Dental misidentification on the basis of presumed unique features.
Positive identification of skeletal remains by dental comparison depends on the demonstrable concordance between postmortem and antemortem records. However, there is no accepted norm for the number of points of concordance and there are circumstances when a single (or a few) unique features may allow positive identification. We present a recent case in which superficial similarity may have led to misidentification. We argue that misidentification is particularly likely with over-reliance on apparently unique features. The fact that a single inexplicable inconsistency will rule out a positive dental identification is highlighted.
Kieser
J A
JA
Forensic Dental Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. jules.kieser@stonebow.otago.ac.nz
Firth
N A
NA
Buckley
H
H
D000328:Adult; D001641:Bicuspid / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D018732:Forensic Anthropology; D005553:Forensic Dentistry; D006801:Humans; D008334:Mandible / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D019300:Medical Errors; D008963:Molar / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D016300:Radiography, Bitewing