Cited by 39Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology StudiesForensic Entomology and Diptera StudiesAutopsy Techniques and Outcomes

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Twenty-Seven Years of Forensic Anthropology Casework in New Mexico

Komar, D·2003·Journal of Forensic Sciences

Abstract

A review of anthropological consult cases for the New Mexico Office of the Medical Investigator was conducted for the years 1974 through 2000. A total of 596 cases are summarized and information is presented on the sex and age of the individuals, season of recovery, depositional environment, body covering, time since death, perimortem trauma, postmortem animal activity, and skeletal element recovery. Results reveal a higher percentage of male victims (76%). No variation is seen in the seasonal distribution of cases. In cases with known time since death, 35% were recovered within one week while 30% had a postmortem interval exceeding one year. Depositional environments include surface (45%), burial (13%), and airplane crashes (9.5%). In 42% of the cases, no evidence of perimortem trauma was observed. Postmortem animal activity was noted in 46% of cases. Data presented in this study may prove useful in supporting expert witness testimony and generating future research models.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1520/jfs2002078

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. Reichs, 1992, Forensic anthropology in the 1990s, Am J Forensic Med Pathol, 13, 146, 10.1097/00000433-199206000-00014 · DOI
  2. Iscan, 1998, Progress in forensic anthropology: the 20th century, Forensic Sci Int, 98, 1
  3. Iscan, 1999, Medicolegal anthropology in France, Forensic Sci Int, 100, 17, 10.1016/S0379-0738(99)00016-X · DOI
  4. Iscan, 2001, Global forensic anthropology in the 21st century, Forensic Sci Int, 117, 1, 10.1016/S0379-0738(00)00433-3 · DOI
  5. Iscan, 1988, (1903–1987): the end of an era, J Forensic Sci, 33, 1473, 10.1520/JFS12592J · DOI
  6. Goza, 1999, Maples, forensic historian: four men, four centuries, four countries, J Forensic Sci, 44, 10.1520/JFS14537J · DOI
  7. Bass, 2000, Archaeology, science and forensic anthropology: a tribute to Dr. T. Dale Stewart, J Forensic Sci, 45, 267, 10.1520/JFS14679J · DOI
  8. Owsley, 1995, The role of forensic anthropology in the recovery and analysis of Branch Davidian Compound victims: techniques of analysis, J Forensic Sci, 40, 341, 10.1520/JFS13785J · DOI
  9. Kemkes-Grottenthaler, 2001, The reliability of forensic osteology—a case in point, Forensic Sci Int, 117, 65, 10.1016/S0379-0738(00)00450-3 · DOI
  10. Bennett, 1999, Positive identification of cremains recovered from an automobile based on the presence of an internal fixation device, J Forensic Sci, 44, 1296, 10.1520/JFS14604J · DOI
  11. Stubblefield, 1999, Homicide or accident off the coast of Florida: trauma analysis of mutilated human remains, J Forensic Sci, 44, 716, 10.1520/JFS14542J · DOI
  12. Vesterby, 1997, The diagnosis of a murder from skeletal remains: a case report, Int J Legal Med, 110, 97, 10.1007/s004140050040 · DOI
  13. Ubelaker, 1996, The remains of Dr. Carl Austin Weiss: anthropological analysis, J Forensic Sci, 41, 60, 10.1520/JFS13898J · DOI
  14. Lew, 1996, Septic tank burial: not just an other skeleton in the closet, J Forensic Sci, 41, 887, 10.1520/JFS14018J · DOI
  15. Zugibe, 1985, Metropolitan forensic anthropology team (MFAT) case studies in identification: 3. Identification of John J. Sullivan, the missing journalist, J Forensic Sci, 30, 221, 10.1520/JFS10985J · DOI
  16. Haglund WD . Applications of taphonomic models to forensic investigations. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Washington, 1991.
  17. Komar, 1998, Decay rates in a cold climate region: a review of cases involving advanced decomposition from the Medical Examiner's Office in Edmonton, Alberta, J Forensic Sci, 43, 57, 10.1520/JFS16090J · DOI
  18. Carson, 2000, Skeletal manifestations of bear scavenging, J Forensic Sci, 45, 515, 10.1520/JFS45305J · DOI
  19. Haglund, 1993, Disappearance of soft tissue and the disarticulation of human remains from aqueous environments, J Forensic Sci, 38, 806, 10.1520/JFS13476J · DOI
  20. Rhine, 1998, Estimation of time since death in the southwestern United States, 145
  21. Komar, 1999, Hangings in Alberta, with special reference to outdoor hangings with decomposition, Can Soc Forensic Sci J, 32, 85, 10.1080/00085030.1999.10757491 · DOI
  22. Bass, 1997, Outdoor decomposition rates in Tennessee, 181
  23. Marks, 1995, Bass and the development of forensic anthropology in Tennessee, J Forensic Sci, 40, 741, 10.1520/JFS15376J · DOI
  24. Grisbaum, An analysis of forensic anthropology cases submitted to the Smithsonian Institution by the Federal Bureau of Investigation from 1962 to 1994
  25. Reichs, 1998, Forensic anthropology: a decade of progress, 13
  26. Ubelaker, 2000, The forensic anthropology legacy of T. Dale Stewart (1901–1997), J Forensic Sci, 45, 245, 10.1520/JFS14675J · DOI
  27. Falsetti, 1999, A thousand tales of dead men: the forensic anthropology cases of William R. Maples, Ph.D, J Forensic Sci, 44, 682, 10.1520/JFS14534J · DOI
  28. Rhine, 1984, Forensic anthropology in New Mexico
  29. Mann, 1990, Time since death and decomposition of the human body: variables and observations in case and experimental field studies, J Forensic Sci, 35, 103, 10.1520/JFS12806J · DOI · Paper page
  30. Rodriguez, 1985, Decomposition of buried bodies and methods that may aid in their location, J Forensic Sci, 30, 10.1520/JFS11017J · DOI
  31. Haglund, 1997, Dogs and coyotes: postmortem involvement with human remains
  32. Komar, 1999, The use of cadaver dogs in locating scattered, scavenged human remains: preliminary field test results, J Forensic Sci, 44, 10.1520/JFS14474J · DOI
  33. Nordby, 2002, Is forensic taphonomy scientific?, 31

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Komar, D.
Affiliations
University of New Mexico (US)
Corresponding author
Komar, D
Venue
Journal of Forensic Sciences
Published
2003-05-01
Volume
48
Issue
3
Pages
1-4
ISSN
0022-1198 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2415372525
Cited by
39
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
6.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Forensic Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Forensic Entomology and Diptera Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Autopsy Techniques and Outcomes
Keywords
age and sex estimation, postmortem interval, depositional environment, body covering, perimortem trauma, expert testimony, skeletal remains
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Animals, Cause of Death, Child, Feeding Behavior, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, New Mexico, Postmortem Changes, Seasons, Age Distribution, Sex Distribution, Forensic Anthropology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review