1 00:00:01,440 --> 00:00:04,920 Speaker 1: Welcome to Stuff you should know, a production of iHeartRadio. 2 00:00:11,119 --> 00:00:13,320 Speaker 2: Hey, and welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh, and there's 3 00:00:13,400 --> 00:00:16,239 Speaker 2: Chuck and Jerry's not here, but she's here in spirit. 4 00:00:16,840 --> 00:00:19,880 Speaker 2: We're all flashing our pearly whites because we're in a 5 00:00:19,960 --> 00:00:22,759 Speaker 2: lineup and this is stuff I. 6 00:00:22,840 --> 00:00:26,759 Speaker 1: Tried, or my case, front four of my pearly off whites, 7 00:00:28,000 --> 00:00:30,800 Speaker 1: because when they made me my new set of four 8 00:00:30,800 --> 00:00:34,000 Speaker 1: teeth to go upfront to replace my four teeth, they 9 00:00:34,040 --> 00:00:36,839 Speaker 1: were too white and they looked weird. Oh really, And 10 00:00:36,880 --> 00:00:38,760 Speaker 1: they said we can send them back and have them 11 00:00:39,479 --> 00:00:41,240 Speaker 1: staining them just a bit more, and I went, yeah, 12 00:00:41,479 --> 00:00:42,280 Speaker 1: we're gonna have to do that. 13 00:00:42,760 --> 00:00:45,520 Speaker 2: Like Matt Dylan, and there's something about Mary. 14 00:00:46,280 --> 00:00:51,760 Speaker 1: They weren't quite chick lit white, but they were enough 15 00:00:51,800 --> 00:00:53,840 Speaker 1: to where they looked a little different than the others. 16 00:00:53,840 --> 00:00:55,600 Speaker 1: And the others are just gonna, you know, as teeth 17 00:00:55,600 --> 00:00:58,240 Speaker 1: do continue to stay in a bit. So yeah, it's like, yeah, 18 00:00:58,280 --> 00:00:59,880 Speaker 1: why don't we go ahead and knock it down? 19 00:00:59,880 --> 00:01:02,880 Speaker 2: And you should have just smoked a bunch of cigarettes, right, 20 00:01:03,000 --> 00:01:04,559 Speaker 2: done it yourself, saved some money. 21 00:01:05,000 --> 00:01:08,080 Speaker 1: I don't think these implants will. That's the problem is 22 00:01:08,120 --> 00:01:09,679 Speaker 1: they don't stain, while the others are. 23 00:01:10,360 --> 00:01:13,240 Speaker 2: Oh okay, well then yeah, you definitely need to hand 24 00:01:13,280 --> 00:01:15,119 Speaker 2: those off for staining in the lab. 25 00:01:15,400 --> 00:01:18,080 Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm like, well, I was just smoked eighties cigarettes, 26 00:01:19,040 --> 00:01:22,280 Speaker 1: so today another and I thought we were done with forensics, 27 00:01:22,319 --> 00:01:25,559 Speaker 1: But who knew that lurking out there was the topic 28 00:01:25,600 --> 00:01:30,240 Speaker 1: of forensic dentistry, which we will learn very quickly as 29 00:01:30,240 --> 00:01:33,320 Speaker 1: in right now kind of can be divided up into 30 00:01:33,360 --> 00:01:40,240 Speaker 1: two things, which is identification of deceased people or peoples 31 00:01:41,080 --> 00:01:43,520 Speaker 1: from dental records, like when you hear like you know, 32 00:01:43,520 --> 00:01:45,280 Speaker 1: they perished in the fire, but they were able to 33 00:01:45,319 --> 00:01:51,400 Speaker 1: identify the body, and the much more controversial bite mark 34 00:01:51,520 --> 00:01:56,720 Speaker 1: analysis that had been widely used in court and is 35 00:01:56,760 --> 00:02:01,120 Speaker 1: now generally thought of by most dentists and people in 36 00:02:01,160 --> 00:02:02,600 Speaker 1: this line of work as junk science. 37 00:02:03,240 --> 00:02:05,960 Speaker 2: Yeah, it's I mean, just from researching this, it's like, 38 00:02:06,120 --> 00:02:09,359 Speaker 2: what kind of judge is still allowing this in as evidence? 39 00:02:09,400 --> 00:02:10,119 Speaker 2: It's crazy. 40 00:02:10,560 --> 00:02:11,680 Speaker 1: Yeah. 41 00:02:11,760 --> 00:02:13,720 Speaker 2: Yeah, So I guess I just revealed my take on 42 00:02:14,280 --> 00:02:18,040 Speaker 2: forensic dentistry or bitemark analysis specifically, because the other version 43 00:02:18,080 --> 00:02:24,680 Speaker 2: you said identifying deceased people is really no, it's not. 44 00:02:24,760 --> 00:02:28,959 Speaker 2: It's pretty much set. Most I didn't read anybody who 45 00:02:29,000 --> 00:02:32,160 Speaker 2: was challenging it or it's legitimacy, And apparently it's been 46 00:02:32,240 --> 00:02:36,120 Speaker 2: really useful over the years because the teeth are the 47 00:02:36,200 --> 00:02:39,760 Speaker 2: strongest part of the body. They can survive fire, they 48 00:02:39,760 --> 00:02:42,440 Speaker 2: can survive exposure to chemicals that could just get rid 49 00:02:42,480 --> 00:02:47,200 Speaker 2: of the rest of the body. They can survive explosions 50 00:02:47,320 --> 00:02:50,120 Speaker 2: up to I think two thousand degrees fahrenheit. They can 51 00:02:50,120 --> 00:02:53,079 Speaker 2: take heat up to that as anyone who's made it 52 00:02:53,120 --> 00:02:55,920 Speaker 2: far enough in breaking bad nose that eventually, if it 53 00:02:55,960 --> 00:02:59,160 Speaker 2: gets hot enough, they'll pop like popcorn. But most of 54 00:02:59,200 --> 00:03:02,800 Speaker 2: the time, if a dead person who's unidentifiable comes into 55 00:03:03,160 --> 00:03:05,800 Speaker 2: a medical examiner's office, they have not been exposed to 56 00:03:05,840 --> 00:03:06,680 Speaker 2: that level of heat. 57 00:03:07,280 --> 00:03:11,200 Speaker 1: Yeah, and even if the teeth themselves are struggling to 58 00:03:11,320 --> 00:03:14,919 Speaker 1: hang in there, tooth pulp or dental tissue on the 59 00:03:14,960 --> 00:03:19,200 Speaker 1: inside of that tooth is very resistant to environmental attacks 60 00:03:19,240 --> 00:03:23,920 Speaker 1: like incineration, immersion, like you can be underwater for well, 61 00:03:23,919 --> 00:03:25,880 Speaker 1: I was about to say a million years, but that's 62 00:03:25,919 --> 00:03:32,079 Speaker 1: probably not true, but immersion, trauma, decomposition, So extracting DNA 63 00:03:32,160 --> 00:03:34,639 Speaker 1: from the inside of a tooth is a pretty viable thing. 64 00:03:35,680 --> 00:03:39,240 Speaker 1: But before nineteen seventy four, all you really had going 65 00:03:40,040 --> 00:03:45,000 Speaker 1: was identifying victims of a disaster, usually a natural disaster 66 00:03:45,080 --> 00:03:48,760 Speaker 1: or human cause disaster. They did not really get into 67 00:03:50,080 --> 00:03:54,200 Speaker 1: crime scene stuff. Because in nineteen seventy five is when 68 00:03:54,320 --> 00:03:58,320 Speaker 1: that first became permissible in court, where a murder victim 69 00:03:58,400 --> 00:04:01,680 Speaker 1: had a bite on her nose and three forensic dentists 70 00:04:01,720 --> 00:04:05,160 Speaker 1: came along and said, hey, it's pretty clear this bite 71 00:04:05,160 --> 00:04:09,720 Speaker 1: came from this person. It should be maybe the exception 72 00:04:09,800 --> 00:04:11,800 Speaker 1: to the rule, but we should allow it in court 73 00:04:11,800 --> 00:04:12,280 Speaker 1: this time. 74 00:04:12,560 --> 00:04:16,120 Speaker 2: Yes, And that was a very fateful decision because as 75 00:04:16,200 --> 00:04:19,760 Speaker 2: that case made its way through appeals and a final 76 00:04:19,800 --> 00:04:24,920 Speaker 2: appellate court upheld it, that also simultaneously not only convicted 77 00:04:24,960 --> 00:04:29,960 Speaker 2: the killer, it also it said, this is legitimate. Bitemark 78 00:04:30,000 --> 00:04:33,960 Speaker 2: analysis is admissible in court. It's set a precedent, and 79 00:04:34,040 --> 00:04:37,440 Speaker 2: that exception that those three forensic dentists in their defense, 80 00:04:38,720 --> 00:04:41,560 Speaker 2: you know, went to batfor for use in this particular case, 81 00:04:42,120 --> 00:04:45,880 Speaker 2: became the rule. And there was no longer like, hey, 82 00:04:45,960 --> 00:04:48,680 Speaker 2: this is not actually that great of an idea. It was, hey, 83 00:04:48,680 --> 00:04:52,400 Speaker 2: we've got this new way of prosecuting scumbags. Let's use 84 00:04:52,440 --> 00:04:55,160 Speaker 2: it to the max. And there was a really famous 85 00:04:55,200 --> 00:04:58,280 Speaker 2: case within just a couple of years of it becoming 86 00:04:58,400 --> 00:05:02,839 Speaker 2: widely used in American court sorts. That's still celebrated today. 87 00:05:02,920 --> 00:05:06,240 Speaker 2: Is one of the great successes of bitemark analysis because 88 00:05:06,240 --> 00:05:10,360 Speaker 2: it's not like every single case is worse than the last. Yeah, 89 00:05:10,360 --> 00:05:13,480 Speaker 2: but there's enough bad cases and enough people who've been 90 00:05:13,480 --> 00:05:17,360 Speaker 2: wrongly convicted and later exonerated based on bite mark evidence 91 00:05:17,480 --> 00:05:20,120 Speaker 2: that it should not It's not it should not be allowed. 92 00:05:20,360 --> 00:05:23,600 Speaker 2: You just go figure out who did it some other way. 93 00:05:23,920 --> 00:05:26,240 Speaker 2: Stop using bite mark analysis. 94 00:05:26,520 --> 00:05:30,840 Speaker 1: Yeah, dozens of people, according to the Innocence Project. And 95 00:05:32,000 --> 00:05:35,280 Speaker 1: we should point out from nineteen seventy five until just recently, 96 00:05:35,360 --> 00:05:39,240 Speaker 1: like twenty sixteen is when they finally made affirm decision, 97 00:05:40,360 --> 00:05:42,200 Speaker 1: which you know, we'll hold onto that one, but that's 98 00:05:42,240 --> 00:05:45,159 Speaker 1: really when things changed. But I think the case that 99 00:05:45,160 --> 00:05:49,120 Speaker 1: you were talking about is I've forgotten Ted Bundy. In 100 00:05:49,240 --> 00:05:53,640 Speaker 1: nineteen seventy eight, a notorious serial killer Ted Bundy would 101 00:05:53,720 --> 00:05:57,919 Speaker 1: sort of wind up his serial killing career by wandering 102 00:05:57,920 --> 00:06:01,560 Speaker 1: into the Kyomegas already house at Florida State University and 103 00:06:03,080 --> 00:06:08,240 Speaker 1: bludgeoning and killing for students at sorority sisters there, including 104 00:06:09,040 --> 00:06:12,120 Speaker 1: one victim where he bit her and left very clear 105 00:06:12,160 --> 00:06:16,320 Speaker 1: bite marks. And those bite marks were instrumental in Ted 106 00:06:16,360 --> 00:06:17,120 Speaker 1: Bundy's conviction. 107 00:06:17,600 --> 00:06:21,400 Speaker 2: Yeah, the two Kyomega women were who were who died 108 00:06:21,440 --> 00:06:24,359 Speaker 2: who did not manage to live with Lisa Levy and 109 00:06:24,400 --> 00:06:28,400 Speaker 2: Margaret Bowman. But he did some pretty terrible damage to 110 00:06:28,560 --> 00:06:31,960 Speaker 2: some the other the other two, I guess. But that 111 00:06:32,040 --> 00:06:36,440 Speaker 2: bitte mark apparently Ted Bundy had extremely crooked front teeth, 112 00:06:37,320 --> 00:06:39,440 Speaker 2: so much so and the bite mark was clear enough 113 00:06:39,440 --> 00:06:43,599 Speaker 2: that they used that bitemark analysis in part to convict 114 00:06:43,640 --> 00:06:46,960 Speaker 2: him for those murders. Those were he apparently admitted to 115 00:06:47,080 --> 00:06:50,480 Speaker 2: killing thirty women, possibly killed as many as one hundred 116 00:06:51,040 --> 00:06:53,120 Speaker 2: and so one of the one of the cases he 117 00:06:53,160 --> 00:06:56,000 Speaker 2: was prosecuted for were the Kyo Omega murders. 118 00:06:56,279 --> 00:07:00,960 Speaker 1: Yeah, that's right. So that's a good setup. We should 119 00:07:01,000 --> 00:07:04,080 Speaker 1: just mention sort of as far as the identification, the 120 00:07:04,160 --> 00:07:09,520 Speaker 1: non controversial part. Adults usually have thirty two teeth, foreign sizers, 121 00:07:09,560 --> 00:07:12,640 Speaker 1: four canines, eight pre molars, twelve molars, and four wisdom 122 00:07:12,680 --> 00:07:15,520 Speaker 1: depending on if you still have those. And when you 123 00:07:15,520 --> 00:07:17,760 Speaker 1: go to the dentist, they you know, we've been to 124 00:07:17,800 --> 00:07:20,200 Speaker 1: the dentist, and they do a lot of notating. They 125 00:07:21,320 --> 00:07:25,040 Speaker 1: notate your teeth variations in your teeth changes in your teeth, 126 00:07:25,080 --> 00:07:27,960 Speaker 1: if you chip a tooth, any dental work you've gotten, 127 00:07:28,120 --> 00:07:30,600 Speaker 1: like crowns or fillings or bridges, or in my case 128 00:07:30,640 --> 00:07:37,160 Speaker 1: for implants, periodontal disease, receding gums. There are x rays 129 00:07:37,160 --> 00:07:39,840 Speaker 1: and there are just the tooth charts. And these are 130 00:07:39,840 --> 00:07:42,320 Speaker 1: the dental records that we speak of when they say, 131 00:07:42,320 --> 00:07:46,560 Speaker 1: you know, a body was identified, you know via dental records. 132 00:07:46,920 --> 00:07:49,440 Speaker 1: It's because of all this work that you get over 133 00:07:49,480 --> 00:07:53,600 Speaker 1: the years at the dentist. I guess if you, well, 134 00:07:53,600 --> 00:07:55,800 Speaker 1: this doesn't have so much to do with bitemark analysis, 135 00:07:56,080 --> 00:07:58,200 Speaker 1: I guess it could, but the records that seem like 136 00:07:58,240 --> 00:07:59,800 Speaker 1: are mainly about identification. 137 00:08:00,600 --> 00:08:04,280 Speaker 2: Yeah, and also by laws, I think every state requires 138 00:08:04,560 --> 00:08:08,160 Speaker 2: dentists to keep dental charts on their patients, and then 139 00:08:08,160 --> 00:08:11,320 Speaker 2: they also have to retain them for set number of years, 140 00:08:11,320 --> 00:08:14,360 Speaker 2: depending on which state demands what. So they do come 141 00:08:14,400 --> 00:08:18,040 Speaker 2: in handy just the charts alone. Well, like, there's not 142 00:08:18,080 --> 00:08:21,240 Speaker 2: going to be x raysed with them necessarily, there's not 143 00:08:21,280 --> 00:08:24,400 Speaker 2: going to be any photographs just from the charts, and 144 00:08:24,440 --> 00:08:29,000 Speaker 2: the the coding systems that they've worked out to codify 145 00:08:29,160 --> 00:08:35,040 Speaker 2: teeth can conceivably give you enough information that you could 146 00:08:35,160 --> 00:08:38,439 Speaker 2: use it in some form of forensic dentistry. That's how 147 00:08:38,480 --> 00:08:39,760 Speaker 2: accurate the charts are meant to be. 148 00:08:40,400 --> 00:08:42,800 Speaker 1: Yeah, for sure. So you know, we mentioned all the 149 00:08:42,800 --> 00:08:47,400 Speaker 1: ways teeth can hang in there and stay you know, 150 00:08:47,559 --> 00:08:49,440 Speaker 1: a part of your skull, and when other parts of 151 00:08:49,480 --> 00:08:54,640 Speaker 1: your body have deteriorated, teeth can shrink, they can become fragile, 152 00:08:55,280 --> 00:08:59,200 Speaker 1: but if you handle them gently and with care, you 153 00:08:59,240 --> 00:09:03,000 Speaker 1: can preserve them and lacquer. And what will happen if 154 00:09:03,080 --> 00:09:06,920 Speaker 1: you need to identify corpse usually is a dentist will 155 00:09:06,920 --> 00:09:10,560 Speaker 1: go to the morgue. They will surgically expose the jaw 156 00:09:10,600 --> 00:09:13,920 Speaker 1: and examine things. That's if you have, like you know, 157 00:09:14,200 --> 00:09:18,000 Speaker 1: a pretty recent dead body that hasn't decomposed too much. 158 00:09:18,440 --> 00:09:21,000 Speaker 1: If all you've got is a handful of teeth, that 159 00:09:21,120 --> 00:09:23,400 Speaker 1: still maybe enough due to those X rays and charts. 160 00:09:24,960 --> 00:09:29,560 Speaker 1: But if it's mass casualties, a dentist is gonna and 161 00:09:29,600 --> 00:09:31,720 Speaker 1: these are forensic dentists, by the way, it's a specialty. 162 00:09:32,600 --> 00:09:36,000 Speaker 1: They get a list of possible victims and then you know, 163 00:09:36,040 --> 00:09:38,720 Speaker 1: you start comparing different records of the different people to 164 00:09:38,760 --> 00:09:39,920 Speaker 1: try and sort out who is who. 165 00:09:40,480 --> 00:09:43,080 Speaker 2: Yeah, Yeah, it takes a special kind of dentist to 166 00:09:43,080 --> 00:09:47,440 Speaker 2: do this kind of work, because by the time the cadaver, 167 00:09:47,960 --> 00:09:52,240 Speaker 2: the corpse has made it to the forensic dentist, everybody 168 00:09:52,320 --> 00:09:56,199 Speaker 2: else upstream has said, like, no, they don't have fingerprints, 169 00:09:56,480 --> 00:09:59,200 Speaker 2: their face is unrecognizable. It just keeps going on and 170 00:09:59,240 --> 00:10:03,599 Speaker 2: on and on until finally your last chance of identifying 171 00:10:03,640 --> 00:10:07,199 Speaker 2: the person is forensic dentistry. And they'll often, i mean, 172 00:10:07,200 --> 00:10:09,679 Speaker 2: like if it's a mass casualty, you know, you know 173 00:10:09,720 --> 00:10:12,160 Speaker 2: who is on the plane. Apparently that's when it comes 174 00:10:12,160 --> 00:10:14,760 Speaker 2: in handy a lot for plane crashes. You know, all 175 00:10:14,760 --> 00:10:17,600 Speaker 2: the passengers on the plane, You go get their dental records, 176 00:10:17,720 --> 00:10:20,040 Speaker 2: You hand them over to the forensic dentists and say, 177 00:10:20,040 --> 00:10:22,400 Speaker 2: good luck, can you match any of these teeth with 178 00:10:22,480 --> 00:10:25,720 Speaker 2: these charts? And they're they're i mean, they're a huge 179 00:10:25,760 --> 00:10:29,319 Speaker 2: part of a forensic team in like mass casualty events. 180 00:10:29,320 --> 00:10:32,959 Speaker 2: They're they're really important because again they're like the last 181 00:10:33,000 --> 00:10:36,920 Speaker 2: hope of some families getting closure, being able to like 182 00:10:36,960 --> 00:10:39,440 Speaker 2: give their loved one a funeral or something like that. 183 00:10:39,520 --> 00:10:42,120 Speaker 2: Like that's the role that they're they're playing. They're not 184 00:10:42,200 --> 00:10:45,160 Speaker 2: doing this because they like just playing with dead people's 185 00:10:45,200 --> 00:10:48,800 Speaker 2: teeth or anything like that. Like they are helping other 186 00:10:48,920 --> 00:10:53,600 Speaker 2: humans with their work by identifying disaster victims. I'm not 187 00:10:53,679 --> 00:10:55,520 Speaker 2: extending that to bitemark analysis. 188 00:10:55,880 --> 00:10:58,960 Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, for sure. There's a lot of things you 189 00:10:59,000 --> 00:11:02,280 Speaker 1: can sort of glean from looking at a person's teeth 190 00:11:02,280 --> 00:11:06,000 Speaker 1: about that person. It's not the most exact science, but 191 00:11:07,320 --> 00:11:10,000 Speaker 1: we know generally how fast teeth grow, about four micro 192 00:11:10,120 --> 00:11:13,839 Speaker 1: meats per day, So you can estimate someone's age based 193 00:11:13,880 --> 00:11:14,480 Speaker 1: on their teeth. 194 00:11:14,559 --> 00:11:17,960 Speaker 2: Well, not only that, you can also like when your 195 00:11:18,000 --> 00:11:21,680 Speaker 2: teeth develop as a human, it follows a set pattern. Yeah, 196 00:11:21,679 --> 00:11:25,560 Speaker 2: so you can go and look at somebody's development, especially 197 00:11:25,559 --> 00:11:28,520 Speaker 2: if they're underage, I think twenty something or thirty five, 198 00:11:29,080 --> 00:11:31,320 Speaker 2: and say, well, they have they've developed this tooth, but 199 00:11:31,360 --> 00:11:36,640 Speaker 2: they haven't developed this tooth, so they're yeah, probably eighteenish. 200 00:11:35,480 --> 00:11:39,439 Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly. They can get it in a wheelhouse. Sometimes 201 00:11:39,480 --> 00:11:43,319 Speaker 1: you can learn a little bit about someone's ethnicity because 202 00:11:43,400 --> 00:11:46,240 Speaker 1: you know, some ethnicities have teeth that are a little different. 203 00:11:46,920 --> 00:11:51,319 Speaker 1: Apparently some Native Americans and some Asian people have incisors 204 00:11:51,320 --> 00:11:56,400 Speaker 1: that have scooped out backs. You can determine sometimes some 205 00:11:56,520 --> 00:12:00,480 Speaker 1: socioeconomic background. If there's you know a lot of really 206 00:12:00,520 --> 00:12:03,560 Speaker 1: expensive restoration work, that'll tell you that they probably had 207 00:12:03,559 --> 00:12:05,880 Speaker 1: a lot of money or you know, at least money 208 00:12:05,880 --> 00:12:09,560 Speaker 1: to afford that. Also, the methods that are used are 209 00:12:09,640 --> 00:12:11,720 Speaker 1: used in some parts of the world and not in others, 210 00:12:12,440 --> 00:12:17,240 Speaker 1: like some geographic areas. Person's lifestyle, like if they were 211 00:12:17,280 --> 00:12:19,760 Speaker 1: a smoker, this is kind of fun. If you're a 212 00:12:19,800 --> 00:12:22,560 Speaker 1: pipe smoker, man, if you play the play the bagpipes, Yeah, 213 00:12:22,800 --> 00:12:25,559 Speaker 1: you have a very distinctive wear pattern on your teeth. 214 00:12:25,559 --> 00:12:28,120 Speaker 2: Did you see any pictures of a skull with a 215 00:12:28,160 --> 00:12:32,800 Speaker 2: with a where from pipe smoking? Yeah, it's crazy. It's 216 00:12:32,840 --> 00:12:37,480 Speaker 2: like the person's teeth like curve up at some point, 217 00:12:37,520 --> 00:12:39,360 Speaker 2: like I'm basically I think it was the right side 218 00:12:39,360 --> 00:12:42,240 Speaker 2: of their face just from holding a pipe in their 219 00:12:42,240 --> 00:12:43,720 Speaker 2: teeth for years and years and years. 220 00:12:44,240 --> 00:12:46,800 Speaker 1: Yeah, and then just sort of the obvious stuff like 221 00:12:47,200 --> 00:12:50,880 Speaker 1: a family member saying like, no, they were definitely missing 222 00:12:50,880 --> 00:12:53,880 Speaker 1: that tooth or that that you know, that distinctive crown 223 00:12:53,960 --> 00:12:59,640 Speaker 1: with the diamond CWB for Charles W. Chuck Bryant, I know, 224 00:12:59,679 --> 00:13:02,640 Speaker 1: I can't believe you got that. Still that was definitely 225 00:13:02,840 --> 00:13:07,160 Speaker 1: their mouth or that tooth was broken. So beyond just 226 00:13:07,240 --> 00:13:09,960 Speaker 1: dental records, like family members can sometimes help out. 227 00:13:10,120 --> 00:13:12,600 Speaker 2: I also saw another lifestyle. One was something called a 228 00:13:12,679 --> 00:13:17,960 Speaker 2: tailor's notch. This is pretty arcane, but if you find 229 00:13:18,000 --> 00:13:20,480 Speaker 2: a tailor's notch, there's a chance that this was a dressmaker, 230 00:13:20,520 --> 00:13:22,800 Speaker 2: a tailor or something like that, because they hold pins 231 00:13:22,800 --> 00:13:24,120 Speaker 2: in their mouths. 232 00:13:24,280 --> 00:13:25,560 Speaker 1: Oh yeah, as part of their. 233 00:13:25,400 --> 00:13:27,680 Speaker 2: Profession, usually in their teeth, and when you do that 234 00:13:27,840 --> 00:13:31,240 Speaker 2: enough times, it actually wears a little indentation in the 235 00:13:31,280 --> 00:13:35,840 Speaker 2: tooth that you normally hold the the sewing needle in. So, 236 00:13:36,520 --> 00:13:38,000 Speaker 2: do you want to talk about the Black Death or 237 00:13:38,040 --> 00:13:38,800 Speaker 2: just keep moving on. 238 00:13:40,160 --> 00:13:42,880 Speaker 1: Let's take a break. Okay, all right, we'll take a 239 00:13:42,920 --> 00:13:45,559 Speaker 1: break and we'll talk about the Black Death and then 240 00:13:45,920 --> 00:14:12,920 Speaker 1: dive into the more controversial bitemark analysis. 241 00:14:14,720 --> 00:14:17,800 Speaker 2: So we promised talk about the Black Death. Apparently one 242 00:14:17,840 --> 00:14:23,720 Speaker 2: of the high profile I guess forensic dentistry cases recently 243 00:14:23,880 --> 00:14:28,160 Speaker 2: was a study that looked at the teeth of or 244 00:14:28,240 --> 00:14:30,840 Speaker 2: I think it extracted DNA from the pulp of the 245 00:14:30,840 --> 00:14:35,160 Speaker 2: teeth of medieval villagers who died from the plague. And 246 00:14:35,280 --> 00:14:37,800 Speaker 2: I guess they were able to exclude the plague in 247 00:14:37,840 --> 00:14:41,840 Speaker 2: some cases, like people had died and it was falsely 248 00:14:41,840 --> 00:14:46,120 Speaker 2: attributed to death from the plague. That seems almost inconsequential 249 00:14:46,120 --> 00:14:47,840 Speaker 2: to me because the other thing that they did was 250 00:14:48,040 --> 00:14:52,640 Speaker 2: definitively prove that you're seeing a pestis, which is a 251 00:14:53,600 --> 00:14:57,520 Speaker 2: bacteria I think, a bacteria that's carried by fleas typically, 252 00:14:58,080 --> 00:14:59,880 Speaker 2: So the rats came to town, the fleas around the 253 00:15:00,200 --> 00:15:03,000 Speaker 2: so the bacteria was on the fleas, and that's what 254 00:15:03,120 --> 00:15:06,120 Speaker 2: spread the black death, that's what they've long said. And 255 00:15:06,200 --> 00:15:08,840 Speaker 2: they extracted that from the DNA of the pulp of 256 00:15:08,880 --> 00:15:11,920 Speaker 2: teeth of medieval people who died from the plague definitely 257 00:15:11,960 --> 00:15:15,840 Speaker 2: died from the plague, and said, yep, here's your smoking gun. 258 00:15:16,480 --> 00:15:21,320 Speaker 1: There's your problem, right, Yeah, And it was something this old. 259 00:15:21,320 --> 00:15:25,520 Speaker 1: A DNA isn't readily available. M DNA mitochondrial DNA can 260 00:15:25,560 --> 00:15:26,560 Speaker 1: also be very useful. 261 00:15:26,960 --> 00:15:29,960 Speaker 2: And I also saw the oldest tooth that they successfully 262 00:15:30,000 --> 00:15:33,200 Speaker 2: sequenced a genome from by extracting DNA from the pulp 263 00:15:33,760 --> 00:15:36,480 Speaker 2: was six thousand years old, from about four thousand BCE. 264 00:15:36,720 --> 00:15:38,720 Speaker 2: Back in two thousand and five. They managed to do that, 265 00:15:39,040 --> 00:15:41,720 Speaker 2: and you know, those people are still talking about, like 266 00:15:41,800 --> 00:15:44,240 Speaker 2: I did I ever tell you about the four thousand 267 00:15:44,280 --> 00:15:46,480 Speaker 2: BCE tooth we extracted DNA from? 268 00:15:46,840 --> 00:15:53,680 Speaker 1: Yeah, oh boy, the smell of that toothbulp O Oh good. 269 00:15:51,760 --> 00:15:54,280 Speaker 2: God, that was awful. I was not expecting that. 270 00:15:55,840 --> 00:15:57,800 Speaker 1: All right. So now this is where things get a 271 00:15:57,800 --> 00:16:00,240 Speaker 1: little hinky, because we're going to talk about the other 272 00:16:00,480 --> 00:16:04,760 Speaker 1: aspect of forensic dentistry, which is the very controversial, very 273 00:16:04,800 --> 00:16:09,440 Speaker 1: complex bite mark analysis, which and we'll get to the 274 00:16:09,640 --> 00:16:13,320 Speaker 1: admissibility of it now in a bit. But they still 275 00:16:13,360 --> 00:16:16,560 Speaker 1: do collect the evidence, which you know you should do. 276 00:16:16,560 --> 00:16:19,000 Speaker 1: I don't think anyone's saying, like, hey, stop even doing 277 00:16:19,040 --> 00:16:22,360 Speaker 1: this as far as evidence collection goes. But here's how 278 00:16:22,400 --> 00:16:24,840 Speaker 1: they do that. If you see a bite mark or 279 00:16:24,880 --> 00:16:27,200 Speaker 1: anything you think is a bitemark in a like a 280 00:16:27,280 --> 00:16:30,200 Speaker 1: murder case, Let's say you call in that forensic dentist 281 00:16:31,800 --> 00:16:34,360 Speaker 1: who's just sitting around like so happy. They don't have 282 00:16:34,440 --> 00:16:37,240 Speaker 1: their hands in a live human being's mouth at the time, right, 283 00:16:38,000 --> 00:16:40,480 Speaker 1: And they got to do it quick because time is 284 00:16:40,480 --> 00:16:42,800 Speaker 1: of the essence, because bite marks can change a lot 285 00:16:44,040 --> 00:16:46,880 Speaker 1: pretty quickly, and especially if a body has been deteriorating 286 00:16:46,920 --> 00:16:50,840 Speaker 1: for a few days, like the location of that bite 287 00:16:50,880 --> 00:16:54,080 Speaker 1: may be entirely different because the skin is slipping and shrinking. 288 00:16:54,600 --> 00:16:59,440 Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a big one. Also, bruising and lividity can 289 00:16:59,480 --> 00:17:03,240 Speaker 2: also obscure a bite mark or change it or alter it, 290 00:17:03,320 --> 00:17:05,399 Speaker 2: so they often have to wait for the bruise to 291 00:17:05,440 --> 00:17:08,399 Speaker 2: heal if the humans still alive, or wait for the 292 00:17:08,480 --> 00:17:12,120 Speaker 2: lividity the pooling of blood to just kind of come 293 00:17:12,160 --> 00:17:14,480 Speaker 2: and go before they really examine it. 294 00:17:15,480 --> 00:17:18,920 Speaker 1: Yeah, they're going to take pictures with a ruler next 295 00:17:18,920 --> 00:17:20,840 Speaker 1: to it. You've probably seen that in some movies I have. 296 00:17:20,960 --> 00:17:22,720 Speaker 2: I saw in Silence of the Lambs. 297 00:17:23,040 --> 00:17:26,840 Speaker 1: Right, oh, yeah, that's right. Bite photography is very specific 298 00:17:26,840 --> 00:17:29,560 Speaker 1: and very precise, or at least it should be, and 299 00:17:29,600 --> 00:17:32,560 Speaker 1: then you can magnify those photos and stuff. But while 300 00:17:32,560 --> 00:17:34,159 Speaker 1: they're doing this, the first thing that they're going to 301 00:17:34,240 --> 00:17:37,080 Speaker 1: identify is like was it a human bite or not? 302 00:17:37,600 --> 00:17:40,280 Speaker 1: And seems like a no brainer, like I could even 303 00:17:40,320 --> 00:17:42,600 Speaker 1: tell sure, But you found a study from twenty fifteen 304 00:17:42,680 --> 00:17:46,040 Speaker 1: that doesn't quite hold up. I mean, that's about animals 305 00:17:46,040 --> 00:17:47,280 Speaker 1: and human differences, right. 306 00:17:47,320 --> 00:17:50,080 Speaker 2: Yeah, there was a twenty fifteen study that found they 307 00:17:50,800 --> 00:17:57,800 Speaker 2: used thirty nine experts. These were Board certified Forensic odontologists 308 00:17:58,359 --> 00:18:02,760 Speaker 2: or members of the American Board of Forensic Odeontologists, the 309 00:18:02,920 --> 00:18:05,639 Speaker 2: crediting body. I don't know why I went into that 310 00:18:05,720 --> 00:18:08,200 Speaker 2: much detail, but there you have it. The official people 311 00:18:08,280 --> 00:18:10,879 Speaker 2: in this study with this thirty nine experts. They showed 312 00:18:10,880 --> 00:18:13,639 Speaker 2: one hundred photographs of bite marks and said, okay, we 313 00:18:13,680 --> 00:18:17,639 Speaker 2: want some information about this. Are these Let's just start 314 00:18:17,720 --> 00:18:20,920 Speaker 2: with is this a human bitemark or an animal bitemark? 315 00:18:21,359 --> 00:18:23,399 Speaker 1: The easiest thing in the world. Was this a dog 316 00:18:23,880 --> 00:18:26,040 Speaker 1: or an adult human biting this person? 317 00:18:26,200 --> 00:18:31,080 Speaker 2: Exactly? And only eight percent of the photographs, so eight 318 00:18:31,280 --> 00:18:33,480 Speaker 2: of one hundred photographs. I just did that, meth and 319 00:18:33,520 --> 00:18:35,280 Speaker 2: I'm quite confident it's correct. 320 00:18:35,359 --> 00:18:36,240 Speaker 1: Yeah, you nailed it. 321 00:18:36,359 --> 00:18:40,399 Speaker 2: Could ninety percent of those experts. I don't know what 322 00:18:40,480 --> 00:18:43,960 Speaker 2: ninety percent of thirty nine is come to consensus that yes, 323 00:18:44,240 --> 00:18:47,119 Speaker 2: this is definitely human or yes this is definitely animal. 324 00:18:47,720 --> 00:18:50,800 Speaker 2: They did not believe. Yeah, they did not agree on 325 00:18:51,040 --> 00:18:53,320 Speaker 2: the other ninety two photographs. 326 00:18:53,680 --> 00:18:56,119 Speaker 1: Yeah, I would think human and animal would be pretty 327 00:18:56,119 --> 00:18:58,879 Speaker 1: easy to tell the difference of you know, apparently not. 328 00:18:59,240 --> 00:19:03,160 Speaker 2: Yeah, actually if the animals wearing human dentures at the time, right, 329 00:19:05,400 --> 00:19:09,439 Speaker 2: good point. Yeah, like that. You know that cartoon wolf 330 00:19:09,680 --> 00:19:13,439 Speaker 2: from the old timey nineteen thirties cartoon. I don't think 331 00:19:13,480 --> 00:19:15,639 Speaker 2: I know that, Oh, sure you do. He was always 332 00:19:15,680 --> 00:19:17,640 Speaker 2: like his eyes would pop out of his head and like. 333 00:19:17,640 --> 00:19:19,640 Speaker 1: He was oh yeah, you know, like uh yeah, yeah, 334 00:19:19,800 --> 00:19:20,240 Speaker 1: I gotcha. 335 00:19:21,200 --> 00:19:22,240 Speaker 2: So what else, Chuck? 336 00:19:23,560 --> 00:19:27,000 Speaker 1: Well, this is a pretty disturbing but I guess helpful 337 00:19:27,000 --> 00:19:30,679 Speaker 1: thing that I never knew. After they inspect the body 338 00:19:30,720 --> 00:19:32,960 Speaker 1: for the bite marks and all that stuff, they will 339 00:19:33,000 --> 00:19:37,280 Speaker 1: actually cut out the bike mark and preserve it. 340 00:19:37,800 --> 00:19:39,040 Speaker 2: They're like, can I take this home? 341 00:19:39,880 --> 00:19:41,840 Speaker 1: Yeah, So they will cut the bipe mark from the skin, 342 00:19:41,960 --> 00:19:45,000 Speaker 1: preserve it and formaldehyde, and then make a silicone cast 343 00:19:45,560 --> 00:19:47,800 Speaker 1: of the bite mark, which makes total sense. I just 344 00:19:47,960 --> 00:19:51,119 Speaker 1: never thought about how gross that would seem. 345 00:19:51,600 --> 00:19:54,520 Speaker 2: Yeah, it is pretty gross. I mean, the whole process 346 00:19:54,560 --> 00:19:56,160 Speaker 2: from starting to finish is fairly gross. 347 00:19:56,160 --> 00:19:58,800 Speaker 1: In that case, what kind of bite marks though they 348 00:19:58,840 --> 00:19:59,320 Speaker 1: can they make? 349 00:19:59,400 --> 00:20:03,800 Speaker 2: Well, I'm based on the kind of transfer pattern is 350 00:20:03,840 --> 00:20:06,119 Speaker 2: what they call it. And it's not just specific to 351 00:20:06,240 --> 00:20:09,920 Speaker 2: forensic idontology transfer patterns or what you're looking at when 352 00:20:09,960 --> 00:20:14,000 Speaker 2: you look at the rifling on a bullet to try 353 00:20:14,000 --> 00:20:16,680 Speaker 2: to identify what gun it came out of, which also 354 00:20:16,680 --> 00:20:20,359 Speaker 2: apparently is junk science fingerprints. You're transferring your fingerprints, so 355 00:20:20,440 --> 00:20:23,840 Speaker 2: it leaves a transfer pattern. Same thing with forensic idontology, 356 00:20:24,080 --> 00:20:26,840 Speaker 2: and the different kinds of forensic patterns are based on 357 00:20:26,920 --> 00:20:30,159 Speaker 2: the damage that the bites do. So if it scrapes, 358 00:20:30,280 --> 00:20:33,200 Speaker 2: like if you're I don't need to put it any 359 00:20:33,240 --> 00:20:35,840 Speaker 2: other way. That's considered an abrasian bite. 360 00:20:36,359 --> 00:20:36,600 Speaker 1: Yeah. 361 00:20:36,720 --> 00:20:41,520 Speaker 2: And artifact is when, yeah, when there's an actual part 362 00:20:41,560 --> 00:20:44,280 Speaker 2: of the body missing from because of the bite. It's 363 00:20:44,280 --> 00:20:47,760 Speaker 2: not just a bite mark, there's actually tissue or something missing, 364 00:20:47,840 --> 00:20:51,200 Speaker 2: like an ear lobe. I think is like Evander Holyfield's 365 00:20:51,200 --> 00:20:52,160 Speaker 2: ear lobe. 366 00:20:52,400 --> 00:20:54,720 Speaker 1: Yeah, I was, I'd say mac Tyson bite. 367 00:20:54,760 --> 00:20:56,360 Speaker 2: So he's got a fight on Friday. 368 00:20:57,280 --> 00:21:01,560 Speaker 1: Oh is he fighting that guy Friday on Netflix? Shoot, 369 00:21:01,600 --> 00:21:02,960 Speaker 1: I'm not even gonna be here. I want to see that. 370 00:21:03,359 --> 00:21:05,000 Speaker 2: I'll tape it for you on the VCR. 371 00:21:05,320 --> 00:21:08,000 Speaker 1: You take it all right to me the tape. We 372 00:21:08,040 --> 00:21:11,879 Speaker 1: also have evulsions, that is when just some of the 373 00:21:11,920 --> 00:21:14,879 Speaker 1: skin is removed, and I guess not an entire piece 374 00:21:14,920 --> 00:21:18,040 Speaker 1: of the body. You have contusions, which is of course 375 00:21:18,040 --> 00:21:21,760 Speaker 1: a bruise. If it's profusely bleeding, it's a hemorrhage. If 376 00:21:21,760 --> 00:21:23,720 Speaker 1: it's a nice clean neat wound, then you have a 377 00:21:23,800 --> 00:21:26,560 Speaker 1: very precise spider and they call that an incision. And 378 00:21:26,600 --> 00:21:28,600 Speaker 1: then a puncture wound is a laceration. 379 00:21:28,520 --> 00:21:34,119 Speaker 2: Yes, And then there's also the different like depths or 380 00:21:34,240 --> 00:21:38,320 Speaker 2: the obviousness of the bite mark is another category that 381 00:21:38,359 --> 00:21:41,720 Speaker 2: they use, and it starts from lowest to highest. It 382 00:21:41,760 --> 00:21:44,119 Speaker 2: took me a minute to figure this out because I 383 00:21:44,160 --> 00:21:46,920 Speaker 2: don't think the wording they used is really good. Agree, 384 00:21:47,000 --> 00:21:50,159 Speaker 2: a clear impression means that there was significant pressure used. 385 00:21:50,600 --> 00:21:55,560 Speaker 2: That's the lowest of the three categories. Yes, an obvious 386 00:21:55,600 --> 00:21:59,840 Speaker 2: one signifies medium pressure, which that to me just just 387 00:22:00,600 --> 00:22:03,840 Speaker 2: like shows that this is not accurate science. Medium is 388 00:22:04,520 --> 00:22:08,280 Speaker 2: a type of fry order, French fry order, not the 389 00:22:09,000 --> 00:22:11,600 Speaker 2: you know, depth of a bite mark, like medium is 390 00:22:11,640 --> 00:22:15,199 Speaker 2: so subjective, right, Yeah, all three of these are and 391 00:22:15,240 --> 00:22:17,879 Speaker 2: then noticeable. That seems to me like that would be 392 00:22:17,880 --> 00:22:22,600 Speaker 2: the least of the three. That's the most, the most 393 00:22:22,640 --> 00:22:26,080 Speaker 2: pronounced bite mark of all, because the biter used violent 394 00:22:26,119 --> 00:22:27,120 Speaker 2: pressure to bite down. 395 00:22:28,400 --> 00:22:35,840 Speaker 1: Yeah, it should be obvious. Oh my god, and holy crap, 396 00:22:35,880 --> 00:22:38,240 Speaker 1: for the love of god, what was this person doing? 397 00:22:38,480 --> 00:22:43,280 Speaker 2: Yeah, for sure. There's also some some other things that 398 00:22:43,320 --> 00:22:49,040 Speaker 2: the bier can do during the biting, if they you know, 399 00:22:49,080 --> 00:22:51,679 Speaker 2: if they like use their jaw a bunch. It's not 400 00:22:51,840 --> 00:22:53,720 Speaker 2: just like one bite where they clamp down. If they 401 00:22:53,760 --> 00:22:57,440 Speaker 2: bite in succession a few times, that was going to 402 00:22:57,520 --> 00:23:00,200 Speaker 2: leave a totally different mark from one that is going 403 00:22:59,920 --> 00:23:02,639 Speaker 2: to where they just clamp their jaw down or something. 404 00:23:03,119 --> 00:23:05,800 Speaker 2: If they move their tongue, it will move the skin 405 00:23:05,880 --> 00:23:09,040 Speaker 2: around and will affect the bite mark that's left behind. 406 00:23:09,400 --> 00:23:11,639 Speaker 2: We should have probably given like heads up at the 407 00:23:11,880 --> 00:23:14,160 Speaker 2: outside of this episode. Huh. 408 00:23:14,200 --> 00:23:17,720 Speaker 1: Well, I think forensic dentistry is a creepy enough title, okay, 409 00:23:17,800 --> 00:23:21,159 Speaker 1: or maybe I'll title it forensic Dentistry colon enter at 410 00:23:21,200 --> 00:23:22,359 Speaker 1: your own Risk or something like that. 411 00:23:22,440 --> 00:23:24,760 Speaker 2: Oh good one. And then there's another one too. If 412 00:23:24,800 --> 00:23:28,439 Speaker 2: the victim is being is still, it might which to 413 00:23:28,520 --> 00:23:31,040 Speaker 2: me means dead because nobody's gonna sit still. Well, they're 414 00:23:31,080 --> 00:23:33,679 Speaker 2: being bitten hard enough to leave a bite mark that 415 00:23:33,680 --> 00:23:36,320 Speaker 2: could be used against you in court. But you know, 416 00:23:36,359 --> 00:23:38,680 Speaker 2: if they're moving, that's going to affect the bite mark 417 00:23:38,720 --> 00:23:41,280 Speaker 2: that's left behind too. And then of course also the 418 00:23:41,359 --> 00:23:44,640 Speaker 2: kind of tooth profile they have too. 419 00:23:44,520 --> 00:23:48,960 Speaker 1: Right, Yeah, for sure. I mean if you're if I 420 00:23:48,960 --> 00:23:52,399 Speaker 1: would have bitten somebody in a violent episode when I 421 00:23:52,480 --> 00:23:56,320 Speaker 1: had my front tooth or my two front teeth missing, 422 00:23:56,680 --> 00:23:59,000 Speaker 1: it would be pretty obvious when you saw that bite mark. 423 00:24:00,040 --> 00:24:02,000 Speaker 1: Ted Bundy, like you said, had crooked teeth, and so 424 00:24:02,040 --> 00:24:05,240 Speaker 1: that will leave a crooked impression obviously you need chips 425 00:24:05,320 --> 00:24:08,040 Speaker 1: on your teeth, are gonna make a more sort of 426 00:24:08,119 --> 00:24:09,040 Speaker 1: jagged impression. 427 00:24:09,119 --> 00:24:10,720 Speaker 2: Yeah, Like if you ate a bunch of chips and 428 00:24:10,760 --> 00:24:15,200 Speaker 2: they're just stuck between your teeth, is that what you meant? 429 00:24:16,240 --> 00:24:20,280 Speaker 1: Yeah, here's an ear lobe and some doriedo, So let's 430 00:24:20,320 --> 00:24:21,840 Speaker 1: put that in an evidence backing. 431 00:24:22,640 --> 00:24:24,720 Speaker 2: You're welcome for the plug. 432 00:24:25,080 --> 00:24:28,320 Speaker 1: And then braces. You know, if you braces or implants 433 00:24:28,400 --> 00:24:31,320 Speaker 1: or something or a bridge, that can leave a pretty 434 00:24:31,320 --> 00:24:36,119 Speaker 1: distinctive impression for sure. Once and this is sort of 435 00:24:36,119 --> 00:24:39,639 Speaker 1: how it used to work, but once they identify a subject, 436 00:24:39,680 --> 00:24:41,359 Speaker 1: they're going to get a warrant to take a mold 437 00:24:41,400 --> 00:24:45,000 Speaker 1: of a suspect's teeth so they can compare it. They'll 438 00:24:45,000 --> 00:24:48,520 Speaker 1: take a lot of pictures of their mouth and stuff opening, closing, biting, 439 00:24:48,520 --> 00:24:51,720 Speaker 1: stuff like that, and then in the old days, they 440 00:24:51,760 --> 00:24:54,679 Speaker 1: would go to court and compare those and a forensic 441 00:24:54,720 --> 00:24:58,119 Speaker 1: dentist would take the stand and say, hey, that that 442 00:24:58,200 --> 00:25:03,159 Speaker 1: bitemart looks like that person's mouth me jury. That can 443 00:25:03,200 --> 00:25:05,080 Speaker 1: be a major reason why you convict. 444 00:25:05,760 --> 00:25:08,640 Speaker 2: And in some cases they would say things like with 445 00:25:08,680 --> 00:25:10,240 Speaker 2: one hundred percent certainty. 446 00:25:10,800 --> 00:25:11,200 Speaker 1: Yeah. 447 00:25:11,400 --> 00:25:13,639 Speaker 2: Another thing that they say too, that we'll find that 448 00:25:13,760 --> 00:25:17,200 Speaker 2: seems to not be at all true, is that each 449 00:25:17,320 --> 00:25:21,880 Speaker 2: person's arrangement and teeth, like your mouth, everything inside your 450 00:25:21,880 --> 00:25:26,520 Speaker 2: mouth is totally unique, like your fingerprints. And that apparently 451 00:25:26,560 --> 00:25:28,960 Speaker 2: is not true at all, But you'll find it all 452 00:25:29,000 --> 00:25:30,639 Speaker 2: over the internet as fact. 453 00:25:31,320 --> 00:25:35,880 Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, there are some professional dentists, in forensic 454 00:25:35,960 --> 00:25:39,040 Speaker 1: dentists that still believe that. I mean that thing I 455 00:25:39,080 --> 00:25:41,720 Speaker 1: sent you was from last year, yeah, and is on 456 00:25:41,760 --> 00:25:45,160 Speaker 1: the National Institutes of Health US government website, and those 457 00:25:45,200 --> 00:25:50,439 Speaker 1: four accredited dentists dental experts flat out say like a 458 00:25:50,560 --> 00:25:55,560 Speaker 1: person's bite mark is unique like DNA or fingerprints. When 459 00:25:56,119 --> 00:25:57,639 Speaker 1: and I guess we should probably take a break and 460 00:25:57,640 --> 00:26:00,080 Speaker 1: get into the studies and stuff like that. But it 461 00:26:00,359 --> 00:26:02,600 Speaker 1: seems like study after study is kind of confirmed that 462 00:26:02,720 --> 00:26:03,560 Speaker 1: is just not the case. 463 00:26:04,440 --> 00:26:06,040 Speaker 2: Well, let's take that break and we'll come back and 464 00:26:06,040 --> 00:26:09,560 Speaker 2: we'll talk about all the controversies surrounding bitemark analysis as 465 00:26:09,600 --> 00:26:11,359 Speaker 2: a part of forensic odontology. 466 00:26:12,400 --> 00:26:40,120 Speaker 3: Man, that's a mouthful, all right. 467 00:26:40,200 --> 00:26:44,280 Speaker 1: So you did some extra digging, and you know it's 468 00:26:44,320 --> 00:26:46,520 Speaker 1: pretty clear from doing the research that this is basically 469 00:26:46,560 --> 00:26:49,720 Speaker 1: known as junk science now to most people. Despite those 470 00:26:50,520 --> 00:26:53,080 Speaker 1: four people who wrote the article on the National Institutes 471 00:26:53,080 --> 00:26:58,840 Speaker 1: of Health. But there was a review in twenty twenty 472 00:26:58,840 --> 00:27:02,439 Speaker 1: two in a report from the NIST. What does that 473 00:27:02,440 --> 00:27:02,920 Speaker 1: stand for? 474 00:27:03,040 --> 00:27:06,639 Speaker 2: The National Institute of Standards and Technology. They're like a 475 00:27:06,760 --> 00:27:08,480 Speaker 2: federal agency, if I'm not mistaken. 476 00:27:09,160 --> 00:27:14,159 Speaker 1: Yeah, okay, So they released this report that said and 477 00:27:14,200 --> 00:27:16,440 Speaker 1: there were previous reports that we'll talk about too, I guess, 478 00:27:16,440 --> 00:27:19,600 Speaker 1: but this is the most recent that said BYTEmark, analysis 479 00:27:19,680 --> 00:27:23,440 Speaker 1: is not real science, and it's based on these three 480 00:27:23,480 --> 00:27:27,200 Speaker 1: sort of faulty premises, one which you already mentioned, which 481 00:27:27,240 --> 00:27:31,960 Speaker 1: is that a person's dental pattern is unique to that person. 482 00:27:32,600 --> 00:27:34,879 Speaker 1: And you know, there haven't been any studies that really 483 00:27:35,040 --> 00:27:38,840 Speaker 1: confirmed this. There was a twenty thirteen study from the 484 00:27:38,920 --> 00:27:42,439 Speaker 1: United Arab Emirates that found I think there's is that 485 00:27:42,640 --> 00:27:47,240 Speaker 1: sort of a dental capital of the world because I 486 00:27:47,280 --> 00:27:50,880 Speaker 1: saw a lot of dentists from like Saudi Arabia and AE. Yeah. 487 00:27:50,960 --> 00:27:52,520 Speaker 2: No, I didn't know that. I didn't see that. 488 00:27:52,560 --> 00:27:54,919 Speaker 1: Maybe I have a hunch that that's the case, so 489 00:27:54,960 --> 00:27:58,240 Speaker 1: maybe someone will confirm or deny that. But that study 490 00:27:58,240 --> 00:28:02,000 Speaker 1: found that fifty one percent of the two thousand dental 491 00:28:02,080 --> 00:28:05,920 Speaker 1: charts that they examined were unique, some one more than 492 00:28:05,960 --> 00:28:08,680 Speaker 1: half and the rest were identical to at least one other. 493 00:28:09,840 --> 00:28:12,879 Speaker 1: The only thing I'll say in defense is that it 494 00:28:12,920 --> 00:28:16,200 Speaker 1: may not be truly unique, but if forty nine percent 495 00:28:16,320 --> 00:28:20,520 Speaker 1: are unique, then that's unique enough to talk about. Maybe 496 00:28:20,560 --> 00:28:24,879 Speaker 1: not to be used in court, but enough to talk about. 497 00:28:26,200 --> 00:28:26,640 Speaker 2: Yeah. 498 00:28:26,960 --> 00:28:28,639 Speaker 1: Yeah, in my opinion, yeah for sure. 499 00:28:28,720 --> 00:28:31,680 Speaker 2: But the fact is that study, and we should also 500 00:28:31,760 --> 00:28:35,840 Speaker 2: caveat that with the fact that this study used dental 501 00:28:35,920 --> 00:28:39,360 Speaker 2: charts only, and they made sure that they were highly 502 00:28:39,640 --> 00:28:44,040 Speaker 2: high quality dental charts that they examined. But the fact 503 00:28:44,080 --> 00:28:47,040 Speaker 2: that they were able to find dental charts that were 504 00:28:47,160 --> 00:28:53,120 Speaker 2: identical between two people totally undermines the the idea that 505 00:28:53,200 --> 00:28:57,320 Speaker 2: everybody's mouth is unique, everybody's teeth arrangement is unique. 506 00:28:57,360 --> 00:28:59,560 Speaker 1: It seems like about half of them are. Yeah, if 507 00:28:59,560 --> 00:29:00,560 Speaker 1: you go by the data here. 508 00:29:00,680 --> 00:29:02,640 Speaker 2: Yeah, and this was two thousand dental charts. They didn't 509 00:29:02,680 --> 00:29:06,200 Speaker 2: choose like three. Like this was a pretty decent, high 510 00:29:06,280 --> 00:29:10,280 Speaker 2: quality study, And yeah, I think it totally undermines that. 511 00:29:10,400 --> 00:29:14,480 Speaker 2: But like you said, yes, there's also enough uniqueness that 512 00:29:14,600 --> 00:29:17,080 Speaker 2: you can kind of use this. And I think, like 513 00:29:17,120 --> 00:29:23,160 Speaker 2: you said, nobody's really saying, like stop doing bitemark analysis entirely, right, 514 00:29:24,080 --> 00:29:26,600 Speaker 2: and the actually in their defense, the American Board of 515 00:29:26,680 --> 00:29:31,320 Speaker 2: Forensic Odentology says, they basically admit, like, hey, we made 516 00:29:31,320 --> 00:29:34,280 Speaker 2: some mistakes in the past, we've cleaned up our act, 517 00:29:34,320 --> 00:29:37,960 Speaker 2: we've revised our guidelines, and now if you're a legitimate 518 00:29:38,000 --> 00:29:43,640 Speaker 2: forensic odontologist, the furthest you will go is to make 519 00:29:43,760 --> 00:29:50,560 Speaker 2: three different calls. One exclude, meaning that this person's teeth 520 00:29:50,720 --> 00:29:53,840 Speaker 2: could not have possibly made the bite mark that you're 521 00:29:53,880 --> 00:29:55,000 Speaker 2: showing me, cops. 522 00:29:55,120 --> 00:29:57,920 Speaker 1: Yeah, not exclude. 523 00:29:57,880 --> 00:30:01,280 Speaker 2: Which is only saying it's pos I'm not going to 524 00:30:01,320 --> 00:30:03,960 Speaker 2: go any further than that, but it's their their teeth 525 00:30:04,040 --> 00:30:09,120 Speaker 2: resemble enough this bite mark pattern, this bite pattern, that 526 00:30:09,240 --> 00:30:12,800 Speaker 2: it's possible that this person made it, and then inconclusive, 527 00:30:13,320 --> 00:30:15,200 Speaker 2: and that's as far as they're supposed to go. They're 528 00:30:15,240 --> 00:30:17,560 Speaker 2: not supposed to in that sense, they're not I guess 529 00:30:17,600 --> 00:30:21,680 Speaker 2: you could testify those three things. But if the prosecutor's like, okay, so, 530 00:30:21,680 --> 00:30:24,120 Speaker 2: so not exclude, you're saying it's his right, They're they're 531 00:30:24,160 --> 00:30:27,440 Speaker 2: supposed to bail essentially at that point. They're not supposed 532 00:30:27,440 --> 00:30:29,600 Speaker 2: to go any further than that. That's the standard in 533 00:30:29,640 --> 00:30:33,600 Speaker 2: the guidelines for forensic dentists doing biite analysis bite mark 534 00:30:33,640 --> 00:30:36,800 Speaker 2: analysis today, but there's still plenty of people out there 535 00:30:36,840 --> 00:30:37,880 Speaker 2: who are going beyond that. 536 00:30:38,880 --> 00:30:40,920 Speaker 1: Yeah, and you know that's the kind of situation too 537 00:30:40,920 --> 00:30:45,360 Speaker 1: where you also have to really educate a jury over 538 00:30:45,640 --> 00:30:48,880 Speaker 1: like the data on what that really means, you know 539 00:30:48,920 --> 00:30:52,320 Speaker 1: what I'm saying, and say like, hey, half the time, 540 00:30:52,960 --> 00:30:55,600 Speaker 1: these aren't unique, So you have to understand that going in. 541 00:30:57,280 --> 00:30:58,880 Speaker 1: So you know that that was the first thing, and 542 00:30:58,960 --> 00:31:00,400 Speaker 1: you know that there was that one case that you 543 00:31:00,480 --> 00:31:06,040 Speaker 1: sent where and this kind of factors into number two. 544 00:31:06,120 --> 00:31:09,480 Speaker 1: And number one was that they're they're unique. Number two 545 00:31:09,560 --> 00:31:11,680 Speaker 1: is that the patterns can be accurately transferred to the 546 00:31:11,720 --> 00:31:14,680 Speaker 1: human skin, because we've already talked about the fact that 547 00:31:14,720 --> 00:31:18,280 Speaker 1: there can be a lot of distortion by skin's elasticity, 548 00:31:18,360 --> 00:31:20,960 Speaker 1: and if the person like sort of does a sawing motion, 549 00:31:21,040 --> 00:31:24,680 Speaker 1: it completely distorted the bite mark. But you sent that 550 00:31:24,720 --> 00:31:26,520 Speaker 1: one case of the guy who was convicted who was 551 00:31:27,320 --> 00:31:31,760 Speaker 1: missing a tooth entirely, which should show a pretty clear like, hey, 552 00:31:31,760 --> 00:31:35,040 Speaker 1: we can exclude this one because the bitite mark didn't 553 00:31:35,040 --> 00:31:37,680 Speaker 1: have a gap. But they were like, yeah, but if 554 00:31:37,720 --> 00:31:40,040 Speaker 1: he grinded his teeth and kind of did a sawing motion, 555 00:31:40,520 --> 00:31:42,720 Speaker 1: it could look like this, and he was found guilty, 556 00:31:43,040 --> 00:31:44,440 Speaker 1: you know, and he was not guilty. 557 00:31:44,680 --> 00:31:47,200 Speaker 2: Yeah, he was sentenced to jail, I think, was that 558 00:31:47,360 --> 00:31:48,040 Speaker 2: Roy Brown? 559 00:31:48,720 --> 00:31:49,880 Speaker 1: Yeah, in two thousand and seven. 560 00:31:50,000 --> 00:31:54,520 Speaker 2: Okay, so yeah, he spent almost twenty years in jail, 561 00:31:54,600 --> 00:31:57,080 Speaker 2: fifteen years from ninety two to two thousand and seven, 562 00:31:57,600 --> 00:32:01,400 Speaker 2: largely based on that bite mark analysis testimony. 563 00:32:01,880 --> 00:32:05,040 Speaker 1: Yeah, and the both forensic dentists that worked on that 564 00:32:05,080 --> 00:32:08,640 Speaker 1: case recanted their testimony, right, like completely. 565 00:32:08,760 --> 00:32:10,800 Speaker 2: Yeah, that was a big one too. I think maybe 566 00:32:10,840 --> 00:32:13,000 Speaker 2: in one of those cases where they were appealing it. 567 00:32:13,040 --> 00:32:15,560 Speaker 2: I don't know if it was Roy Brown's, but there 568 00:32:15,600 --> 00:32:18,000 Speaker 2: have been plenty of forensic on ontologists who have gone 569 00:32:18,000 --> 00:32:20,480 Speaker 2: back and been like, what I was saying apparently is 570 00:32:20,520 --> 00:32:23,840 Speaker 2: not right or grounded in science. I recant my testimony, 571 00:32:24,360 --> 00:32:27,520 Speaker 2: and at least one judge that I read was like, well, 572 00:32:27,560 --> 00:32:29,800 Speaker 2: we didn't really need you. The jury could have come 573 00:32:29,840 --> 00:32:32,719 Speaker 2: to the same conclusion that the bitemark matched their teeth. 574 00:32:33,280 --> 00:32:36,240 Speaker 2: So I'm not going to overturn this case, which is 575 00:32:36,480 --> 00:32:39,240 Speaker 2: nuts in and of itself. But Roy Brown is far 576 00:32:39,280 --> 00:32:42,920 Speaker 2: from the only person who has been exonerated after being 577 00:32:42,960 --> 00:32:47,160 Speaker 2: convicted on bitemark analysis too, right, Like, haven't there been 578 00:32:47,200 --> 00:32:49,920 Speaker 2: like at least twenty six people. 579 00:32:50,000 --> 00:32:53,400 Speaker 1: Yeah, at least twenty six That DNA evidence is now cleared, 580 00:32:53,480 --> 00:32:57,040 Speaker 1: where bite mark analysis was, if not the smoking gun, 581 00:32:57,240 --> 00:32:59,880 Speaker 1: like a pretty key part of the jury's you know finding. 582 00:33:00,240 --> 00:33:04,320 Speaker 2: Yeah, remember when I was saying, some expert witnesses on 583 00:33:04,360 --> 00:33:06,840 Speaker 2: the stand say like this, it's one hundred percent match. 584 00:33:07,240 --> 00:33:07,640 Speaker 1: That happened. 585 00:33:07,640 --> 00:33:10,920 Speaker 2: A good guy named Roy Cron he did ten years 586 00:33:10,960 --> 00:33:13,280 Speaker 2: based on BikeE mark analysis. Because you got to understand, 587 00:33:13,280 --> 00:33:16,280 Speaker 2: if you're a juror and the prosecution is saying, like 588 00:33:16,400 --> 00:33:20,640 Speaker 2: this person is an expert in forensic odentology, and that 589 00:33:20,800 --> 00:33:23,760 Speaker 2: expert tells you, the jurors, there is one hundred percent 590 00:33:23,880 --> 00:33:26,680 Speaker 2: match between that man's teeth and this bite mark on 591 00:33:26,720 --> 00:33:29,560 Speaker 2: this murder victim, it's going to be tough to overlook 592 00:33:29,600 --> 00:33:31,360 Speaker 2: that For the average jur I would. 593 00:33:31,240 --> 00:33:35,160 Speaker 1: Guess, yeah, for sure. And you know, the big change 594 00:33:35,160 --> 00:33:37,960 Speaker 1: that you were talking about with just excluding that came 595 00:33:38,000 --> 00:33:42,040 Speaker 1: about in twenty sixteen. We've mentioned some other studies. There 596 00:33:42,040 --> 00:33:43,800 Speaker 1: was one we didn't mention in two thousand and nine 597 00:33:44,320 --> 00:33:47,400 Speaker 1: when the National Academy of Sciences released a report about 598 00:33:47,400 --> 00:33:49,520 Speaker 1: a lot of problems with a lot of forensic science, 599 00:33:50,240 --> 00:33:55,360 Speaker 1: but one of those was bitemark analysis, and they basically said, 600 00:33:55,400 --> 00:33:56,760 Speaker 1: and this was in two thousand and nine and it 601 00:33:56,800 --> 00:33:59,840 Speaker 1: still took till twenty sixteen to make that change official, 602 00:33:59,880 --> 00:34:03,800 Speaker 1: was they said, there's no scientific studies that support the 603 00:34:03,840 --> 00:34:08,280 Speaker 1: assertion that bite marks provide sufficient detail for positive identification. 604 00:34:09,800 --> 00:34:13,400 Speaker 1: And then a few years after that, doctors from the 605 00:34:13,400 --> 00:34:16,120 Speaker 1: American Border Forensic Identology, like, we said, that's the sort 606 00:34:16,120 --> 00:34:20,160 Speaker 1: of the main body or is the main body? Participants 607 00:34:20,200 --> 00:34:23,600 Speaker 1: in a study there of certified dentists, an overwhelming number 608 00:34:23,640 --> 00:34:25,680 Speaker 1: of them couldn't even agree whether they were looking at 609 00:34:25,680 --> 00:34:26,520 Speaker 1: a bite mark at all. 610 00:34:26,800 --> 00:34:29,040 Speaker 2: Yeah. There was another thing too, I think from that 611 00:34:29,160 --> 00:34:32,279 Speaker 2: same study where they took the same experts and went 612 00:34:32,360 --> 00:34:34,800 Speaker 2: back to them eight weeks with the exact same photos 613 00:34:34,840 --> 00:34:37,359 Speaker 2: they'd shown them eight weeks before, and some of those 614 00:34:37,400 --> 00:34:40,160 Speaker 2: experts didn't even agree with their previous assessments. 615 00:34:40,680 --> 00:34:41,000 Speaker 1: Wow. 616 00:34:41,120 --> 00:34:43,799 Speaker 2: Yeah, so that was and they weren't like, hey, you 617 00:34:43,840 --> 00:34:46,120 Speaker 2: said this before, what do you think now? It was 618 00:34:46,160 --> 00:34:48,040 Speaker 2: like they I think they thought that this is a 619 00:34:48,080 --> 00:34:50,759 Speaker 2: new set of bite marks and they were just basically 620 00:34:50,760 --> 00:34:55,440 Speaker 2: guessing is what they found. So it's been pretty thoroughly debunked, 621 00:34:57,320 --> 00:35:00,760 Speaker 2: but people still use it. The Innocence Project really taken 622 00:35:00,800 --> 00:35:03,960 Speaker 2: an interest in this, and I think rightfully. So we 623 00:35:04,040 --> 00:35:06,600 Speaker 2: did an episode on that with guess Paul Is on 624 00:35:08,000 --> 00:35:12,319 Speaker 2: Remember Correctly and Yeah. So they're a group that go 625 00:35:12,400 --> 00:35:16,800 Speaker 2: around and basically free people who were railroaded or wrongfully convicted, 626 00:35:17,360 --> 00:35:20,360 Speaker 2: usually based on DNA evidence that wasn't heard in their case. 627 00:35:21,000 --> 00:35:22,960 Speaker 2: And so one of the things that they've done is 628 00:35:22,960 --> 00:35:25,279 Speaker 2: taken interest in bite mark analysis. And one of the 629 00:35:25,400 --> 00:35:27,120 Speaker 2: roles they play now is I don't know how they 630 00:35:27,200 --> 00:35:29,560 Speaker 2: keep their finger on the pulse, but if a prosecutor, 631 00:35:29,840 --> 00:35:32,000 Speaker 2: which is very rare these days from what I understand, 632 00:35:32,160 --> 00:35:36,719 Speaker 2: tries to introduce bite mark analysis into a case, the 633 00:35:36,800 --> 00:35:39,080 Speaker 2: Innocence Project will show up and be like, we object 634 00:35:39,120 --> 00:35:43,040 Speaker 2: to that. This is not science, this should not be admitted. 635 00:35:43,040 --> 00:35:44,600 Speaker 2: And I think they're fairly successful. 636 00:35:45,280 --> 00:35:49,520 Speaker 1: They throw tomatoes at them, for sure. There was another 637 00:35:49,560 --> 00:35:52,960 Speaker 1: case you found pretty striking when a guy named John Kunko. 638 00:35:54,000 --> 00:35:57,600 Speaker 1: He was convicted of rape and assault in nineteen ninety one, 639 00:35:58,239 --> 00:36:02,959 Speaker 1: and the main evidence that got him convicted was identification 640 00:36:03,080 --> 00:36:06,440 Speaker 1: of his voice by the victim, a comment he supposedly 641 00:36:06,440 --> 00:36:08,960 Speaker 1: made at a party, and then bite mark on the 642 00:36:09,000 --> 00:36:14,800 Speaker 1: victim's shoulder. All the evidence was a problem. The comment 643 00:36:15,360 --> 00:36:18,440 Speaker 1: that the party that he supposedly made was not corroborated 644 00:36:18,480 --> 00:36:19,920 Speaker 1: by I always have trouble with that word. 645 00:36:19,960 --> 00:36:20,720 Speaker 2: It's a hard one. 646 00:36:21,160 --> 00:36:24,800 Speaker 1: Corroborated by any other people at the party. The voice 647 00:36:24,800 --> 00:36:29,440 Speaker 1: ID was made from a police officer's imitation of Kunko 648 00:36:29,560 --> 00:36:32,120 Speaker 1: and his lisp to the victim, so I have no 649 00:36:32,200 --> 00:36:36,520 Speaker 1: idea how that got through. And then I believe the 650 00:36:37,080 --> 00:36:42,000 Speaker 1: bite mark was infrared light analysis of a bite mark 651 00:36:42,040 --> 00:36:43,000 Speaker 1: that had already healed. 652 00:36:43,040 --> 00:36:45,440 Speaker 2: This is a big one. So there was a forensic 653 00:36:45,520 --> 00:36:50,080 Speaker 2: onontologist from Mississippi named Michael West, and he essentially just 654 00:36:50,600 --> 00:36:53,919 Speaker 2: changed careers to be an expert witness in forensic onontology. 655 00:36:53,960 --> 00:36:56,239 Speaker 2: That's how he made his living. And he came up 656 00:36:56,239 --> 00:37:00,399 Speaker 2: with a technique called the West phenomenon, wherein you can, 657 00:37:00,600 --> 00:37:04,080 Speaker 2: according to him, using some special goggles and a UV light, 658 00:37:04,760 --> 00:37:09,320 Speaker 2: you can basically resurrect a bite mark that's healed years 659 00:37:09,400 --> 00:37:13,280 Speaker 2: later and see it well enough that you can compare 660 00:37:13,280 --> 00:37:17,040 Speaker 2: it to a suspect's bite and use it to convict. 661 00:37:17,760 --> 00:37:20,840 Speaker 2: He totally made it up, apparently, at least in the 662 00:37:20,880 --> 00:37:23,839 Speaker 2: first case that he used it on. He took photographs, 663 00:37:23,840 --> 00:37:25,759 Speaker 2: but he wouldn't share him with anybody, So it was 664 00:37:25,880 --> 00:37:28,640 Speaker 2: just his testimony that this person was convicted on, and 665 00:37:28,680 --> 00:37:31,400 Speaker 2: it became a tool of the trade. So other people, 666 00:37:31,440 --> 00:37:35,000 Speaker 2: including John Conco, were convicted in part because of this 667 00:37:35,160 --> 00:37:39,000 Speaker 2: West phenomenon, which was part of an overall junk forensic science. 668 00:37:39,040 --> 00:37:42,200 Speaker 2: So this is the junkiest of the junk that people 669 00:37:42,239 --> 00:37:43,480 Speaker 2: were being convicted on. 670 00:37:44,360 --> 00:37:46,800 Speaker 1: Did he also sell the special goggles on his website? 671 00:37:47,160 --> 00:37:50,759 Speaker 2: Yeah, but he sold them as X ray goggles that 672 00:37:50,800 --> 00:37:53,160 Speaker 2: you could look right through people's clothes with. 673 00:37:53,880 --> 00:37:55,560 Speaker 1: Yeah. It was a picture of him with his uh 674 00:37:56,040 --> 00:37:57,959 Speaker 1: looking at his hand and the bones. 675 00:37:57,960 --> 00:38:00,680 Speaker 2: Yeah, with exclamation points come up off of his head. 676 00:38:01,400 --> 00:38:05,440 Speaker 1: Yeah. So yeah, I mean this is everything changed in 677 00:38:05,440 --> 00:38:07,600 Speaker 1: twenty sixteen. One of the big things that happened, and 678 00:38:07,640 --> 00:38:10,719 Speaker 1: I think there was a case in Texas a guy 679 00:38:10,760 --> 00:38:14,280 Speaker 1: named Stephen Cheney was released by the Texas Court of Appeals. 680 00:38:14,480 --> 00:38:16,200 Speaker 1: And this is the Texas Court of Appeals. They're not 681 00:38:16,239 --> 00:38:20,120 Speaker 1: big on releasing, right, you know, convicted criminals. I noted 682 00:38:20,160 --> 00:38:24,000 Speaker 1: that too, But the Texas Forensic Science Commission in twenty 683 00:38:24,000 --> 00:38:27,120 Speaker 1: sixteen because of this you know, kind of fraudulent bitemark 684 00:38:27,120 --> 00:38:29,560 Speaker 1: evidence in Stephen Cheney's case, they were like, we need 685 00:38:29,560 --> 00:38:32,000 Speaker 1: to stop this, and I think that was kind of 686 00:38:32,000 --> 00:38:34,040 Speaker 1: a big case that kind of, you know, really jump 687 00:38:34,080 --> 00:38:37,399 Speaker 1: started the whole We maybe not scraped the whole thing, 688 00:38:37,480 --> 00:38:40,279 Speaker 1: but where they ended up, which is it can exclude, 689 00:38:40,440 --> 00:38:42,360 Speaker 1: but it can't positively identify. 690 00:38:42,480 --> 00:38:45,000 Speaker 2: Yeah, you just use it to exclude. That's what most 691 00:38:45,000 --> 00:38:47,520 Speaker 2: people can agree on for bitemark analysis is as far 692 00:38:47,560 --> 00:38:51,359 Speaker 2: as they Yeah, Chuck, to ever tell you about Paul 693 00:38:51,400 --> 00:38:55,920 Speaker 2: Revere in forensic id antology, No. 694 00:38:56,200 --> 00:38:59,640 Speaker 1: But hey, it's a good little historical cherry on top, right. 695 00:38:59,719 --> 00:39:02,160 Speaker 2: Yeah. So Paul Revere in addition to being a blacksmith, 696 00:39:02,239 --> 00:39:04,959 Speaker 2: he was a dentist too, and one of the things 697 00:39:04,960 --> 00:39:08,360 Speaker 2: he did he was one of the first forensic ononologists 698 00:39:09,080 --> 00:39:12,839 Speaker 2: who used dental records based on his own knowledge too. 699 00:39:12,880 --> 00:39:15,480 Speaker 2: He made, you know, dental work for a lot of 700 00:39:15,520 --> 00:39:18,920 Speaker 2: people in the Revolutionary War, and he identified some of 701 00:39:18,920 --> 00:39:21,919 Speaker 2: those people, including doctor Joseph Warren, the man who sent 702 00:39:22,000 --> 00:39:24,440 Speaker 2: him on his fateful ride where he shouted the British 703 00:39:24,440 --> 00:39:25,640 Speaker 2: are coming, the British are coming. 704 00:39:27,160 --> 00:39:28,080 Speaker 1: Boom pal. 705 00:39:28,480 --> 00:39:30,280 Speaker 2: Yeah, pretty amazing. Huh. 706 00:39:30,360 --> 00:39:31,800 Speaker 1: Yeah, that's a good one. Thanks. 707 00:39:32,960 --> 00:39:35,320 Speaker 2: I think that's it for forensic onontology, right. 708 00:39:36,160 --> 00:39:39,760 Speaker 1: Yeah, and man, that may be it for our long, 709 00:39:39,880 --> 00:39:42,879 Speaker 1: long running forensic suite. I can't believe that there could 710 00:39:42,920 --> 00:39:44,879 Speaker 1: be anything else, But I also said that last time. 711 00:39:44,920 --> 00:39:47,719 Speaker 2: Yeah, I disagree, but yes, we'll find out. I think 712 00:39:48,120 --> 00:39:49,560 Speaker 2: I'm going to go find something. 713 00:39:50,640 --> 00:39:52,560 Speaker 1: Maybe, I mean someone will write in and be like, guys, 714 00:39:52,600 --> 00:39:55,839 Speaker 1: you've covered crimes and clean up. That's better analysis, fingerprinting. 715 00:39:56,280 --> 00:39:57,359 Speaker 1: I mean, the list goes on and off. 716 00:39:57,440 --> 00:40:00,719 Speaker 2: Yeah, you forgot forensic foot smelling, Go do that one. 717 00:40:00,760 --> 00:40:03,560 Speaker 1: Maybe what I didn't know about that's it. It was 718 00:40:03,600 --> 00:40:05,439 Speaker 1: the dog I smell Frido's right. 719 00:40:05,680 --> 00:40:08,640 Speaker 2: Nice. Oh, actually I can do this old school too, 720 00:40:08,640 --> 00:40:10,760 Speaker 2: because if you want to know more about forensic demistry, 721 00:40:10,760 --> 00:40:12,880 Speaker 2: you can go check out a how stuff works article 722 00:40:12,920 --> 00:40:16,080 Speaker 2: that we use in part for this episode. That is 723 00:40:16,160 --> 00:40:17,440 Speaker 2: kicking at old school, isn't it. 724 00:40:17,920 --> 00:40:20,120 Speaker 1: Yeah, one of the rare articles that we didn't cover 725 00:40:20,239 --> 00:40:21,400 Speaker 1: that is still good for us. 726 00:40:21,719 --> 00:40:24,839 Speaker 2: Yeah. And since I kicked at old school, then it's 727 00:40:24,880 --> 00:40:25,839 Speaker 2: time for listener mail. 728 00:40:28,120 --> 00:40:30,600 Speaker 1: All right, I'm going to call this another ADHD follow up. 729 00:40:30,600 --> 00:40:33,319 Speaker 1: This is a this is a good one. Hey, guys, 730 00:40:33,360 --> 00:40:36,160 Speaker 1: I had to write in after the ADHD episode. During 731 00:40:36,160 --> 00:40:38,640 Speaker 1: the first episode, I had to pull over into a 732 00:40:38,640 --> 00:40:43,840 Speaker 1: parking lot because, honestly, guys, I started crying. Oh wow, Yeah, 733 00:40:43,880 --> 00:40:46,879 Speaker 1: I have ADHD and I have never had my life 734 00:40:46,920 --> 00:40:51,520 Speaker 1: explained on a podcast before. Everyone's experiences are different, for sure, 735 00:40:51,560 --> 00:40:53,960 Speaker 1: and I think you did an incredible job explaining the 736 00:40:54,000 --> 00:40:58,000 Speaker 1: base challenges. I also appreciated Chuck's hesitancy to call it 737 00:40:58,040 --> 00:41:01,120 Speaker 1: a disorder. It is to find it disorder, but so 738 00:41:01,160 --> 00:41:03,799 Speaker 1: there's nothing wrong medically with calling it one. But it 739 00:41:03,840 --> 00:41:05,640 Speaker 1: does hurt just a little, even as an adult, when 740 00:41:05,640 --> 00:41:08,440 Speaker 1: people call it a disorder without thinking about the person 741 00:41:09,239 --> 00:41:12,920 Speaker 1: who has it. I appreciated the optimism with which you 742 00:41:13,000 --> 00:41:15,720 Speaker 1: both spoke about the challenges and how they can be managed, 743 00:41:16,360 --> 00:41:19,560 Speaker 1: especially Josh. The only thing I would add to that 744 00:41:19,719 --> 00:41:22,960 Speaker 1: is the subtopic would be to find people who accept 745 00:41:23,000 --> 00:41:25,839 Speaker 1: you before they try and change you. When I feel 746 00:41:25,840 --> 00:41:28,040 Speaker 1: that people love and accept me as me, I am 747 00:41:28,080 --> 00:41:31,359 Speaker 1: far more willing to accept their help with managing my ADHD. 748 00:41:32,200 --> 00:41:34,400 Speaker 1: Don't approach someone like you're going to fix them. Approach 749 00:41:34,440 --> 00:41:37,960 Speaker 1: them because you love them, and they will receive your 750 00:41:38,200 --> 00:41:39,680 Speaker 1: honest offer to assist. 751 00:41:39,880 --> 00:41:43,200 Speaker 2: Man. That is some good ADHD advice right there. 752 00:41:43,239 --> 00:41:46,400 Speaker 1: And just good life advice. Your podcast reminded me that 753 00:41:46,400 --> 00:41:47,680 Speaker 1: there are a lot of people out there like me, 754 00:41:48,200 --> 00:41:49,640 Speaker 1: and I hope that a lot of people out there 755 00:41:49,719 --> 00:41:54,440 Speaker 1: are trying to take this particular challenge do amazingly positive 756 00:41:54,480 --> 00:41:56,040 Speaker 1: things with it. And that is from Steve. 757 00:41:56,440 --> 00:41:58,160 Speaker 2: Thanks a lot, Steve, what a great email. 758 00:41:58,719 --> 00:42:03,040 Speaker 1: Yeah, appreciate it, Steve. That those episodes were a big 759 00:42:03,080 --> 00:42:05,360 Speaker 1: deal for us for a lot of reasons, and it 760 00:42:05,400 --> 00:42:07,400 Speaker 1: seems like people responded, so we're proud of. 761 00:42:07,440 --> 00:42:10,040 Speaker 2: Them for sure. If you want to be like Steve 762 00:42:10,080 --> 00:42:11,880 Speaker 2: and tell us that you had to pull over because 763 00:42:11,880 --> 00:42:14,280 Speaker 2: you were so overcome by something we did or said, 764 00:42:14,600 --> 00:42:17,240 Speaker 2: we love that kind of thing, especially if it was positive, 765 00:42:17,320 --> 00:42:19,279 Speaker 2: not because it was so terrible that you had to 766 00:42:19,280 --> 00:42:21,920 Speaker 2: pull over. But even if that was the case, you 767 00:42:21,960 --> 00:42:24,440 Speaker 2: can still email us either way. Send it off to 768 00:42:24,560 --> 00:42:29,360 Speaker 2: Stuff Podcasts at iHeartRadio dot com. 769 00:42:29,760 --> 00:42:32,759 Speaker 3: You Know, Stuff you Should Know is a production of iHeartRadio. 770 00:42:33,280 --> 00:42:36,480 Speaker 3: For more podcasts my heart Radio, visit the iHeartRadio app, 771 00:42:36,640 --> 00:42:39,560 Speaker 3: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.