The Reliability of Pattern Classification in Bloodstain Pattern Analysis-PART 2: Bloodstain Patterns on Fabric Surfaces,

An automated method for the generation of bloodstain pattern metrics from images of blood spatter patterns

An improved automated bloodstain pattern analysis method has been developed and validated, which utilises computer vision techniques to identify bloodstains on a plain background within a digital image. The method generates metrics relating to the individual stains as well as the overall pattern, including bloodstain pattern specific metrics such as the gamma angle, circularity, solidity, area of convergence, stain density and pattern linearity. This method provides an objective approach to the analysis of bloodstains and bloodstain patterns and can generate a wealth of quantitative data that is currently not obtainable using manual techniques or other image-based programs currently utilised in the discipline. This method will be useful to analysts and researchers investigating the application of quantitative methods to bloodstain pattern analysis.

Determination of angle of impact and directionality of drip stains on various fabrics

Bloodstain pattern analysis (BPA) on absorbent surfaces, such as fabrics, is far more complex compared to its application on smooth, hard, non-porous surfaces. Angle of impact and directionality are commonly interpreted from bloodstains but may be adversely affected by porous surfaces. In fact, there is a lack of evidence that traditional approaches to BPA are even applicable when blood impacts absorbent materials such as clothing and other fabrics. Hence, there is a critical need for research focusing on the validity and reliability of methods for bloodstain pattern analysis on textiles. Here, human blood drops were deposited on six different fabric types (cotton, satin polyester, rayon, blended polyester/spandex, blended nylon/spandex, and blended modal/polyester/spandex) at two known impact angles: 30° and 10°. Bloodstain morphology was found to be unique for each fabric. Calculated angles of impact for cotton and satin polyester were not statistically different from the known angle of impact while blended polyester/spandex, blended nylon/spandex, and blended modal/polyester/spandex significantly underestimated the known angle of impact. Even when stain morphology on fabric resembled those on a glass control, the angle of impact significantly underestimated the known. The ability to assign directionality based upon bloodstain morphology was dependent on the fabric type. These findings support the need for further research and the development of guidelines for bloodstain pattern interpretation on fabric materials.

Bloodstain classification methods: A critical review and a look to the future

Classifying bloodstains is an essential part of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis. Various experts have developed methods. Each method considers the same basic bloodstain pattern types. These use either terminology based on the observable characteristics or the mechanistic cause of the bloodstain patterns as part of the classification process. This review paper considers ten classification methods from fourteen sources, which are used to classify bloodstain patterns. There are fundamental differences in how the patterns are classified, how differentiated the classification is, and whether the classification process uses clear, unambiguous criteria, and is susceptible to contextual bias. Experts have also reported issues with classifying bloodstains that have indistinguishable features. These differences expose key limitations with current classification methods: mechanistic terminology is too heavily relied on, and the classification process is susceptible to contextual bias. The development of an unambiguous classification method, based on directly observable characteristics within bloodstain patterns is recommended for future work.

Contextual bias by Forensic Document Examination trainees: An empirical study from China

The impact of contextual bias has been repeatedly demonstrated across forensic domains; however, research on this topic in China is scarce. To examine the prevalence of contextual bias in pattern feature-comparison disciplines, we conducted an experiment involving 24 forensic document examination students. The aim was to determine whether knowledge of different contextual information influenced their forensic decision-making. Participants were divided into different context groups and tasked with examining whether questioned signatures with ambiguous features matched reference signatures. The results of independent-samples t-tests for their decision score data in the two context groups exhibited a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05, Cohen's d > 0.8). Moreover, the submitted forensic reports by participants disclosed a biased evaluation of handwriting features. These findings show how contextual information can bias forensic decision-making in handwriting examination. Context management with complementary strategies such as case triage, cognitive training and decision-making transparency must be implemented to minimize bias in handwriting examination.

Distinguishing between stamping in blood from walking through blood using blood pattern analysis

Bloodstains are typically encountered in violent incidents involving the use of a weapon or physical actions, such as punching, kicking, or stamping. Bloodstain pattern analysis can provide inceptive evidence or intelligence about what happened in an alleged incident, the sequence of events, along with indicating possible suspects if blood is analysed through DNA profiling. This research project focused on the differences in patterns created on footwear during a violent action, such as stamping on a person, and a non-violent action, such as walking through a pool of blood. In this project, several experiments were designed to simulate the stamping and walking actions on a surface wet with blood: carpet, lino flooring, and belly pork meat. Two volunteers with varying body weights were recruited to perform the two actions, using a pair of trainers and a pair of Wellington boots. Defibrinated horse blood was used to simulate real human blood. It was found that the patterns created from stamping and walking through blood differed by the type of pattern and the number and size of stains. The footwear used in the stamping action was characterised by a larger contact stain on the sole than those used in the walking actions: ∼209 mm in length by ∼92 mm in width versus ∼65 mm in length by ∼60 mm in width. The stamping action produced a large number of impact spatters (∼435) on the sides of the footwear versus no impact spatters in the walking actions. The presence of impact spatters was found to be the most prominent feature that differentiated between the two actions. The findings were statistically significant (p < 0.05) and could assist in evaluating whether a defendant was actively involved in a stamping action, or the evidence found was due to innocent reasons.

Using the likelihood ratio in bloodstain pattern analysis

There is an apparent paradox that the likelihood ratio (LR) approach is an appropriate measure of the weight of evidence when forensic findings have to be evaluated in court, while it is typically not used by bloodstain pattern analysis (BPA) experts. This commentary evaluates how the scope and methods of BPA relate to several types of evaluative propositions and methods to which LRs are applicable. As a result of this evaluation, we show how specificities in scope (BPA being about activities rather than source identification), gaps in the underlying science base, and the reliance on a wide range of methods render the use of LRs in BPA more complex than in some other forensic disciplines. Three directions are identified for BPA research and training, which would facilitate and widen the use of LRs: research in the underlying physics; the development of a culture of data sharing; and the development of training material on the required statistical background. An example of how recent fluid dynamics research in BPA can lead to the use of LR is provided. We conclude that an LR framework is fully applicable to BPA, provided methodic efforts and significant developments occur along the three outlined directions.

Accuracy and reproducibility of conclusions by forensic bloodstain pattern analysts

Although the analysis of bloodstain pattern evidence left at crime scenes relies on the expert opinions of bloodstain pattern analysts, the accuracy and reproducibility of these conclusions have never been rigorously evaluated at a large scale. We investigated conclusions made by 75 practicing bloodstain pattern analysts on 192 bloodstain patterns selected to be broadly representative of operational casework, resulting in 33,005 responses to prompts and 1760 short text responses. Our results show that conclusions were often erroneous and often contradicted other analysts. On samples with known causes, 11.2% of responses were erroneous. The results show limited reproducibility of conclusions: 7.8% of responses contradicted other analysts. The disagreements with respect to the meaning and usage of BPA terminology and classifications suggest a need for improved standards. Both semantic differences and contradictory interpretations contributed to errors and disagreements, which could have serious implications if they occurred in casework.

Bloodstain pattern analysis: Does experience equate to expertise?

Bloodstain pattern analysis (BPA) has long been accepted by courts as an area of expertise; however, that position has recently been challenged. The discipline has been criticized for limited empirical research into practitioner determination error rates and whether determinations require specialized knowledge/expertise, including whether practitioner experience level influences accuracy. This study attempted to address these knowledge gaps as they relate to bloodstain pattern recognition. The aims were twofold: to establish whether practitioners would outperform lay non-practitioners, and whether practitioner experience influenced accuracy and error in determinations. Comparisons of practitioner responses under three scenarios (forced, casework, and definitive) were also made to assess conservatism/certainty in pattern recognition. Participants (both BPA practitioners and non-practitioners) analyzed photographs of bloodstain patterns and made determinations of the broad bloodstain category and specific bloodstain pattern type. When forced to provide only a single response, practitioners identified bloodstain categories and patterns significantly more accurately than non-practitioners (p = 0.0001, p < 0.00001, respectively). Practitioner accuracy in bloodstain pattern recognition was positively associated with experience level (p = 0.0429) and this was consistent regardless of response scenario. Although no significant difference in practitioner accuracy was observed across response scenarios, practitioner conservatism/certainty varied significantly among the broad bloodstain category and specific pattern types. Overall, these results support bloodstain pattern recognition as an area of expertise and that practitioner experience positively influences accuracy. Based on these results, a series of recommendations were proposed aimed at further improving practices within the discipline to maximize accuracy and reliability of BPA evidence.

Biasability and reliability of expert forensic document examiners

The performance of experts can be characterized in terms of biasability and reliability of their judgments. The current research is the first to explore the judgments of practicing forensic document experts, professionals who examine and compare disputed handwritten evidence to handwriting exemplars of individuals involved in criminal or civil litigation. Forensic handwriting experts determine if questioned and known handwritten items are of common authorship or written by different individuals, and present their findings in legal proceedings. The expert participants in our study (N=25) were not aware that they were part of a research study. Thirteen participants were led to believe that they were working on a case commissioned from the prosecution and the other twelve that it was for the defense. We did not find evidence in this study that this information biased their judgments, which may make sense since document examiners (in contrast to many other forensic domains) do not primarily work within an organizational forensic laboratory culture. The lack of bias in our findings may have been also due to the stimuli we used or/and the great variability in the judgments within each group, reflecting a lack of consistency in conclusions among examiners. A detailed discussion of our findings is presented along with the limitations that may have affected our results.

The effect of contextual information on decision-making in forensic toxicology

The impact of cognitive bias on decisions in forensic science has been demonstrated in numerous disciplines such as DNA and fingerprints, but has not been empirically investigated in the more objective domains, such as forensic toxicology. In the first experiment, participants (n = 58) were affected by irrelevant case information when analysing data from an immunoassay test for opiate-type drugs. In the second experiment, participants (n = 53) were biased in their choice of tests, for example, the age of the deceased impacted testing strategy: for older people, medicinal drugs were commonly chosen, whereas for younger people drugs of abuse were selected. Based on the results that examiners analyzing case data may have biases if they are given access to case context, we propose that examiners analysing presumptive test data are blind to irrelevant contextual information. Furthermore, that forensic toxicology laboratories use a consistent protocol for selecting tests, and that any deviations are documented and justified.

Determining how diluted bloodstains were derived: Inferring distinctive characteristics and formulating a guideline

In forensic settings, diluted bloodstains are regularly encountered for example when bloodstains are mixed with tap-/rainwater, after deliberate cleaning attempts, or when blood is dropped on a wet surface such as a towel. Such diluted bloodstain scenarios can be subdivided into sequences of events in which a blood drop was either (1) readily diluted (a mixture of blood and water is deposited); (2) deposited on a surface that was readily moistened (first water, then blood) or (3) deposited and subsequently moistened (first blood, then water). Current bloodstain pattern analysis (BPA) lacks data and tools to distinguish these three ways of derivation of a diluted bloodstain that vary in the sequence of deposition of blood and water on textile. In this study, 880 bloodstains were examined for characteristics that can be used to determine the derivation of diluted bloodstains. A guideline to assist BPA-analysts in interpreting diluted bloodstains was extracted. The added value of this guideline was confirmed by conducting two surveys: one survey with and one without the guideline. A third survey confirmed that the characteristics also function on a broader range of textile types that have different weave and knit styles. This guideline can aid BPA-experts to determine, in an objective way, how diluted bloodstains derived which can aid in determining which activities took place at a crime scene.