Citation

Quatrehomme G, Alunni V. Forensic Sci. Int. 2019; 301: 118-128.

Affiliation

Institut Universitaire d'Anthropologie médico-légale, Faculté de médecine, 28 avenue de Valombrose, 06107, Nice Cedex 2, France; CEPAM (UMR CNRS 7264), 24 Avenue des Diables Bleus, 06357 Nice Cedex 4, France.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2019, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.04.033

PMID

31153989

Abstract

Forensic pathology and forensic anthropology are inherently related fields. The observations made during the autopsy and the conclusions from the anthropological analysis highlight the complementarities between the two approaches. In this review, gunshot wounds, sharp force injuries, chop wounds, blunt trauma, burned bodies, mechanical asphyxia and dismemberment will be analyzed from both perspectives. The result of this systematic review is that the conclusions stemming from the presence or absence of bone injuries must be very cautious because the observation of severe bone lesions does not always mean that this trauma was the cause of death; conversely, traumatic death, and even homicide, can be associated with a complete absence of bone lesions.

Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Language: en

Keywords

Autopsy; Forensic anthropology; Forensic pathology; Forensic trauma