So What Did Margie Say About...CSI: Code Blue Plate Special

The first blog entry reference the repeat episode of CSI: Crime Scene Investigation titled "Code Blue Plate Special" appeared on 5/30/13.

 

Tonight I'll focus on the bloodstain pattern analysis.  I say bloodstain pattern analysis instead of blood-spatter because there is more to the science than the 'spatter'. 

 

In bloodstain patterns there are stains that are created through 'active' events and stains that are created through 'passive' events.

 

In this episode the significant analysis of the blood was done on passive stain patterns.  When the blood flows it will always flow downward due to gravitational pull.  When you look at the downward flow on the chin of a deceased you know that their original position was upright when blood began to flow.  Gravity pulls it down.

 

The same is true when looking at the flow on the clothing.  If a person is upright when they suffer a blood letting injury and maintain that position then gravity will pull the blood flow downward and this will be demonstrated on the staining on their clothing.  If they are on the ground when the blood flows then gravity pulls it downward across the curves of the body and this staining is evident on their clothing.

 

Where blood pools and where it saturates the clothing are also telltale indicators of body positions and subsequent motion or movement.

 

So you see, you don't have to have spatter, gunshot impact spatter or otherwise, to be able to interpret the language of blood and hear the story that it has to tell.  Even in the midst of "action" such as eight people being shot, the quieter evidence was the most informational.

So What Did Margie Say About...CSI: Code Blue Plate Special

 

 

 

The 5/29/13 repeat episode of CSI: Crime Scene Investigation titled "Code Blue Plate Special" was a treasure trove of forensic evidence.

Obviously I gravitate toward the bloodstain pattern analysis. This was done extremely well, following the flows of blood and the placement of the blood stains to tell the story of the events.

I do have some talking points about other forensic issues in this episode.

For instance, a photograph of a bloody shoe impression was held up against the shoe of a potential suspect: Ronald Bosderic. It may have been visually the same tread pattern and the same size but just a quick look like this wouldn't identify the individual characteristics for Sarah to declare "It's a match". Damage done by rocks or cuts or scuff marks are what make 'a match'. The likelihood that two pair of shoes walk the same path to receive the same damage to the tread of the shoes is beyond calculation. But you have to actually find these characteristics and compare a known to an unknown in the laboratory to declare a match.

Then we have the testing of a set of clothes to determine a shooter. With eight people killed (some with multiple shots) and two shots that missed hitting any individuals, there would be an accumulation of gases within the relatively close proximity of all the victims. I dare say that anyone's clothes within that particular scene would test positive for lead. This finding, in and of itself, would not determine "the shooter".

Next I would like to draw attention to the finding of a thread in one of the victim's throat. This is not part of a routine autopsy, especially in a shooting. The neck may be cut and viewed in a choking or a fire to check for injury or smoke and searing but it is not typical to just view the interior of the throat.

Lastly I have an issue with fuming newspapers using ninhydrin. Superglue is used in a fuming hood and is usually used for nonporous items. Porous items like paper are treated with ninhydrin to find the amino acids left behind when someone touches an item and the fingerprint and its contents absorb into the paper. However it is usually applied by spray, dipping, or brushing and then subjected to a humid heat source (like a steam iron).

On the positive side, did I mention that they did a bang up job with the bloodstain patterns??