Kouble Roland F, Craig Geoffrey T
University of Sheffield, School of Clinical Dentistry, 95 Roebuck Road, Sheffield S6 3GQ, England.
J Forensic Sci. 2004 Jan;49(1):111-8.
Comparison techniques used in bite mark analysis are many and varied, the choice of technique depending largely on personal preference. Until recently, no one technique has been shown to be better than the others, and very little research has been carried out to compare different methods. This study evaluates and compares the accuracy of direct comparisons between suspects' models and bite marks with indirect comparisons in the form of conventional traced overlays of suspects' models or a new method using photocopier-generated overlays. Artificial bite marks in pigskin were made using standardized sets of models and recorded as photographs and fingerprint powder lifts on tape. The bite mark photographs and fingerprint lifts were coded and randomized so that a blind comparison could be made with the models, traced overlays, and photocopier-generated overlays using a modified version of the American Board of Forensic Odontology Scoring (ABFO) System for Bite Marks. It was found that the photocopier-generated overlays were significantly more accurate at matching the correct bite mark to the correct models irrespective of whether the bite mark was recorded photographically or as a fingerprint lift. The photocopier-generated overlays were also found to be more sensitive at matching the correct bite marks to the correct models than the other two methods used. The modified ABFO scoring system was able to discriminate between a correct match and several incorrect matches by awarding a high score to the correct match.
咬痕分析中使用的比较技术多种多样，技术的选择很大程度上取决于个人偏好。直到最近，还没有一种技术被证明比其他技术更好，而且很少有研究对不同方法进行比较。本研究评估并比较了嫌疑人模型与咬痕之间直接比较的准确性，以及以嫌疑人模型的传统追踪叠加图形式或使用复印机生成的叠加图的新方法进行间接比较的准确性。使用标准化的模型组在猪皮上制作人工咬痕，并记录为照片和胶带指纹粉印。咬痕照片和指纹印被编码并随机化，以便使用美国法医牙科学会咬痕评分（ABFO）系统的修改版，对模型、追踪叠加图和复印机生成的叠加图进行盲法比较。结果发现，无论咬痕是通过照片记录还是作为指纹印记录，复印机生成的叠加图在将正确的咬痕与正确的模型匹配方面都要准确得多。还发现，复印机生成的叠加图在将正确的咬痕与正确的模型匹配方面比使用的其他两种方法更敏感。修改后的ABFO评分系统能够通过给正确匹配项打高分来区分正确匹配和几个错误匹配。
