TY  - JOUR
A1  - Gelderman, Tamara
A1  - Stigter, Erik
A1  - Krap, Tristan
A1  - Amendt, Jens
A1  - Duijst, Wilma
T1  - The time of death in Dutch court; using the Daubert criteria to evaluate methods to estimate the PMI used in court
T2  - Legal medicine
N2  - Highlights
• Forensic experts should be questioned about their education and experience.
• Reliability of methods used to estimate the PMI should be evident when exposed in court.
• Judges should question if the right method was used in the right manner.
• The PMI is an estimate and cannot be interpreted as the actual time of death.
Abstract
When a capital crime is committed the post-mortem interval (PMI) is of particular importance in investigating a suspect’s alibi in court. A forensic expert can use different methods to estimate the PMI. This research focuses on who is considered an expert in court and whether the methods used to estimate the PMI are reliable. In this study, the methods used to estimate the PMI and the experts consulted, available in Dutch jurisprudence, in the period 2010–2019 were investigated. Ninety-four judicial cases were included and multiple experts and methods of estimating the PMI were found. As part of this study, the methods that were used to estimate the PMI in court were subjected to the Daubert criteria. Of these methods, only the Henssge nomogram and entomological methods met the Daubert criteria. However, the methods are only useful when applied by the right forensic expert and in the right manner. Unfortunately, this was not always the case.
KW  - Time of death
KW  - Post-mortem interval
KW  - Daubert criteria
KW  - Forensic experts
KW  - Forensic medicine
Y1  - 2021
UR  - http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/77993
UR  - https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:hebis:30:3-779933
SN  - 1344-6223
VL  - 53
IS  - 101970
PB  - Elsevier
CY  - Amsterdam [u.a.]
ER  -