[Main] [Newsletter] [Resources] [Calendar] [Mentor Program] [Officers & Steering Committee] [Contact]
[Membership] [Education]

American Academy of Forensic SciencesYoung Forensic Scientists Forum

Young Forensic Scientists Forum Newsletter - March/April 2002

Emerging as a Young Forensic Scientist
By Heather Walsh-Haney, MA
Heather Walsh-Haney is the 2001 Recipient of the Emerging Forensic Scientist Award. As the award recipient, Heather was entitled to an all expense paid trip to the Atlanta meeting which included hotel, registration, airfare, and a per diem. Below is her presentation from the meeting that focuses upon the rules governing the Forensic Science Foundation's Emerging Forensic Scientist Award and her personal experiences on applying for (and winning!) the award. For more details on the award, see page 18 of this issue of “Academy News.”

I am currently a PhD student at the University of Florida, having also received my Bachelor of Arts (1996) and Master of Arts Degrees (1999) from the University of Florida. My studies have been and continue to be focused on physical anthropology with a primary emphasis on forensic anthropology and a secondary emphasis on zoology. I have taken classes such as human osteology, comparative biomechanics, comparative anatomy, gross anatomy, human evolutionary anatomy, and archaeology. These courses have allowed me to better understand how the human skeleton may change as a result of physical activity (or a lack thereof), disease, or trauma and how skeletal features differ as a result of these variables between males and females and between populations.

Forensic anthropology entails the integration of knowledge regarding human skeletal anatomy (human osteology) and archaeology (excavation, mapping, and recovery) and the application of this integration to the legal investigation of death. By applying their unique skills to the analysis of skeletal remains, forensic anthropologists are able to assist medical examiners, coroners, and/or law enforcement agencies in the identification of skeletonized or badly decomposed corpses who may otherwise remain unidentified in perpetuity. Forensic anthropologist's also assist in the determination of time since death (through an analysis of taphonomy) and in the identification of traumatic injuries (blunt force trauma, gunshot wounds, and sharp force trauma), including whether those injuries were sustained before death, at or around the time of death, or after death.

My personal and professional interest in forensic anthropology began after Professor William R. Maples came to lecture in my undergraduate Physical Anthropology class. Dr. Maples was an exciting speaker whose strange and fascinating tales highlighted cases he had worked on including: (1) the identification of the remains of Francisco Pizarro, (2) an analysis of the purported remains of the last Russian Royal Family, (3) a final determination that President Zachary Taylor had not been poisoned, and (4) a documentation of the extent of skeletal malformations of Joseph Merrick (the Elephant Man). He also spoke of how he had helped to solve several grizzly murders through the identification of tool marks on bone (matching specific knifes with their traumatic marks on bone) and, more importantly, the victims themselves. Shortly after this lecture, I purchased a book entitled Dead Men Do Tell Tales and enjoyed a comprehensive, autobiographical account of Dr. Maples’ career.

I met with Dr. Maples shortly thereafter, telling him that this was the career for me. Fortunately, Dr. Maples' forensic laboratory (the C.A. Pound Human Identification Laboratory) is located on the University of Florida campus and he quickly suggested that I volunteer in the laboratory. Early on, I stood back and took in as much as I could by quietly watching him work. I also swept floors, labeled cases with India ink, did filing, and washed laboratory vans for 10 hours per week. While these tasks were not forensically glamorous, they allowed me to prove my dedication and little by little Dr. Maples allowed me to take on additional responsibility. 

This apprenticeship of sorts also afforded me an opportunity to work closely with a Board Certified Diplomat who emphasized teaching above all and also someone who maintained the highest standards of personal and professional integrity. Indeed, all of Dr. Maples' personal and professional attributes were central to the theme of this year's meeting. If you take away one thing today, make sure it is an understanding of the value associated with volunteering or apprenticing in a laboratory because you will gain valuable experience, acquire the technical skills necessary to land jobs later on, and become buoyed by scientists who both preach and practice professional ethics. 

Moving from the idea that good mentors are priceless and that working as a volunteer in a lab is requisite, I want to now focus upon the Emerging Forensic Scientist (EFS) Award by relating my experience in applying for and winning the award, what types of research are applicable, and how one accomplishes this goal. The Emerging Forensic Scientist Award began four years ago. The program calls for Student and Trainee Affiliate members of the academy's ten sections to provide papers to the section leaders and present their papers at the annual meeting. The winner of the award is announced in the the Academy News following that year's AAFS Anual Meeting. The winner of the award receives travel to and from the next year's meeting, lodging for that week, a daily meal allowance, and a beautifully engraved plaque. In order to win the award, your paper and research topic must fit that year's official AAFS Annual Meeting theme, further forensic knowledge, be based upon strong scientific theory and methodology, and follow the Academy's ethical and scientific standards. 

The year of my award, the theme was "War Crimes and Other Acts Against Humanity." In the broadest sense, forensic anthropologists are key players in the identification of victims and patterns of trauma seen in the war crimes from Bosnia to Bolivia to Sierra Leon. The central aspect of my study that year involved an examination of fracture patterns in human skeletal remains and made recommendations for how to document and interpret antemortem and perimortem trauma. Such a study assists in the identification of trauma and in turn aids in the documentation and prosecution of war crimes and other acts against humanity, 

I set out to examine two skeletal samples in order to determine if the skeletal markers of trauma that occurred in life (healed fractures) and at or around the time of death were indicative of the mechanism of injury (intentional or accidental). I also sought to determine whether criteria put forth by Dr. Nancy Lovell (1995) was suitable for forensic anthropology and if some unity or synthesis could be brought to the descriptors used by medical examiners, pathologists, and forensic anthropologists. 

I visually inspected and radiographed all of the skeletal remains in my samples and classified the fractures by their type, location, and any evidence of healing. I then compared my samples using chi-square analysis and Mann Whitney-U analysis of variance. Following Lovell's (1995) methodology, I classified each fracture by its proximate cause as either a direct or indirect fracture. 

I found that my two skeletal samples mostly displayed oblique fractures from indirect blows, suggesting that the fractures may have been the result of accidental trauma. When I compared males and females within each sample, I found that males between 25-35 exhibited the most evidence of direct fracture. Indicative of such fractures were the comminuted and crushed fractures noted on a middle-aged male's eye and cheek bone. Females exhibited evidence of direct fractures, particularly depressed skull fractures. Females also presented with impacted/direct fractures to their hands and indirect fractures to their forearms and ribs (perhaps from blocking blows or blows to the anterior aspect of the chest). Males exhibited more than expected depressed skull fractures and rib fractures. Interestingly these are the types of injuries recorded most in emergency rooms (from car accidents) and the result of accidental rather than intentional trauma. In sum, my research showed that the systematic gross and radiographic analysis of the antemortem and perimortem fractures can yield information concerning the mechanism of death, be it accidental or intentional. This research also underscored the importance of using the same descriptive terminology by medical examiners, forensic anthropologists, bioarchaeologists, and human osteologists. 

However, my research had an additional wrinkle. Rather than collecting data from autopsy, I used museum collections. In particular, I used archived collections of native American hunter-gatherers for my sample of over 300 skeletons. While these skeletons were not the victims of traffic accidents or shootings they were victims of violence (whether interpersonal or inter-group) and accidental injury. And as such, analysis of their fracture patterns helps to round out the knowledge of how the human skeleton may respond to injury. This study also helps to shed light on differentiating accidental from intentional injury no matter what the time period or context. 

Furthermore, this study aids the forensic anthropologist in answering the first question posed in each and every case: Is this case of forensic significance? For example, has this individual been dead for more than 75 years? The 48 Diplomates of the American Board of Forensic Anthropology have had to make this determination time and time again. For example, in 1996 they examined over 1400 cases and of those 70 were prehistoric and 128 were historic (Reichs 1998). Thus, a premium is placed upon the forensic anthropologist's ability to quickly identify whether the skeletal remains (or isolated bone) placed before them is prehistoric or historic. My museum research was also necessary because of recent Florida legislation prohibiting the collection of data from autopsy. In addition, ongoing issue of repatriation of Native American remains require that data be collected as quickly as possible before valuable scientific data is lost forever. 

I have given examples of my progression through academia. I've taken opportunities to apprentice with wonderful forensic professionals who have high personal and professional standards. I've also taken my research interests and morphed them into a topic applicable the mission of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences. Despite my approach, I believe that students often fail to present their research at the annual meetings not only because of time issues, but because of a general feeling that their work isn't good enough, complete enough, or relevant enough for peer review. My advice is for each student researcher to get such thoughts out of his/her head. If you have an idea, if you intuitively feel a research idea, go with it, talk about it to your colleagues, professors, and mentors. Then collect those data. After that, the only question to address becomes the form of the publication, whether as a presentation at the AAFS meeting or a published article in the Journal of Forensic Sciences. This is what science is truly about. Fear of the peer review process or a feeling that the subject research is not good enough should not frighten students who would otherwise participate in the Emerging Forensic Scientist Award program. But it clearly has because participation in the program has not been commensurate with the growing number of student members. And no wonder. As we are all aware, science is an important endeavor and as scientists we often take ourselves a bit too seriously. So, contrary to form, I leave you with an anecdote from the movie Stripes (as related in Ann Lamott's book Bird by Bird 1999) which I believe may help student researchers get such fears out of their heads and become Emerging Forensic Scientists.

In the movie, actor Bill Murray joins the army. In one scene, Murray and his platoon are in their barracks on their first night together. They are assembled in a group and each of the soldiers is supposed to get to know one another and their drill Sergeant. Each soldier introduces himself, mentioning who is and where he is from. Then, one intense, angry soldier named Francis, speaks. "My name is Francis," he says. "No one calls me Francis-anyone here calls me Francis and I'll kill him. And another thing. I don't like being touched. Anyone here ever tries to touch me, I'll kill him." At which point the Sergeant jumps in and says, " Hey, lighten up Francis."

So, with that I say lighten up and be kind to yourself. You can be a forensic scientist. The simple steps to this goal involve being vigilant with your studies, taking apprenticeships or volunteer positions wherever you may find them, and conducting sound, ethical, and important scientific research. As an important step in getting you closer to this goal, take a deep breath and write a 10-15 page paper on your research and send it in for review for the Emerging Forensic Scientist Award.

 

Copyright © 2002 Young Forensic Scientists Forum / American Academy of Forensic Sciences