Re: fibers/ washing the mouth I was the hair and fiber expert at my old job, and I agree that you probably couldn't guess the type of clothing article from a single fiber. Maybe if you had a small piece of the cloth, to see pattern and weave, you could make a guess. But it would just be a guess, not really anything you'd want to be defending in court, unless you actually found the article it came from. And I've been to a lot of autopsies and they don't wash the mouth specifically but they'd wash blood off the face. How much water got in the mouth would depend on how neatly the deiner likes to work! Sorry I'm way late with this, just catching up.
Re: fibers/ washing the mouth No, many thanks, ElizabethBecka. I was just working on a writing exercise, writing a CSI episode. I know that sounds bizarre, but my dream job would not be what I'm doing right now. So, since I haven't even attempted scripted television writing in 9 years, I wanted to see if I could still do it. Thanks!
Re: fibers/ washing the mouth the first question, wouldnt there be ligature marks around the neck area if stranglation had taken place? i dont know, just a guess.
Re: fibers/ washing the mouth most likely there'd be bruises, but with very soft fabric (like a silk scarf), and some other materials, you woumdn't see bruised. Also, for stranglation, you dont have to wrap something around him : put someones neck between two pieces of wood, and you'll strangle him without any ligature marks ( sorry for the compariso...but it's the most explicit I have!)
Re: fibers/ washing the mouth I have a question: How does evidence that possesses individual characteristics influence a criminal case differently from that having class characteristics?
Re: fibers/ washing the mouth When you have the same class characteristics you have circumstantial evidence linking the tested sample to the evidence left at the scene. There is no definite link, and depending on the type of class characteristics, it might be a very weak link. White or blue cotton fibers for example. These are basically EVERYWHERE, and the same class characteristics of that type don't tell you much. For a firearms example, if you had a 9mm Luger projectile with 6 lands and grooves, a right twist, and the land width about 1/2 the groove width, it wouldn't be a strong link. There are probably a hundred different manufacturers who have made firearms with those class characteristics. On the other hand, when we have individual characteristics that match, the link is conclusive (as conclusive as forensic science can be). That particular firearm fired that specific projectile or casing. The evidence isn't circumstantial; it is specific to the crime scene.
Re: fibers/ washing the mouth hi guys i'm new to all this but just wanted to say that this thread is fantastic, it's really interesting and is much appreciated cheers tinka x
Re: fibers/ washing the mouth i have a question for chemists. i'm doing chemistry A level (english qualification before you go to uni, takes 2 years to get, when you are 17/18) and i am learning about indicators and phenolphthalein is one, now from watching csi i know that it tests for the presence of blood, so how does it do this? is it to do with the pH of blood? but if this is the case, then surely lots of other chemicals have the same pH as that? thanks
Re: fibers/ washing the mouth It doesn't have to do with pH, it has to do with the peroxidase reaction. Look up Kastle-Meyer test, or visit this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kastle-Meyer_test
Re: fibers/ washing the mouth thanks so much, the show gives the appearance that only one thing is dropped onto the sample. now i understand! thank you!
im still confused to how the tox comes to one decision and the actuall odtopsy comes to a different one.
I have a Question. I am a vigilante in the making. Now, i want to get information that will help me in my making. can i get help send my private messages. or anything.