Forensic Odontology

Abstract
Forensic Odontology is a relatively new science that utilizes the dentists knowledge to serve
the judicial system. Worldwide, dentists qualifed in forensic science are giving expert opinion
in cases related to human identifcation, bitemark analysis, craniofacial trauma and malpractice.
Human identifcation relies heavily on the quality of dental records; however Forensic Odontologists
can still contribute to the identity investigation in the absence of dental records through
profling the deceased person using features related to teeth.
Along with other healthcare providers, dentists encounter cases of injuries which could be
non-accidental. Detection, interpretation and management are important from a legal and
humanitarian point of view. Dentists should be aware of the legal impact those cases have,
and should refer them to the appropriate authorities for suitable action.
This article gives an insight to Forensic Odontology and outlines some of its medico-legal applications.

Key words: Forensic Odontology, identifcation, violence, abuse.
The roles of any forensic scientist are to collect, preserve and interpret trace evidence, then to
relay the results to the judicial authority in a form of a report. Those functions require sound
knowledge in dealing with crime scenes and sufcient acquaintance in law. Forensic Odontology
is the forensic science that is concerned with dental evidence.
The use of teeth as evidence is not recent. There are historical reports of identifcation by
recognizing specifc dental features as early as 49 A.C. However, Forensic Odontology, as a
science, did not appear before 1897 when Dr. Oscar Amoedo wrote his doctoral thesis entitled
LArt Dentaire en Medecine Legale describing the utility of dentistry in forensic medicine
with particular emphasis on identifcation.
1
Traditionally, Forensic Odontology covered various topics that can be broadly classifed into
human identifcation and injury analysis. However, tasks of Forensic Odontologists have
broadened in recent years to cover issues related to child abuse and domestic violence, human
rights protection and professional ethics.
This article gives a brief overview of some of the roles undertaken by Forensic Odontologists.
Human Identifcation
Identifcation is based on comparison between known characteristics of a missing individual
(termed ante-mortem data) with recovered characteristics from an unknown body (termed
post-mortem data).
Identifcation of the deceased is most commonly achieved visually by a relative or a friend
who knew the person during life. This is performed by looking at characteristics of the face,
various body features and/or personal belongings. However, this method becomes undesirable
and unreliable when the body features are lost due to post- and peri-mortem changes (such
as decomposition or incineration). Visual identifcation in those circumstances is subject to error.
Methods of human identifcation that are acknowledged as scientifc are fngerprint, DNA,
dental and medical characteristics.
2
Those methods vary in complexity, but share similar level
of certainty. The dental characteristics method is unique in being the easiest and quickest
method of identifcation.
The diversity of dental characteristics is wide, making each dentition unique.
3
The dental
enamel is the hardest tissue in the body, and would thus withstand peri- and post-mortem
damages, and so would dental materials adjoined to teeth. Being diverse and resistant to
environmental challenges, teeth are considered excellent post-mortem material for identifcation
Dr. Suhail Hani Al-Amad
BDS, DCD, GradDip ForOdont,
MRACDS (Oral Med), JMC
cert. (Oral Med)
. Assistant Professor of Oral
Medicine,College of Dentistry,
University of Sharjah
[email protected]
Forensic Dentistry
22 Smile Dental Journal Volume 4, Issue 1 - 2009
Forensic Dentistry
with enough concordant points to make a meaningful comparison.
For dental identifcation to be successful, ante-mortem data
need to be available. This relies heavily on dental professionals
recording and keeping dental notes, radiographs, study
models, clinical photographsetc. The availability of dental
records will allow comparing the dental characteristics of the
person during life with those retrieved from the person
after death (Fig. 1).

In cases where dental records are not available, Forensic
Odontology can still contribute to establishing the identity
by creating a profle of how the deceased person was during
life. This includes any unusual oral habits, type of diet,
socio-economic status, but most importantly the age of the
person at time of death.
Dental aging is based on the chronology of formation and
eruption of teeth. This helps in determining the age for persons
up to 15 years-old in a fairly accurate manner. After 15 years
of age, dental aging relies on modifcations that take place
during life, such as attrition, cementum formation and root
transparency.
4
Despite being extensively studied, results of
aging of this latter group remain less than optimal because
those age-related modifcations can be infuenced by various
factors, such as diet and dental pathosis.
4
Dentists Role in Mass Fatality Incidences
Routine identification tasks are a simple one-to-one matching
process. This is not the case in disasters. Mass fatality
incidences represent a big challenge to local authorities.
Another challenge is the damage inficted on infra-structure
that includes hospitals, transportation, communications
etc. which impede recovery.
The identifcation of deceased victims in those circumstances
necessitates putting a hierarchy system consisting of an
ante-mortem, post-mortem and reconciliation teams. Those
teams are headed by team leaders, with liaison ofcers to
coordinate the work. The results are reported to an identifcation
board which is headed by a commander, who in most cases
is a senior police ofcer.
Forensic Odontologists have contributed to the resolution
of many mass disasters. The 2004 Indian ocean tsunami
is probably the most eminent example on the success
of Forensic Odontologists in identifying large number of
victims in short time. Nearly half of the victims in Thailand
were identifed by dental characteristics method alone, and
Forensic Odontologists contributed to the identifcation
of the remaining half by assisting the fngerprint, DNA and
physical characteristics teams.
Weak, and even absence of dental records did not stop
Forensic Odontologists from contributing to the identifcation
of tsunami victims in Thailand. Victims with no dental
records were either identifed by photographic superimposition,
if a photograph showing upper anterior teeth was provided
5

(Fig. 2), or by narrowing down possible matches for the
DNA and fngerprint teams through dental aging.
Bitemark Analysis
Injuries induced by teeth and left on objects, such as skin,
have a distinctive pattern. Those patterned injuries (bitemarks)
are useful to judicial authorities because they help in reconstructing
(Figure 2)
Identifcation by photo-skull
superimposition. The
skull of an unknown
child was superimposed
onto the portrait of a
missing person. The
outline of teeth and
the facial anatomical
similarities suggested
that the skull belongs to
the child in the portrait.
The right central incisor
in the skull was lost after
death.
(Figure 1)
Ante-mortem radiograph
taken by the treating
dentist and post-mortem
radiograph taken by the
Forensic Odontologist
of the unknown
deceased. There are
many concordant points
to establish a positive
identifcation.
past events that surrounded the biting process. For example,
bitemarks indicate a violent interaction between the
perpetrator and the victim, and they might tell us something
about the criminal intentions of the perpetrator, whether sexual,
child abuse, or other forms of assaults. Moreover, bitemarks
are the only patterned injuries that can indicate (with diferent
levels of certainty) who the biter was. By comparing the
locations and measurements of teeth marks in a bitemark
with those of the suspect(s), Forensic Odontologists can
exclude or include persons suspected of causing the bitemarks.

However, several erroneous bitemark analysis, mainly from
the United States courts, rendered this type of evidence
23 Smile Dental Journal Volume 4, Issue 1 - 2009
Forensic Dentistry
questionable.
6
The validity of bitemark analysis has undergone
decent review in the last ten years aiming at boosting the
scientifc weight and improving the technique in a manner that
can be reproducible. New research is underway to allow
digital comparison of teeth and bitemarks at a 3-dimensional level.
7

This novel technique is aimed to overcome perspective
distortion, a signifcant morbid factor in bitemark analysis that
results from reducing 3-dimensional objects to 2-dimensional
images.
Domestic Violence and Child Abuse
The World Health Organization (WHO) has declared that violence
is a major and growing public health problem across the
world.
8
This landmark declaration meant that healthcare
providers are involved in detecting and managing cases
of violence, including abuse to vulnerable populations, i.e.
children, elderly and women.
The WHO further distinguishes four types of violence; physical,
sexual, psychological and neglect. All forms of violence can
manifest in the oro-facial region, and are hence should be
of concern to dentists. Prevalence of physical violence, as a
cause of maxillofacial injuries, ranges from 3.3% to 41% in
various countries.
9
This wide range is probably due to diferent
reporting thresholds in diferent communities. The true
prevalence of violence is thus difcult to establish because
of not or under-reporting this problem.
Injuries due to abuse can manifest in the oro-facial region in
various forms, including fractured anterior teeth, fractured
alveolar bone, lacerations of the labial and buccal mucosae,
lacerations to the frenum and bruises to the lips, face and
neck (Fig. 3). Non-accidental injuries have certain characteristics
which help in their recognition (Table 1).
10
The most common site to be non-accidentally traumatized
is the head.
11
Therefore, injuries to the oro-facial region
should raise reasonable suspicion to the treating dentist.
Suspicion should lead to investigation and reporting, but
the reporting must be well-thought of. On one hand, there
is a necessity to report those cases to authorities. But on the
other hand, reporting false cases is stigmatizing and is an
unacceptable interference in the victims personal afairs.
In various countries there are laws that govern reporting of
violence. Some laws penalize healthcare workers by
imprisonment, and/or fnes, for not reporting violence manifested
on their patients.
12,13
However, due to the sensitivity of this
matter, reporting has to follow a sound mechanism, and be
addressed to a proper authority with specifcally-trained
personnel. Readers are advised to search for the proper
reporting authority in their respective countries.
Conclusion
Dental practitioners should be aware of the forensic application
of dentistry. Dental records that are used to provide patients
with optimal dental service could also be very benefcial to
legal authorities during an identifcation process. Therefore,
all forms of dental treatments should be recorded and kept
properly. Dental clinicians, as other healthcare workers, are
at the forefront in detecting signs of violence appearing
on their patients. They should be aware of the criteria of
abusive injuries, and the reporting mechanisms to ensure a
correct response by the concerned authorities.
(Figure 3)
Lacerated injury on the
upper lip of a child after
a smothering attempt
(Courtesy of Dr. Mumen S.
Haddidi).
References
1. Bernstein M. Forensic odontology. In: Eckert WG. editor. Introduction to
Forensic Sciences. 2
nd
ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRS Press; 1997, p. 304-51.
2. Interpol. Disaster victim identifcation. Available at: URL:http://www.
interpol.int/Public/DisasterVictim/default.asp. Accessed 5
th
Feb 2009.
3. Adams BJ. Establishing personal identifcation based on specifc
patterns of missing, flled, and unrestored teeth. J Forensic Sci. 2003
May;48(3):487-96.
4. Meinl A, Huber CD, Tangl S, Gruber GM, Teschler-Nicola M, Watzek G.
Comparison of the validity of three dental methods for the estimation of
age at death. Forensic Sci Int. 2008 Jul 4;178(2-3):96-105. Epub 2008 Apr 8.
5. Al-Amad S, McCullough M, Graham J, Clement J, Hill A. Craniofacial
identifcation by computer-mediated superimposition. J Forensic
Odontostomatol. 2006 Dec;24(2):47-52.
6. Bowers CM. Problem-based analysis of bitemark misidentifcations: the
role of DNA. Forensic Sci Int. 2006 May 15;159 Suppl 1:S104-9. Epub
2006 Apr 4.
7. Blackwell SA, Taylor RV, Gordon I, Ogleby CL, Tanijiri T, Yoshino M, et al.,
3-D imaging and quantitative comparison of human dentitions and
simulated bite marks. Int J Legal Med. 2007 Jan;121(1):9-17. Epub 2006 Jan 4.
8. World Health Organization. Prevention of violence: a public health problem.
49
th
World Health Assembly Resolution WHA49.25: Geneva: WHO, 1996.
9. Eggensperger N, Smolka K, Scheidegger B, Zimmermann H, Iizuka T. A.
3-year survey of assault-related maxillofacial fractures in central Switzerland. J
Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2007 Apr;35(3):161-7. Epub 2007 Jun 20.
10. Mok JY. Non-accidental injury in children--an update. Injury. 2008
Sep;39(9):978-85. Epub 2008 Jul 25.
11. Maguire S. Bruising as an indicator of child abuse: when should I be
concerned? Paediatrics and Child Health. 2008 Dec;18(12):545-9.
12. Government of Dubai. Article 273 Federal Penalties Law of the UAE
Number 3. 1987. Available at:URL:http://www.dc.gov.ae. Accessed 5
th

Feb 2009.
13. Jordanian Legislations. Article 207 Penalties Law of Hashemite Kingdom of
Jordan. 1960. Available at:URL:http://www.lob.gov.jo. Accessed 5
th
Feb 2009.
24 Smile Dental Journal Volume 4, Issue 1 - 2009