reconstrução facial forense

8/8/2019 Reconstrução Facial Forense

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/reconstrucao-facial-forense 1/7

Forensic facial reconstruction

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Forensic facial reconstruction (or forensic facial approximation) isthe process of recreating the face of an unidentified individual fromtheir skeletal remains through an amalgamation of artistry, forensicscience, anthropology, osteology, and anatomy. It is easily the mostsubjective—as well as one of the most controversial—techniques inthe field of forensic anthropology. Despite this controversy, facialreconstruction has proved successful frequently enough that researchand methodological developments continue to be advanced.

In addition to remains involved in criminal investigations, facialreconstructions are created for remains believed to be of historicalvalue and for remains of prehistoric hominids and humans.

Daubert StandardIn the U.S., the Daubert Standard is a legal precedent set in 1993 by the Supreme Court regarding theadmissibility of expert witness testimony during legal proceedings. This standard was set in place toensure that expert witness testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, is the product of reliableprinciples and/or methods (including peer review), as well as ensuring that the witness has applied the

principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.[1]

When multiple forensic artists produce approximations for the same set of skeletal remains, no tworeconstructions are ever the same and the data from which approximations are created are largely

incomplete.[2] Because of this, forensic facial reconstruction does not uphold the Daubert Standard, is

not included as one of the legally recognized techniques for positive identification, and is notadmissible as expert witness testimony. Currently, reconstructions are only produced to aid theprocess of positive identification in conjunction with verified methods.

Contents

1 Daubert Standard 2 Types of identification 3 Types of reconstructions

3.1 Two-dimensional reconstructions 3.2 Three-dimensional reconstructions 3.3 Superimposition

4 History 5 Technique for creating a three-dimensional clay

reconstruction 6 Problems with facial reconstruction

6.1 Insufficient tissue thickness data 6.2 Lack of methodological standardization 6.3 Subjectivity

7 Facial reconstruction and the media 8 External links 9 References 10 Full citation of references

Tsar Ivan the Terrible of Russia. Reconstruction by

M.Gerasimov, Sovietarchaeologist and

anthropologist who developedthe first technique of forensic

sculpture. 1965

Página 1 de 7Forensic facial reconstruction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

10/04/2009http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_facial_reconstruction



Types of identification

There are two types of identification in forensic anthropology: circumstantial and positive.[3]

Circumstantial identification is established when an individual fits the biological profile of a

set of skeletal remains. This type of identification does not prove or verify identity because anynumber of individuals may fit the same biological description.

Positive identification, one of the foremost goals of forensic science, is established when aunique set of biological characteristics of an individual are matched with a set of skeletalremains. This type of identification requires the skeletal remains to correspond with medical ordental records, unique ante mortem wounds or pathologies, DNA analysis, and still other

means.[4]

Facial reconstruction presents investigators and family members involved in criminal casesconcerning unidentified remains with a unique alternative when all other identification techniques

have failed.[4] Facial approximations often provide the stimuli that eventually lead to the positiveidentification of remains.

Types of reconstructions

Two-dimensional reconstructions

Two-dimensional facial reconstructions are hand-drawn facial images based on ante mortemphotographs, and the skull. Occasionally skull radiographs are used but this is not ideal since manycranial structures are not visible or at the correct scale. This method usually requires the collaboration

of an artist and a forensic anthropologist. A commonly used method of 2D facial reconstruction waspioneered by Karen T. Taylor of Austin, Texas during the 1980s. Taylor's method involves adheringtissue depth markers on an unidentified skull at various anthropological landmarks, thenphotographing the skull. Life-size or one-to-one frontal and lateral photographic prints are then usedas a foundation for facial drawings done on transparent vellum. Recently developed, the F.A.C.E. andC.A.R.E.S. computer software programs quickly produce two-dimensional facial approximations thatcan be edited and manipulated with relative ease. These programs may help speed the reconstructionprocess and allow subtle variations to be applied to the drawing, though they may produce more

generic images than hand-drawn artiwork.[4]

Three-dimensional reconstructions

Three-dimensional facial reconstructions are either: 1) sculptures (made from casts of cranialremains) created with modeling clay and other materials or 2) high-resolution, three-dimensionalcomputer images. Like two-dimensional reconstructions, three-dimensional reconstructions usuallyrequire both an artist and a forensic anthropologist. Computer programs create three-dimensionalreconstructions by manipulating scanned photographs of the unidentified cranial remains, stockphotographs of facial features, and other available reconstructions. These computer approximationsare usually most effective in victim identification because they do not appear too picturesque or too

artificial.[4]

Superimposition

Superimposition is a technique that is sometimes included among the methods of forensic facial





reconstruction. It is not always included as a technique because investigators must already have somekind of knowledge about the identity of the skeletal remains with which they are dealing (as opposedto 2D and 3D reconstructions, when the identity of the skeletal remains are generally completelyunknown). Forensic superimpositions are created by superimposing a photograph of an individualsuspected of belonging to the unidentified skeletal remains over an X-ray of the unidentified skull. If the skull and the photograph are of the same individual, then the anatomical features of the face

should align accurately.[5]

History

Welcker (1883) and His (1895) were the first to reproduce three-dimensional facial approximationsfrom cranial remains. Most sources, however, acknowledge His as the forerunner in advancing thetechnique. His also produced the first data on average facial tissue thickness followed by Kollmannand Buchly who later collected additional data and compiled tables that are still referenced in most

laboratories working on facial reproductions today.[6]

Facial reconstruction originated in two of the four major subfields of anthropology. In biologicalanthropology, they were used to approximate the appearance of early hominid forms, while inarchaeology they were used to validate the remains of historic figures. In 1964, Gerasimov wasprobably the first to attempt paleo-anthropological facial reconstruction to estimate the appearance of

ancient peoples[7]

Although students of Gerasimov later used his techniques to aid in criminal investigations, it wasWilton M. Krogman who popularized facial reconstruction's application to the forensic field.Krogman presented his method for facial reconstruction in his 1962 book, detailing his method for

approximation.[7] Others who helped popularize three-dimensional facial reconstruction includeCherry (1977), Angel (1977), Gatliff (1984), Snow (1979), and Iscan (1986).[4]

In 2004 it was noted by Dr. Andrew Nelson of the University of Western Ontario, Department of Anthropology that noted Canadian artist Christian Corbet created the first forensic facialreconstruction of an approximate 2,200 year old mummy based on CT and laser scans. Thisreconstruction is known as the Sulman Mummy project.

Technique for creating a three-dimensional clay reconstruction

NOTE: Because a standard method for creating three-dimensional forensic facial reconstructions has

not been widely agreed upon, multiple methods and techniques are used. The process detailed below

reflects the method presented by Taylor and Angel from their chapter in Craniofacial Identification in

Forensic Medicine, pgs 177-185.[8] This method assumes that the sex, age, and race of the remains toundergo facial reconstruction have already been determined through traditional forensic

anthropological techniques.

The skull is the basis of facial reconstruction; however, other physical remains that are sometimesavailable often prove to be valuable. Occasionally, remnants of soft tissue are found on a set of remains. Through close inspection, the forensic artist can easily approximate the thickness of the softtissue over the remaining areas of the skull based on the presence of these tissues. This eliminates oneof the most difficult aspects of reconstruction, the estimation of tissue thickness. Additionally, anyother bodily or physical evidence found in association with remains (e.g. jewelry, hair, glasses, etc)

are vital to the final stages of reconstruction because they directly reflect the appearance of theindividual in question.





Most commonly, however, only the bony skull and minimal or no other soft tissues are present on theremains presented to forensic artists. In this case, a thorough examination of the skull is completed.This examination focuses on, but is not limited to, the identification of any bony pathologies orunusual landmarks, ruggedness of muscle attachments, profile of the mandible, symmetry of the nasalbones, dentition, and wear of the occlusal surfaces. All of these features have an effect on the

appearance of an individual's face.Once the examination is complete, the skull is cleaned and any damaged or fragmented areas arerepaired with wax. The mandible is then reattached, again with wax, according to the alignment of teeth, or, if no teeth are present, by averaging the vertical dimensions between the mandible andmaxilla. Undercuts (like the nasal openings) are filled in with modeling clay and prosthetic eyes areinserted into the orbits centered between the superior and inferior orbital rims. At this point, a plastercast of the skull is prepared. Extensive detail of the preparation of such a cast is presented in thearticle from which these methods are presented.

After the cast is set, colored plastics or the colored ends of safety matches are attached at twenty-one

specific "landmark" areas that correspond to the reference data. These sites represent the averagefacial tissue thickness for persons of the same sex, race, and age as that of the remains. From thispoint on, all features are added using modeling clay.

First, the facial muscles are layered onto the cast in the following order: temporalis, masseter,buccinator and occipito-frontals, and finally the soft tissues of the neck. Next, the nose and lips arereconstructed before any of the other muscles are formed. The lips are approximately as wide as theinterpupillary distance. However, this distance varies significantly with age, sex, race, and occlusion.The nose is one of the most difficult facial features to reconstruct because the underlying bone islimited and the possibility of variation is expansive. The nasal profile is arbitrarily determined byprojecting two lines from the midline of the skull unless any obvious bony asymmetry is present, in

which case accommodating adjustments to the possible projection are made.

The muscles of facial expression and the soft tissue around the eyes are added next. Additionalarbitrary measurements are made according to race (especially for those with eye folds characteristicof Asian descent) during this stage. Next, tissues are built up to within one millimeter of the tissuethickness markers and the ears (noted as being extremely complicated to reproduce) are added.Finally, the face is "fleshed," meaning clay is added until the tissue thickness markers are covered,and any specific characterization is added (for example, hair, wrinkles in the skin, noted racial traits,glasses, etc.).

Problems with facial reconstructionInsufficient tissue thickness data

There are multiple outstanding problems associated with forensic facial reconstruction.[9] The mostpressing issue relates to the data used to average facial tissue thickness. The data available to forensicartists are still very limited in ranges of ages, sexes, and body builds. This disparity greatly affects theaccuracy of reconstructions. Until this data is expanded, the likelihood of producing the most accurate

reconstruction possible is largely limited.[10]

Lack of methodological standardization

A second problem is the lack of a methodological standardization in approximating facial features and

individuating characteristics.[4] Forensic anthropologists and artists have published individual





techniques used in their own practices. However, a single, official method for reconstructing the facehas yet to be recognized. This also presents major setback in facial approximation because facialfeatures like the eyes and nose and individuating characteristics like hairstyle - the features mostlikely to be recalled by witnesses - lack a standard way of being reconstructed. Without consistencyand a standard method for approximating these features, it will remain very difficult for forensicreconstruction to earn wide recognition as a legitimate form of forensic identification.

Subjectivity

Reconstructions only reveal the type of face a person may have exhibited because of artisticsubjectivity. The position and general shape of the main facial features are mostly accurate becausethey are greatly determined by the skull, but subtle details like certain wrinkles, birthmarks, skinfolds, the shape of the nose and ears, etc, are unavoidably speculative because skeletal remains leaveno evidence of their appearance. The success of reconstruction depends as much upon thecircumstances pertaining to the subject under investigation as it does upon the accuracy of the

technique.[2]

Facial reconstruction and the media

Due to the recent rise in popularity of television shows (e.g. CSI:

Crime Scene Investigation, CSI: Miami, CSI: NY , NCIS, Bones, andthe UK programme Meet the Ancestors) and feature films concernedwith criminal investigations, forensics, and law enforcement, thepresence of forensic facial reconstructions in the entertainmentindustry and the media has also increased. The way the fictionalcriminal investigators and forensic anthropologists utilize forensicsand facial reconstructions are, however, often misrepresented (an

influence known as the "CSI effect"). For example, the fictionalforensic investigators will often call for the creation of a facialreconstruction as soon as a set of skeletal remains is discovered. Inreality, facial reconstructions are widely used as a last resort tostimulate the possibility of identifying a victim.

Interest in discovering and identifying "lost" and/or significanthistorical figures has also increased the presence of forensic facialreconstruction among the public consciousness. For example, thefacial reconstruction of Egypt's King Tut made the June 2005 coverof National Geographic Magazine.

Casdon Toys has produced a line of at-home facial reconstruction toys featuring Julius Caesar, KingTut, Queen Nefertiti, and Neanderthal Man. The popular CSI: Crime Scene Investigation televisionshow has also produced an at-home facial reconstruction kit.

External links

Frank Bender, forensic facial reconstruction artist RN-DS Partnership (Richard Neave & Denise Smith) Department of Forensic Anthropology, Dundee University, Scotland

Forensic Art Karen T. Taylor's Forensic Art Website Forensic Art - Facial Reconstruction

The facial reconstruction of Tutankhamun as shown on thecover of National Geographic

in 2005.





Forensic Faces Institute Skeletal Remains Identification by Facial Reconstruction Computerised 3D Facial Reconstruction Peg Sculpture by Casdon Toys Louisiana State University FACES Lab, Baton Rouge LA Deutsches Ärzteblatt, 2007; 104(17): A-1160: Forensic Facial Reconstruction – Identification

Based on Skeletal Findings, available online: English, German

References

1. ^ Steadman2. ^ a b Helmer et al. Assessment of the Reliability of Facial Reconstruction.3. ^ Burns. Forensic Anthropology Training Manual.

4. ^ a b c d e f Reichs and Craig. Facial Approximation: Procedures and Pitfalls.5. ^ Lundy. Physical Anthropology In Forensic Medicine6. ^ Rhine. Facial Reproductions In Court.

7. ^ a b Iscan. Craniofacial Image Analysis and Reconstruction.

8. ^ Taylor and Angel. Facial Reconstruction and Approximation.9. ^ Lebedinskaya et al. Principles of Facial Reconstruction.10. ^ Rathbun. Personal Identification: Facial Reproductions.

Full citation of references

Wilkinson, Dr Caroline. Forensic Facial Reconstruction. Cambridge University Press, 2004 Gerasimov, Michail M. The Face Finder. New York CRC Press, 1971 Burns, Karen Ramey. Forensic Anthropology Training Manual. New Jersey: Prentice Hall,

1999. Helmer, Richard et al. "Assessment of the Reliability of Facial Reconstruction." Forensic

Analysis of the Skull: Craniofacial Analysis, Reconstruction, and Identification. Ed. MehmetIscan and Richard Helmer. New York: Wiley-Liss, Inc. 1993. 229-243.

Iscan, Mehmet Yasar. "Craniofacial Image Analysis and Reconstruction." Forensic Analysis of the Skull: Craniofacial Analysis, Reconstruction, and Identification. Ed. Mehmet Iscan andRichard Helmer. New York: Wiley-Liss, Inc. 1993. 1-7.

Lebedinskaya, G.V., T.S. Balueva, and E.V. Veselovskaya. "Principles of FacialReconstruction." Forensic Analysis of the Skull: Craniofacial Analysis, Reconstruction, andIdentification. Ed. Mehmet Iscan and Richard Helmer. New York: Wiley-Liss, Inc. 1993. 183-198.

Lundy, John K. "Physical Anthropology In Forensic Medicine." Anthropology Today, Vol. 2,No. 5. October 1986. 14-17.

Rathbun, Ted. "Personal Identification: Facial Reproductions." Human Identification. CaseStudies in Forensic Anthropology. Ed. Ted A. Rathbun and Jane E. Buikstra. Springfield, IL:Charles C Thomas Publisher, LTD, 1998. 347-355.

Reichs, Kathleen and Emily Craig. "Facial Approximation: Procedures and Pitfalls." ForensicOsteology: Advances in the Identification of Human Remains 2nd Edition. Ed. Kathleen J.Reichs. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas Publisher, LTD, 1998. 491-511.

Rhine, Stanley. "Facial Reproductions In Court." Human Identification. Case Studies inForensic Anthropology. Ed. Ted A. Rathbun and Jane E. Buikstra. Springfield, IL: Charles CThomas Publisher, LTD, 1998. 357-361.

Steadman, Dawnie Wolfe. Hard Evidence: Case Studies in Forensic Anthropology. NewJersey: Prentice Hall, 2003.

Taylor, Karen T. Forensic Art and Illustration. CRC Press, 2000 Taylor, R. and Angel, C. "Facial Reconstruction and Approximation." Craniofacial

Identification in Forensic Medicine. Britain: Arnold. 1998. 177-185.





This page was last modified on 23 March 2009, at 03:48 (UTC). All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights

for details.)Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a U.S. registered 501(c)(3) tax-deductible nonprofit charity.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_facial_reconstruction"Categories: Anthropology | Forensics | Head and neck | Types of sculptureHidden categories: Articles that may contain original research since November 2008 | All articles thatmay contain original research | All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourcedstatements since November 2008


reconstrução facial forense

Documents