...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of forensic sciences. >Commentary on: Page M, Taylor J, Blenkin M. Expert interpretation of bitemark injuries-a contemporary qualitative study. J Forensic Sci 2013;58(3):664-72
【24h】

Commentary on: Page M, Taylor J, Blenkin M. Expert interpretation of bitemark injuries-a contemporary qualitative study. J Forensic Sci 2013;58(3):664-72

机译:评注:Page M,Taylor J,BlenkinM。咬伤的专家解释-当代定性研究。 J法医科学2013; 58(3):664-72

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The title of this article encourages readers to anticipate information on the abilities of Australian forensic dental experts to determine whether or not a patterned injury is a bitemark. Unfortunately readers will be disappointed; instead they get a man-on-the-street style interview of Australian forensic odontologists who legitimately complain that they experience a scarcity of actual bitemark casework. This shortage is apparently due to a low incidence of crimes in Australia that include bitemark injuries. It is more likely that bitemark injuries exist down under in numbers similar to other countries but are either undetected or go unanalyzed.
机译:本文的标题鼓励读者预期有关澳大利亚法医牙科专家确定图案伤害是否具有能力的信息。不幸的是,读者会失望的。取而代之的是,他们接受了澳大利亚法医牙医师的街头采访,他们合法地抱怨他们缺乏实际的咬痕案。这种短缺显然是由于澳大利亚犯罪活动的发生率低,其中包括咬伤。咬痕伤的发生率很可能低于其他国家,但未被发现或未被分析。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号