification.pdf
1._Introduction_to_Personal_Identification.pdf1._Introduction_to_Personal_Identification.pdf
1._Introduction_to_Personal_Identification.pdf
 
Forensic science as a basis for forensic investigation
Forensic science as a basis for forensic investigationForensic science as a basis for forensic investigation
Forensic science as a basis for forensic investigation
 
Historical Development in Criminalistics-1.pptx
Historical Development in Criminalistics-1.pptxHistorical Development in Criminalistics-1.pptx
Historical Development in Criminalistics-1.pptx
 
History of forensics 2012
History of forensics 2012History of forensics 2012
History of forensics 2012
 
PERSONAL-IDENTIFICATION-CHAPTER-1-1.pptx
PERSONAL-IDENTIFICATION-CHAPTER-1-1.pptxPERSONAL-IDENTIFICATION-CHAPTER-1-1.pptx
PERSONAL-IDENTIFICATION-CHAPTER-1-1.pptx
 
FC102-chapter-2 (1).pptx
FC102-chapter-2 (1).pptxFC102-chapter-2 (1).pptx
FC102-chapter-2 (1).pptx
 
History of Friction Ridge Identification
History of Friction Ridge IdentificationHistory of Friction Ridge Identification
History of Friction Ridge Identification
 
November In Biology
November In BiologyNovember In Biology
November In Biology
 
Forensic odontology
Forensic odontologyForensic odontology
Forensic odontology
 
FORENSIC ODONTOLOGY
FORENSIC ODONTOLOGYFORENSIC ODONTOLOGY
FORENSIC ODONTOLOGY
 

2mock up of Odontology

  • 1. AD 49 Agrippina minor ordered her husband’s mistress Lollia Paulina killed and identifies the decapitated heard by inspecting the teeth for peculiarities she recognized. 1218 Signature authentication on official documents, when many could only make their X was achieved by having the signer bite into the warm wax sealing the document. 1453 The first formal report of a dental identification was of John Talbot, the 1st Earl of Shrewsbury, who died in the battle of Castillion, France. The battle, which was won by France, marked the end of the Hundreds Years’ War. 1692 In the colonies during the Salem Witch Trials, the reverend George Burroughs bit his victims. His bite pattern and those of other people were compared to patterns on the victims skin. The judges readily accepted the bite marks as evidence of his guilt. This was the first use of bite marks in the colonies to solve a crime. Burroughs was convicted and hanged for his crimes. 1777 Paul Revere, a man of many talents, was a coroner, metal smith, and also a dentist. He identified the remains OD Warren who had been shot through the head during the battle of Breeds Hill. Warren was buried with others as an unknown, since it as common battlefield practice for the enemy to strip the fallen of uniforms and possessions as souvenirs. After the war, in an effort to honor Warren the unidentified soldiers were disinterred. Revere had previously constructed a dental prosthesis for his friend enabling him to identify one of the bodies as General Joseph Warren and rebury him with full military honors. 1837 Controlling child labor, which was extensively used during the Industrial Revolution was a problem. Stature was a common means of establishing age. Dr. Edwin Saunders established that the pattern of the eruption of an individual’s teeth was a better criterion. 1849 The first murder trial based on circumstantial dental evidence occurred. Charred fragmentary dental remains were found in an assay furnace in the laboratory of John White Webster, a professor of chemistry and mineralogy at Harvard’s medical school. The remains were identified as those of Dr. George Parkman. Dr. Nathan Coley Keep was able to recognize a peculiar notch in the lower jaw a dental prosthesis he had constructed. Webster allegedly killed his faculty colleague over an unpaid loan. Webster was tried, convicted, lost an appeal and was sentenced to death. This case based only on circumstantial evidence is a classic case, illustrating that a conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence can be upheld and is still studied by students in law school today. 1864 Dog tags were not issued or required of soldiers during the Civil War. Troops were concerned that if they were killed would be buried as unidentified. Some pinned scraps of paper, which weren’t very durable, in their clothing. Others carved their names in pieces of wood. Enterprising peddlers made and began selling the first commercial metal identification “dog tags”. 1870 The first documented use of bite mark evidence in court in the United States was Ohio vs. Robinson, Mansfield, Ohio. Ansil Robinson, a prominent businessman was suspected of biting and murdering his mistress. Five bite marks were found on her arm. Charged with murdering her, he was tried and acquitted despite the fact that his teeth matched the 5 bite marks on the victim’s arm. Lacking established rules of evidence and trained odontologists to testify, Robinson, a prominent businessman in the community was acquitted. Many “friends” were allowed to testify on his behalf. By 1890 bite marks began to be recognized as evidence leading to identification. 1897 The first textbook on dental identification, “L’Art Dentaire en Medicine Legale” was published by Dr. Oscar Amoedo, a Cuban. He is considered the father of forensic odontology and was responsible for the identification of many of the fatalities in the tragic Charity Bazaar fire in Paris, France. 1915 The International Association (IAI) is founded. It is now the oldest and largest forensic association in the world. This professional association represents a diverse, knowledgeable and experienced membership that assembles each year to educate, share, critique and present methods, techniques and research in the physical science disciplines. 1924 The early physical analysis of bite marks is believed to have begun with the noted German forensic odontologist A. Sorup. He used transparent paper upon which the outline of the biting edges of a suspect’s teeth were traced to compare with life to compare with life size photographs of the bite mark. These were the precursor of the more recent overlays in use today. 1930 In Quebec, Canada an infant was murdered. This was the first case in Canada in which a bite mark on skin was introduced as evidence in court. 1945 Berlin, Germany. The advancing Russian Army recovers charred human remains from outside a bunker. An autopsy was conducted and captured medical and dental records enable them to confirm the remains are those of Adolph Hitler and Eva Braun. This identification was never shared with the allies. 1946 Welty and Glasgow devised a system in which as many as 500 punch cards could be sorted in one minute by a computer. The following year Taltersall wrote that he thought this system would be very beneficial in compiling dental data. 1948 One of the first published accounts involving a conviction based on bite marks was the case, in which pathologist Keith Simpson used bite marks on the breast of the victim in the conviction of Robert Gorringe for the murder of his wife, Phyllis. 1948 Scientists recognizing the importance of the advancement of forensic sciences formed the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS), a professional organization, developed to educate its members and mentor the next generation. 1950 The military, assigned the responsibility for the identification of battle casualties, recognized the difficulties of relying on the time honored “dog tags”. They realized, as had the Scandinavians, that dental x-rays and records were a scientific method and began using them. Many soldiers were not wearing their dog tags or they had been scavenged. Fragment of Adolf Hitler’s mandible. Sketch of Eva Braun’s left side teeth. 1953 The identification of the DNA helix by Watson and Crick promised to be the next scientific means of human identification, supplanting the use of dental x-rays and pattern analysis by forensic odontologists. 1954 An early case, Doyle vs. State, occurred in Texas. The bite mark in this case was on a piece of cheese found at the crime scene of a burglary. The accused was asked to bite another piece of cheese for comparison. A firearms examiner and a dentist examined the patterns and both conclude that the tooth marks were made by the same teeth. The conviction in this case set the stage for bite marks found on objects and skin to be used as evidence in the future. 1962 The first formal training in forensic odontology was established by the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Washington, D.C., primarily to train military dentists and other governmental investigators of criminal activity. 1965 Scientists reviewing archived records captured by the U. S. Army in Berlin at the end of WW II, discovered dental and skull radiographs, plus medical records which independently enabled them to identify Adolph Hitler and Eva Braun, information that the Russian Army had withheld from their 1945 autopsy. 1966 Dr. Gosta Gustafson, Lund, Sweden, published the second text on forensic odontology, the first in English. He went on to train the next generation of Scandinavian forensic odontologists. 1973 Repatriation of the discovered remains of prisoners of war and those missing in action (POW / MIA) began with the establishment of the Central Identification Laboratory, Hawaii (CILHI) at which dental identification from dental x-rays and records played a significant role. 1975 A landmark case, People v. Marx occurred in California. A woman was murdered by strangulation after being sexually assaulted. She was bitten several times on her nose. Walter Marx was identified as a suspect and dental impressions were made of his teeth. Impressions were also taken of the woman’s injured nose. These samples along with other evidence was evaluated using a variety of techniques. Three experts testified that the bites on the woman’s nose were indeed made by Marx and he was convicted of voluntary manslaughter. Evolution of X-ray of Hitler’s skull taken by Dr. Erwin Giesing 9/19/1944 1988 Computer assisted software for the dental identification of human remains was developed by the U. S. Army Institute of Dental Research with CAPMI4, followed by a succession of increasingly sophisticated software. 1989 The development of WinID3 by Dr. James McGivney, introduced the advantage of incorporating digital images of the ante and post mortem X-rays. 1991 Forensic odontology played a significant role in the assembly and identification of the fragmentary remains of 15 individuals discovered in the apartment of serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer. 1995 The strategic Planning Committee of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences reported that the quality and standards applied by different boards for granting certification varied widely. The Academy recognized the importance of oversight in the credentialing of forensic specialists by accrediting the certification boards. A task force now known as the Forensic Specialties Accreditation Board (FSAB) was developed with grant assistance from the National Institute of Justice to develop a voluntary program to objectively assess, recognize and monitor the various forensic specialty boards which seek accreditation by the FSAB. The FSAB was incorporated as an independent organization in Colorado on June 23, 2000. 1976 The Forensic Sciences Foundation (FSF), an educational arm of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, received an award from the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, to establish examining and certifying boards for proficiency in forensic odontology and another in questioned document examination. This was in response to requests from judicial and governmental agencies for a means of identifying qualified experts. 1976 Warren Harvey published a text, Dental Identification & Forensic Odontology, with an extensive chapter on bites and bite marks. 1978 People vs. Bundy, Tallahassee, Florida firmly established the forensic value of human bite marks as evidence in a criminal prosecution, ending the coast to coast odyssey of Theodore (Ted) Bundy who was responsible for the murders of at least fifteen young women. 1980 The National Funeral Directors (NFD) realizing the importance of having appropriate equipment and supplies available immediately in the event of a major disaster, developed the first portable morgue (DPMU) and recruited volunteers in several forensic science specialties. It was the predecessor of the current federally established mobile morgues. The DPMU supported the Disaster Mortuary Operational Response Teams (DMORT) for disasters in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Del Rio, Texas. Forensic Odontology 1996 In David Faigman’s text, Modern Scientific Evidence, Chapter V, the ABFO Workshop # 4 was erroneously cited as a proficiency test. The frequently referenced error rate published in the text has been cited in news stories. The source of this information which has apparently been difficult to locate, allegedly found a 63% rate of false identifications. It actually was an unauthorized contribution to the text, inappropriately written by a Diplomate of the American Board of Forensic Odontology. A White Paper published by the ABFO, when the misinformation was discovered, pointed out that the 1995 workshop was actually an informal exercise and was not designed, considered a valid scientific setting, nor a proficiency test. 1996 The Family Assistance Act was passed by Congress in response about inadequate treatment from families of disaster fatalities. It developed standards which airlines and other public modes of transportation were required to develop. The basic complaint stemmed from the lack of communication with the families regarding the progress being made in the identification of the families. This lead to the development of the National Disaster Medical Service (NDMS) which incorporated a Disaster Mortuary Operational Response Team (DMORT) which was assigned the identification and disposition of the fatalities. Forensic odontologist became essential members of these teams. 2000 By approval of a resolution, the Board of Directors of the International Association for Identification, forensic odontology was recognized as the IAI’s Thirteenth Forensic Discipline. 2002 In response to the threat of additional terrorist threats, the Department of Homeland Security is established and DMORT and again forensic odontologists served as temporary federal employees. 2001 Terrorists attacked the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and were thwarted in an additional attack by passengers which caused the airliner to crash near Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Forensic odontologists again contributed their expertise in the identification of the fragmented and burned remains, since the teeth are highly resistant to destruction 2003 The functions of the Central Identification Laboratory (CILHI) and the Joint Task Force – Full Accounting Command JPAC) were combined to form JPAC/CIL the joint POW/MIA command responsible for the responsibility of recovering, identifying and repatriating the remains of members of the armed forces. Military board certified forensic odontologists were assigned tours of duty. 2006 The Federal government activated the National Disaster Medical Service and the Disaster Mortuary Operational Teams in response to Hurricane Katrina, Hurricane Rita and subsequent disasters. Again forensic odontologist played a substantial role. 2006 The Midwest Forensic Resource Center (MFRC) awarded the first of three grants for the odontological research quantifying the characteristics of human teeth in relation to the analysis of bite marks. The award lead to the development of a methodology and software application to develop a scientific means of bite mark analysis. This provided essential data for further research. 2009 The National Academy of Sciences published a report, “Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States; A Path Forward.” The report cites the committee opinion that that the forensic comparative disciplines, which are not taught in academia, as somehow lacking in a scientific grounding, as opposed to the Newtonian sciences. 2010 The National Institute of Justice awarded a three year, $715,000 grant to researchers at Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin to study the replication of human bite marks in living skin and the probability any patterns replicated can be correlated with their source with a degree of probability. 2011 The second edition of a comprehensive text, Bitemark Evidence; A Color Atlas and Text, was published with chapters contributed by board certified forensic odontologists. 2013 The final report on the NIJ research cited above was peer reviewed and published on the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, ncjrs.gov. It demonstrated that contrary to a popular assumption, it is possible under ideal circumstances to replicate bite marks in porcine skin and correlate some to their source in a data set with a high degree of probability, 2014 The last two decades have seen several texts on forensic odontology published. Although DNA has been cited as the only scientific means of identifying a human bite mark with a known source, research has indicated probability may also be a means of correlating a bite mark with its source. DNA is not always recovered, or has been severely degraded. 2014 In spite of the increase use of DNA in bite marks and human identification, forensic odontology will not be outmoded in cases of civil litigation involving standards of care, injuries and the interpretation of dental records and oral radiographs. The identification of remains through the use of dental radiographs and records can be accomplished more quickly and is less expensive than the use of DNA.