Forensic evidence in the McDermott Edgewater Tech case

Forensics Made the Case

Was it Bite Marks or...Hypnosis?

Many believe that Ted Bundy probably eliminated at least 100 women. Bundy's MO was to bludgeon his victims, then strangle them until they stopped breathing (Lotter).

The middle class, good looking and highly intelligent Bundy was never caught, until he left bite marks on Florida student, Lisa Levy's buttock. The expert testimony of forensic odontologist (dentist), Dr. Richard Souviron regarding the bite marks found on Lisa Levy, was crucial in securing Bundy's conviction and subsequent execution. Even today, when people talk about bite mark evidence, they usually mention the case of Theodore Robert Bundy. A gifted law student at one time, Ted Bundy, became one of America's most feared men (Lotter).

This was the first case in Florida's legal history that relied on bite mark testimony. It was also the first time that a piece of physical forensic evidence that actually linked Bundy to one of his crimes.

It is relatively simple to record the evidence from the bite mark injuries and match the teeth for comparison of the shapes, sizes and pattern that are present, but the science is not as exact as other forensic sciences and there is a lot of controversy about the accuracy of bite mark evidence. Human bite marks are most often found on the skin of victims. Women are most often bitten on the breasts, buttocks and legs during sexual attacks, whereas bites on men are commonly seen on the arms and shoulders (Lotter, Taking a Look at Human Bite Marks).

Often the bite marks are clear but other times they are faint or even not visible to the naked eye and are only picked up when the Ultraviolet (UV) light detects saliva. A saliva sample can be taken from the bite from which DNA analysis and blood typing can be done. However, DNA testing was not available in the 1970s and early 1980s for the Ted Bundy case.

According to an article in the British Dental Journal by Drs David Sweet and Iain Pretty, the sizes, shapes and pattern of the biting edges of the anterior teeth that are arranged in the upper and lower dental arcades are thought to be specific to that individual. This is mainly caused by the sequence of eruption of anterior and posterior teeth (Lotter, Taking a Look at Human...).

Once teeth impressions are taken from a suspect these can be compared against the bite mark data and matched for up to seventy-six comparison factors. These include whorls, indentations, chips, abrasions, striations, distances between cuspids, tooth width and thickness, alignment and mouth arch (Lotter, Taking a Look at Human...).

In the middle of a crime spree, Bundy entered the Florida State University's Chi Omega sorority house in Tallahassee at approximately 3 a.m. On January 15, 1978 and attacked two sleeping women, Lisa Levy and Margaret Bowman. No fingerprints or physical evidence were found at the crime scenes. Yet there was a piece of evidence that was to become a centerpiece during the trial: an odd bite mark on the left buttock of Lisa Levy (Lotter, the Capture of Ted Bundy).

One of the officers at the scene of the crime had the forethought to place a yellow ruler in the photo to show scale next to the bite marks on Levy's buttock when they were photographed. Following Bundy's arrest in Pensacola, police obtained a search warrant allowing them to take a dental impression from Bundy. They then photographed his mouth (Lotter, the Capture of Ted Bundy).

In the forensic science armory, bite mark evidence is subject to interpretation and the experience of the forensic dentist, which means that although it can be very exact, even in the right hands it does not have the degree of accuracy that fingerprint analysis or DNA profiling enjoy. It is not, by any means, an open and shut case.

According to the Innocence Project: "For years, bite mark evidence has been seen as an unreliable science. It has led to at least four wrongful convictions overturned by DNA testing and processes of accreditation and peer review have been wildly inconsistent."

Dr. Richard Souviron, a forensic dentist from Coral Gables, took photographs of Bundy's front upper and lower teeth and gums. He noted the uneven pattern, which he knew would make a match easier.

Crime library's Kathleen Ramsland writes in the Most Famous Bite Mark,

"In his expert testimony, Souviron described the bite mark on Lisa Levy as the jury examined the photographs. He pointed out how unique the indentation mark

was and showed how it matched the dental impressions of Bundy's teeth. He showed them the structure of alignment, the chips, the size of the teeth, and the sharpness factors of the bicuspids, lateral, and incisor teeth. Then he put up on a board an enlarged photo of the bite-mark and laid over it a transparent sheet with an enlarged picture of Bundy's teeth."

There was no question that Ted had made the bite marks on Lisa Levy's body. The photos would be the biggest piece of evidence the prosecution had linking Ted to the crime (Bell).

Finally, the chief consultant in forensic dentistry to New York City's Medical Examiner, forensic odontologist (dentist) Dr. L. Lavine, confirmed Souviron's findings. He testified that from the position and measurements of the bite mark he could tell that Lisa was no longer struggling when it was made. The jury was convinced by this expert testimony that Ted Bundy was the one who bit Lisa Levy (Lotter, the Capture of Ted Bundy).

And Forensic Hypnosis...

More than bite mark and DNA forensics were at work in the Ted Bundy case. Little known is that fact that forensic hypnosis helped put him in the electric chair.

Forensic hypnosis must be conducted by a trained professional who knows how to get information without leading a witness or accidentally implanting a suggestion or memory.

Secondly, very exacting procedures and standards must be met during the hypnosis session. Last, when the case goes to court the jury must consider the four dangers of hypnosis in deciding the case. The four dangers are: (1) suggestibility -- a hypnotist could "suggest" a race, height, eye color, etcetera which the subject accepts as truth; (2) loss of critical judgment -- under hypnosis personal beliefs and prejudices may influence how an event is interpreted during recall; (3) confabulation or lies -- a person who has a reason to lie may create lies while under hypnosis. (4) memory cementing -- a false memory seems so real to the witness that he develops false confidence in it (Look Into My Eyes: Forensic Hypnosis in Famous Court Cases).