The History of Firearm and Toolmark Identification

The following paper was published in the Association of Firearm and Tool Mark Examiners Journal, 30th Anniversary Issue, Volume 31 Number 3, Summer 1999. Revised April 2008.

Reprinted here with permission of the author, James E. Hamby.

THE HISTORY OF FIREARM 
AND TOOLMARK IDENTIFICATION

By: James E. Hamby, Ph.D., Indianapolis-Marion County Forensic Services Agency, Indianapolis, IN 46204 and James W Thorpe, Ph.D., Forensic Science Unit, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland GI 1XW

Key Words: history, firearms identification

ABSTRACT

The history of how the science of firearm and toolmark identification has evolved over the past 165 years is extremely interesting to many forensic scientists performing duties as firearm and toolmark examiners. It was thought that a study of this history would be of value for those examiners that have an interest in this history. Reference material and literature available to the authors, some of which was provided by other firearm and toolmark examiners over the past several years, was researched to provide the data for this article. We are keenly aware that a considerable amount of additional historical data, concerning the history of firearm and toolmark identification, exists in files assembled and maintained by other forensic scientists, especially in Asia, Europe, the Middle East, Central America, and South America. We would respectfully request that copies of any historical information that you have available to you be sent to the authors to allow for future revised information on this subject.

One of the earliest references concerning the rifling of firearms is in a book authored by Harold Peterson wherein he discusses the rifling of firearms by Emperor Maximilian of Germany between 1493 and 1508. Although some firearms were rifled - helical grooves in the bore of a firearm barrel to impart rotary motion to a projectile - the recognition that this rifling was of value for identifying a fired projectile to the firearm did not occur until late in the l9th century.

Prior to 1900 (1835 – 1899), events occurred that would ultimately be associated with firearm and toolmark identification. Many of these events involved the simple observation, physical matching, caliber determination from an examination of the shape and size of a projectile, and experiments. 

In the early part of the last century (1900 — 1930), the science of firearm and toolmark identification was recognized by numerous judicial (law) systems in several countries around the world. Legal recognition was due, in part, to the efforts of several individuals from various countries around the world that had conducted research and experiments into the identification of fired projectiles and cartridges cases to the specific firearms. In researching the exploits of many of these pioneer examiners, one is extremely thankful for their scientific curiosity as well as their contributions to our field of science.

In the middle part of the last century (1930 - 1970), the science of firearm and toolmark identification continued to evolve. For example, in the United States, the Scientific Crime Detection Laboratory (SCDL) began operations at Northwestern University in late 1929 or early 1930, followed by formation of the Federal Bureau of Identification (FBI) Laboratory in 1932. Additionally, many other countries also recognized the requirement to provide this type of forensic analysis and established firearm and toolmark sections either in existing laboratories or as new laboratories. Over the next few years, several laboratories were established and commenced operations, especially in many of the larger cities in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States and in Europe.

The effort of the individuals involved in firearm and toolmark identification during this period should be recognized as they, were the individuals instrumental in both continuing the development of the science as well as gaining public and legal acceptance of the science. The misuse of firearms in criminal cases, especially in the United Stares, greatly increased in the 1960’s. In recognition of the need to exchange information and promote continuing scientific research in the field of firearm and toolmark identification, thirty-six individuals met in Chicago, Illinois in February 1969, and organized the Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE).

In the last part of the last century (1970 — 1999), the science of firearms and toolmark identification has continued to evolve with a greater number of forensic scientists being employed as firearm and tool-mark examiners around the world. Many of these examiners continue to conduct research and experimentation into the various aspects of our field and have published their findings in many of the leading forensic publications listed below. The science has greatly benefited from the numerous technological advances that have occurred during this period. These advances include innovations in one of the primary tools of the firearm and toolmark examiner — the binocular comparison microscopes. The vast majority of the current comparison microscopes have been equipped with digital cameras and   closed circuit television (CCT) units, which allow for direct viewing on a monitor or instant documentation using digital photomicrography. Viewing the side-by-side images on the monitor is very useful for instructional purposes while digital photographs are useful for inclusion in the case files.

The most significant advances during this period include the tremendous growth, popularity, and relatively inexpensive cost of computers. The ability to fully utilize the vast potential of computers has allowed science overall, and forensic science more specifically, to take full advantage in development of several useful ‘tools’ for use within the firearms laboratory. The ongoing development of computers has provided the firearms and toolmark examiner with such useful equipment as the former Drugfire System as well as the current Integrated Ballistics Identification System (IBIS). In the United States, IBIS units in forensic laboratories connect in a nation-wide network to form the National Integrated Ballistics Identification Network (NIBIN). Similar systems exist in Canada as well as several countries in Europe.

Using advanced computer technology, the IBIS system allow for the capturing of digital images of fired bullets and cartridge casings which are then analyzed to provide the examiner with a list of possible ‘hits’ for examination using a comparison microscope. This amazing technology, unheard of just a few years ago, provides the examiner with the opportunity to search for possible identifications on fired evidence bullets and cartridge cases in the laboratory and throughout the NIBIN System. 

 

The Early Years (1835—1899)

London, England

The earliest event involving a firearms identification case that we have been able to locate occurred in 1835 in the City of London, England. A homeowner was shot and killed and the servant suspected of the crime. A Mr. Henry Goddard (no relation to Calvin H. Goddard of later firearms identification historical note), a Bow Street Runner (an early police force within the City of London), thoroughly investigated the case. Goddard was able to identify the mold mark — the mold is used to manufacture lead balls from molten lead — on the fired projectile (ball). He also examined the paper patch — the paper patch provides a seal between the ball and gunpowder in blackpowder firearms — and was able to identify it as having been torn from a newspaper that was found in the room of the servant. Goddard’s careful observations and subsequent examination of the physical evidence from the crime scene were instrumental in bringing the guilty party to justice.

State of Oregon

In 1852, a firearms related examination occurred when the Sheriff in the State of Oregon (USA) examined the hole either in a homicide victim’s shirt to determine if the hole was a tear or from a bullet. The sheriff, using the suspect firearm and victim’s shirt, conducted experiments by test firing the weapon into the shirt. The sheriff, because of his experiments, testified in court that the hole in the shirt was from a gunshot and not a tear and the suspect was convicted and hanged for murder.

Noilles Thesis

In Paris, France in 1857, a Monsieur Noilles published a thesis titled ‘Les Plaies ParArmes a Feu Courtes’. His thesis dealt with the subject of wounds made by small firearms.

Civil War

One of the earliest recorded cases involving simple firearms identification occurred in 1863, during the United States Civil War. Confederate General Stonewall Jackson was fatally wounded on the battlefield and the bullet removed for examination. Examination of the bullet revealed both the caliber and bullet shape, and it was determined that the bullet could only have been fired by one of his own men. The projectile, identified as a 67-caliber ball projectile typical of those used by his own forces such as Hill’s Division of the Confederate Army.  The Union forces used the 58 caliber Minnie ball projectile in their rifles.

A year later, in 1864, Union General John Sedgwick was killed in battle by a single projectile fired by a Confederate sniper from an estimated distance of 800 yards. When the fatal bullet was removed from his body, an identification of the fatal bullet was made based on both the caliber and hexagonal shape of the bullet. It was determined that this particular caliber and shape of bullet was consistent with the Whitworth rifles that had been imported from England by the Confederate forces for sniping purposes.

Early Court Testimony

In 1876, a Georgia State (USA) Court allowed a witness, who was experienced in the use of firearms, to provide expert testimony concerning the amount of time that had elapsed since a gun was last fired.

A Minnesota State (USA) Court, in 1879, used the services of a qualified gunsmith to examine a fatal bullet in conjunction with two suspect revolvers. His examination of the two revolvers revealed that one of the revolvers had actual rifling marks while the other revolver only had false rifling marks at the muzzle. His examination of the two revolvers, and his careful examination of the marks on the fatal bullet, allowed him to testify that the bullet could not have been fired from the revolver with rifling marks but might have well been fired from the other revolver.

Another case involving testimony concerning the time elapsed since the gun was last fired occurred in a Texas State (USA) Court in 1883. The court allowed an individual to provide expert testimony on the elapsed time since the evidence firearm was last fired. His testimony was based on his examination of the fired wadding (paper patch), the percussion cap (a small metallic cup containing a primary explosive used to ignite the muzzle charge in muzzle loading firearms), and the barrel of the firearm.

Related Studies

In 1885, in Lyon, France, a study tided “Etudes Medico-Legales des Plaies Entrée Par Coups de Revolver” (Medico-Legal Study of Wounds of Entry Caused by Revolver Bullets) was published by the Poix. Travail du Laboratorie du MedicineLegale de Lyon. This study, one of the first that involved the examination and reporting on wounds caused by revolver bullets, represented information of value to both the medical field and the forensic field of firearms identification.

In 1889, Mr. A. Lacassogne of Lyon, France, published a paper tided “La Deformation Des Balles de Revolver” (Deformation of Revolver Bullets) in Volume 5, Archives de l’Antropologie Criminelle et Des Sciences Penales.

In 1897, a Virginia court allowed testimony concerning the similarity between a fatal and test fired bullets.

Effects of Firing Testimony

One of the first recorded instances of someone being permitted to provide testimony to the effects of firing a pistol at human hair and a paper target occurred in a Kansas State (USA) Court in 1896. The court permitted the witness, experienced in the use of firearms, to conduct various experiments using the evidence pistol and similar cartridges in an attempt to determine the effect on firing at hair and targets at close distances. The witness, because of his experiments, was then allowed to provide testimony as to the results of his experiments.

Distance Determination

In 1898, this type of analysis was further expanded when in Paris, France, a Mr. Corin published an article titled “La Determination de La Distance a’Laguelle un Coup de Feu a e’te’ Tire” (Determination of the distance at which a shot has been discharged from a firearm)

 

1900 – 1930

In 1900, in Buffalo, New York (USA), a very significant article tided “The Missile and the Weapon” was published in the June issue of the Buffalo Medical Journal. The article, written by Dr. Albert Llewellyn Hall, dealt with a variety of issues to include how measurement of land and groove markings (impressions on the bearing surface of the bullet caused by the rifling process) is made on bullets. He also discussed the examination of gunpowder residues in barrels of firearms and the changes that take Dr. Hall, unfortunately never went further in his evaluating markings found on fired bullets.  

Two years later, in 1902, a Massachusetts State (USA) Court allowed an individual to provide expert testimony on the effects of rifling and other markings in a gun barrel upon bullets fired through the barrel. This was one of the first important cases that allowed the introduction of photographs of evidence and test fired bullets.

In 1903, in London, England, Mr. E. J. Churchill (uncle of Robert Churchill of later fame as a firearms examiner for the United Kingdom) provided testimony as to some experimentation that he had performed involving the distance at which a shot had been fired into a human skull. Mrs. Camille Holland was shot and killed in Essex, England in 1899. Her body was recovered and examined to determine cause of death. It was determined that she had been shot at a close range with a 32-calibre revolver. E. J. Churchill, using a similar revolver and the same type of ammunition, fired test shots into sheep’s skulls at varying distances. He examined the skull of the victim in conjunction with the damage observed in the sheep’s skulls and provided testimony in court that, in his opinion, the fatal shot was fired from a revolver at between 6 and 12 inches. The accused was convicted and hanged.

Three years later, in 1905, in Leipzig, Germany, a Mr. Kockel published an article titled “Zur Sachverstandigen Beurteilung Von Geschossen” (The Expert Examination of Fired Bullets) in the Kriminalfallen, Leipzig.

In 1907, in Brownsville, Texas (USA), several soldiers from a nearby US Army Infantry Regiment was allegedly involved in a riot (later referred to in the popular press as the Affray at Brownsville) in the small Texas town of Brownsville. During the hours of darkness, and during a ten-minute period, the soldiers were alleged to have fired some 150 to 200 shots from their assigned rifles throughout the entire town. The facts surrounding the ‘riot’ are very much in question and although the case was supposedly investigated, it was never determined if any soldier actually participated in the riot. The importance of this event for the field of firearms identification is that it was the first time that a serious study was undertaken to attempt and identify fired cartridge cases to specific rifles and represents one of the first recorded examinations of fired cartridge cases. Following the alleged riot, some townspeople ‘found’ in a back alley of the town a grand total of 39 fired 30-caliber cartridge cases and some fired bullets. These items, and numerous rifles belonging to three infantry companies, were collected and sent to the staff of Frankfort Arsenal for their examination. The arsenal staff studied the submitted evidence and then devised a method of attempting to identify the fired cartridge casings to the submitted rifles. The arsenal staff, after spending a lengthy period of time test firing the rifles, was able identify 33 of the fired cartridge casings as having been fired from four of the submitted rifles. The remaining six cartridge casings could not be associated with any of the submitted rifles and no conclusions were reached concerning any of the fired bullet evidence. A report titled “Study of the Fired Bullets and Shells in Brownsville, Texas, Riot” was published in 1907 by the US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, as part of the Annual Report of the Chief of Ordnance, US Army. This exhaustive examination of evidence, and subsequent written report, is the first recorded instance of fired cartridge casings being evaluated as evidence and represents a milestone in firearms identification history.

A court case involving both expert testimony and experimentation as concerns the distance a firearm was from the target occurred in a Wisconsin State (USA) Court in 1908. The trial judge allowed an individual to provide expert testimony on his observation of the presence and/or absence of gunpowder at various distances.

Another very significant milestone in firearms identification history occurred when starting in 1912, in Paris, France, Professor V. Balthazard devised a series of procedures to identify fired bullets to the firearms from which they were fired. Professor Balthazard identified the bullets to the suspected firearm by taking an elaborate series of photographs of test-fired bullets from the firearm as well as evidence bullets. The photographs included the rifled areas of each land and groove. The photographs were then carefully enlarged and the observed markings compared by Balthazard and his staff. Balthazard also applied these same specialized photographic techniques to the examination and identification of cartridge casings using firing pin, breech face, ejector and extractor marks. In 1909, Balthazard published a paper titled “Identification des Projectiles de Revolver en Plomb Nu” (Identification of Revolver Projectiles of Plain Lead) in Volume 148 of Comptes Rendus de 1’ Academie des Sciences.

In 1915, in New York State (USA), the notorious ‘Stielow’ case occurred, which caused a gross injustice. Stielow, an illiterate tenant framer was accused of shooting and killing his employer and the employer’s housekeeper. The woman   had run from the employer’s house after being shot and was found dead near the door of Stielow’s house. The local authorities, unused to investigating homicides in their rural area, allowed the crime scene to be trampled by the curious crowd, which destroyed most of the evidence. The authorities hired an alleged firearms examiner to examine the evidence who promptly stated that a revolver found in Stielow’s house had fired the fatal bullets. He based his opinion on nine abnormal scratches that he supposedly observed during his examination of the bullets. Stielow was sentenced to death for the murders and sent to the state prison to await execution. The Governor of the State, who was unsatisfied with the entire investigation, ordered a special investigation and engaged individuals to reinvestigate the case. Assigned to the case was Mr. Charles E. Waite, a special investigator for the New York Attorney General’s Office. Waite, and a few other individuals, thoroughly investigated the case, which included examination of the firearms evidence and the fatal bullets. Waite, in conjunction with Dr. Max Poser, a microscopy expert with Bausch & Lomb, microscopically examined the fatal bullets in conjunction with bullets test fired from Stielow’s revolver and determined that Stielow’s revolver could not have been used to fire the fatal bullets. This evidence, in conjunction with other aspects of the investigation, provided sufficient evidence to allow the Governor to pardon Stielow and release him from prison.

In 1917, Dr. Sydney Smith (later Sir Sydney Smith) was offered the position as Principal Medico-Legal Expert in Cairo. Egypt, after the incumbent, Dr. Hamilton, passed away. Dr. Smith arrived in Egypt and immediately sought to have a series of laboratories attached exclusively to his operation to facilitate his duties. All of the analyses and other scientific activities were, until that time, provided either in the Government analytical laboratories or in the School of Medicine. Mr. Arthur Lucas at the Government Laboratory was also interested in the application of science to medico-legal problems that included the examination of firearms and related evidence. Smith was involved in a substantial number of murder investigations over the next several years — many involving the examination of fired bullets and cartridge casings. He began to collect information relative to the firearms evidence recovered from various crime scenes with the hope that it might one-day lead to the identification of the criminals through the weapons they used.

In 1920, two factory workers carrying the factory payroll were shot and killed in Dedham, Massachusetts (USA). The trial of the two accused murders, Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti started in summer of 1921. The case received worldwide publicity due to the political activities of the accused. At the trial, four ‘experts’ presented firearms related evidence — two for the prosecution and two for the defense. The firearms identification experts for both prosecution and defense were at odds with each other throughout the trial. Two firearms examiners provided testimony linking the firearms evidence to the suspect’s firearms while the defense experts stated that the bullets and cartridge casings were not fired by the suspect’s firearms. Based on the testimony of the firearms examiners, and other testimony presented to the court, the two suspects were convicted of murder and executed some seven years later. Many individuals objected to both the trial and the execution as they felt that Sacco and Vanzetti had been framed for their political views and that firearms evidence was unreliable.

In 1921, a court in the State of Oregon (USA) allowed a Sheriff to provide expert testimony involving the identification of a fired cartridge case to the evidence rifle. The Sheriff was able to explain and then demonstrate to the court how a small flaw in the breechblock of the rifle left an identifiable mark on the rim of the ejected cartridge case that had been fired in the rifle.

In 1921, in San Paulo, Brazil, two articles dealing with wounds were published. Mr. Jorge T. Filho published an article titled “Da Diagnose da Distancia nos Tiros de Projecteis Multiplos — Chumbo de Caca” (Estimation of distance from which a bullet was fired) while another thesis (author not identified) was titled “Orificio de Hntrada de Projecteis de Revolver — Estudo experimental das zonas de contorno nos tiros proximos” (Entrance wounds and Powder Markings). In the same year, in Washington, D.C., Mr. Louis B. Wilson published an article titled “Dispersion of Bullet Energy in Relation to Wound Effects” in The Military Surgeon, Washington, September 1921.

In 1922, several issues concerning firearms identification occurred: A court in the State of Missouri (USA) permitted an individual to qualify and provide expert testimony concerning exactly how far a certain firearm would eject a fired cartridge case.

In Denver, Colorado (USA), Mr. C. Williams wrote an article titled “Fingerprints on Bullets” which appeared in Outdoor Life magazine, Volume 49, pages 329-331. In Ithaca, New York (USA), Mr. Emile Monnin Chamot authored a 61-page monograph titled “The Microscopy of Small Arms Primers”.

In Paris, France, Professor Balthazard wrote an article titled “Identification des Projectiles: Perfectionnement de la Technique” (Identification of Projectiles: Perfection of the Technique) which appeared in Annales de Medicine Legale, Volume 2, January 1922, pages 345-250. In the same issue, pages 30-32, Mr. Georgiades wrote an article tided “Une Novelle Methode pour Determiner l’Identite des Projectiles” (A new method for determination of the identity of projectiles).

In Tucson, Arizona, Paul V. Hadley was tried for attempted murder and murder. Hadley accepted a ride with an elderly couple, was alleged to have shot both, seriously wounding the man and killing the wife. He was subsequently arrested and found in possession of a 32 calibre Mauser pistol and several cartridges. A. J. Eddy was requested by the prosecuting attorney to determine if the fatal bullets could be identified as having been fired by the suspect’s firearm. Eddy, a practicing attorney, had previously conducted research and experimentation into the area of bullet identification and he was certain that a bullet fired from a gun carried distinctive markings. With the assistance of a local photographer, Eddy conducted numerous tests on the suspect murder weapon as well as several other 32-calibre firearms. The Mauser pistol was test fired, using ammunition seized from Hadley, and the test and fatal bullets were photographed by reversing the lens of the camera. Over a period of three months, Eddy conducted a series of experiments. He was then called to court to testify as to the results of his research. He provided extensive testimony concerning the elaborate tests that he had conducted and attempted to prove to the jury that each pistol left its own distinctive characteristics markings on bullets. The defense attorneys argued that Eddy was not an expert but the judge overruled their request taking the position that Eddy was merely showing the results of his exhaustive research and experimentation. The judge characterized Eddy’s testimony as being that of a “semi-expert” and allowed him to testify. Hadley was convicted, in large part to Eddy’s testimony, and the case was appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court. The court, after careful deliberation, rendered a historic and momentous decision. The court upheld the lower court, thus recognizing ballistics evidence as valid and admissible. This ruling appears to be the first time that a State Supreme Court in the United States had done so.

In 1923, the court cases and literature continued at a fast pace: Among the court cases was an Oregon State (USA) case where the judge allowed a pistol expert to testify that the evidence bullets were fired in a Colt Army Special revolver similar to the firearm owned by the defendant.

In a Washington, DC (USA) court, the court decided that expert testimony that was provided concerning that the evidence bullet was fired from the defendant’s pistol was competent. In the literature, a Mr. R. E. Herrick published an article titled “Ballistics Jurisprudence” in Arms and Man, Volume 70, Number 17, May 1923.

In Paris, France, three articles appeared in the journal “Annales de Medicine Legale”. The first article was by Mr. P. Chavigny and Mr. E. Gelma and titled “Les Fissures du Crane: Coups de Feu a Courte Distance — Revolver” (Fissures of the skull by revolver bullets at short range”, Volume 3, pages 345-352. Another article in the same journal was by Professor Balthazard and was titled “Perfectionment a la Methode d’Identification des Projectiles” (Perfecting the method on the identification of projectiles), pages 6 18-620. A third article was by Mr. DeRechter and Mr. Mage and titled “Communication sur 1’ Identification des Douilles et des Projectiles tires” (Communication on the Identification of Fired Bullets and Shells).

Meanwhile, from Leipzig, Germany, a Mr. Hulst published an article titled “Bestimmung der Identitat und Herkunft einer Kugel” (Determining the identity and the origin of a bullet), Archives fur Kriminologie, page 300.

In London, England, Arthur Lucas published an article titled “The examination of Firearms and Projectiles in Forensic Cases” in “The Analyst”. (Note: This is the same Arthur Lucas who worked in the Government Laboratory in Egypt and who collaborated with Dr. Sydney Smith)

In a Connecticut State (USA) Court, a case of some distinction (State v. Harold Israel) resulted in the prosecuting attorney recommending that the charge of murder be nolle prosequi (dismissed). His recommendation was due, in large part, to the opinion of six expert witnesses that testified that the fatal murder bullet could not have been fired from the pistol of the defendant. The court record reflects, in some detail, the principals of firearms identification as known at that time.

In Wisconsin, Dr. J. Howard Mathews, the Chairman of the Department of Chemistry at the University of Wisconsin, became involved in his first criminal case that involved the metallographic analysis of bomb parts used to kill an individual. Due to his involvement in this case, he was then requested to examine a rifle used in a homicide case. These two cases, followed by others, caused him to become quite involved in the examination and identification of firearms related evidence.

In November 1924, an event occurred in Cairo, Egypt that would lead to the climax of Dr. Sydney Smith’s work in firearms identification. Sir Lee Stack Pasha, the Sirdar (Commander-in-Chief) of the Egyptian Army and Governor-General of the Sudan was shot while being driven through the streets of Cairo. The Sirdar died the following day from his wounds. Smith relates that he examined the car, reconstructed the crime scene, and examined the firearms evidence which consisted of nine cartridge casings found at the scene and six fired bullets recovered from the victim’s bodies (the driver and the aide-de-camp were also killed). All of the fired bullets were 32 calibre designed to be fired from a semi-automatic pistol. In five of the six bullets, including one used to kill the Sirdar, a cross-shaped cut had been made on the nose in an attempt to convert them into expanding bullets. Smith, after a careful examination of all of the firearms evidence, was able to report that if a suspect firearm were recovered, he would be able to identify it to the fired components found at the scene or from the bodies. Due to the severe nature of the crime, maximum investigative efforts were put forth to determine the identity of the assassins. Suspects were developed in fairly short order and various firearms and ammunition submitted to Dr. Smith for his evaluation and examination. His examination of the submitted evidence, in conjunction with the items from the crime scene and autopsies, allowed him to identify the firearms as having been used during the shooting. The eight suspects were charged with murder, or incitement to murder, and tried in court. The case relied on confessions from the suspects, a police informer, and scientific examination of the evidence by Dr. Smith. Obviously, the testimony by Dr. Smith concerning his examination of the firearms evidence played a very crucial role in the suspects being convicted of murder. Seven of the eight were executed while the remaining suspect was sentenced to life imprisonment. Dr. Smith wrote an article concerning the details of the investigation that appeared in the British Medical Journal in January 1926. He relates that he believes that scientific examination of firearms and projectiles in Great Britain had its beginning because of the publication of his report on the case. While this claim may be somewhat exaggerated, it is also recognized that Smith’s efforts were instrumental in furthering the science of firearms identification.

In 1924, Captain Edward C. ‘Ned’ Crossman, a well-known shooter and sports writer, examined firearms evidence for the Los Angeles County Sheriff. In his writings on the subject, he further reports that he became associated with the Bureau of Forensic Ballistics in 1926 serving as a regional representative for the western portion of the United States. In a book authored by Crossman in 1932, he discusses having some 200 cases submitted to his laboratory for firearms identification work between the initial case in 1924 and 1932. He continued to provide these same services until his death.

In April 1925, in New York City, New York (USA), the Bureau of Forensic Ballistics was established by C. E. Waite, Major (later Colonel) Calvin H. Goddard, and Philip 0. Gravelle and John H. Fisher. The Bureau was formed to provide firearms identification services throughout the United States as few law enforcement agencies had the capability to provide this type of service. Major Goddard was very much a firearms identification pioneer who wrote and spoke extensively on the subject and was published in numerous publications. One significant event of particular note is that Gravelle adapted a comparison microscope for use in the identification of fired bullets and cartridge cases. This singular act is considered by many to be a hallmark event in the science of firearms identification. Adapting the comparison microscope, for use in the examination of fired bullets and cartridge casings, allowed for a significant increase in the examiner’s ability to identify matching striae.

In June 1925, the Saturday Evening Post (then a weekly American general news and articles magazine) published a two-part series of articles entitled “Finger-printing Bullets”. The two articles discussed in great detail both the organization and operation of the Bureau of Forensic Ballistics as well as the science involved in performing firearms identification examinations. The articles also discussed in detail the famous Stielow case that Waite had investigated several years earlier in 1917. As the Post was a very widely circulated publication, read by a great number of people, these two articles were very instrumental in informing the public about both the science of firearm identification as well as the availability of services offered by the Bureau.

In 1928, the first known book on the subject of firearms identification was published by a Mr. Harry Soderman. The book was printed in Lyon, France by Joannes Desvigne & Sons. 

In 1929, Dr. Wilfrid Derome, Professor of Legal Medicine at the University of Montreal, privately published a book titled ‘Expertise en Armes a Feu.’ 

On February 14, 1929, in Chicago, Illinois (USA), an event occurred that greatly furthered the acceptance of firearms identification techniques by authorities in the United States. This event, referred to as the St. Valentine’s Day (an American holiday where one buys candy and flowers for their sweetheart) Massacre, involved the brutal slaying of seven gangsters by a rival gangster group in the City of Chicago. The incredible public outrage over these slayings, and the rumors that police officers were possibly involved, caused local officials to impanel a grand jury (a judicial process) to investigate the killings. The grand jury foreman, Mr. B. A. Massee, promptly engaged the services of Calvin H. Goddard of the Bureau of Forensic Ballistics to examine and report on the firearms related evidence. Goddard’s careful and concise examination of all the firearms related evidence, which included fired bullets, pellets, fired shotgun casings and fired cartridge cases was significant. Goddard was able to state that the killers had used one 12-gauge shotgun and two Thompson submachine guns to commit the killings. He noted that one of the Thompson’s submachine guns was fired using a 50-round drum magazine while the other was fired using a 20-round magazine. Due to the rumors concerning suspected police involvement, all police Thompson submachine guns were submitted for Goddard to rest fire for comparison against the crime scene evidence. He was able to state that none of the police weapons were used and subsequently identified weapons that were obtained during the search of a suspect’s home.

 

1930 - 1970

In 1930, because of Goddard’s excellent work on the Sr. Valentine’s Day Massacre case and the continuing indignation of the public concerning the killings, the foreman of the grand jury requested that he establish a crime detection laboratory to serve the citizens of the Chicago, Illinois (USA) area. The jury foreman, Mr. Massee, who along with other public spirited citizens stated that they would provide the necessary funds to staff and equip the facility as no public funds were available. Goddard accepted the opportunity and became the Director of the Scientific Crime Detection Laboratory (SCDL), which was affiliated with the Northwestern University School of Law near Chicago. Goddard remained Director of the SCDL until leaving in 1934 to form a private firm. Prior to his departure, Goddard provided scientific training, to include the areas of firearms and toolmark identification, to numerous individuals who went on to work in other laboratories around the United States.

In 1932, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) — the premier federal law enforcement organization in the United States — established and organized their laboratory at the direction of then Director J. Edgar Hoover. The laboratory initially started with one person on staff and has subsequently grown in size until today it is the largest forensic laboratory in the United States with a very well deserved reputation within the law enforcement, judicial, and forensic communities. It is of note that the person who staffed the FBI Laboratory had received training from Calvin Goddard at the SCDL.

In 1934, Major Sir Gerald Burrard wrote a book titled “The Identification of Firearms and Forensic Ballistics” which was published in London. England. The book was later published in the United Stares in 1962. In his book, Burrard discusses many of the early cases that occurred throughout the British Empire to include those of another pioneer English firearms examiner (unnamed in the book but known to be Robert Churchill) who Burrard frequently met in court — for the opposite side. Burrard acknowledges that he believes a Colonel H. W. Todhunter, C.M.G., a former Chief Inspector of Small Arms for the British Army, as ‘the pioneer of firearms identification in this country’. He further acknowledges his friendship with Colonel Calvin Goddard and Mr. Arthur Lucas.

In 1935, two books on firearms identification were written and published. One of these books was titled “Textbook of Firearms Investigation, Identification and Evidence” together with the “Textbook of Pistols and Revolvers” and was written by Major (later Major General) Julian S. Hatcher. Major Hatcher was a very experienced US Army ordnance officer who had spent nearly twenty years as a pistol and rifle shooter of some distinction. He had also served in a variety of assignments that involved the design, manufacturing and testing of ammunition and firearms. The book by Hatcher received excellent reviews and was quickly adopted by many firearms examiners throughout the United States. As an aside, a letter, dated October 26, 1934, was sent to Captain Ned Crossman by J. S. Hatcher, thanking him for the fine pictures that he had sent him. These photographs, supplied by Crossman, appeared in Hatcher’s book.

The second book was titled “The Identification of Firearms” and written by Jack D. Gunther and Professor Charles 0. Gunther. Jack Gunther was an attorney and member of the New York State Bar while Charles Gunther was a Professor of Mathematics and a reserve Lieutenant Colonel in the US Army Ordnance Department. Their book provided additional information about the principles of firearms identification with approximately one-half of the book discussing in detail the Sacco-Vanzetti case to include reprinting large portions of the actual court transcript. The Günter’s discussed the need for the science of firearms identification to utilize scientific methodology.

In 1935, an announcement was made concerning the formation of the Missouri Scientific Crime Detection Laboratory to be directed by a Mr. Thomas N. Lewis. The announcement further states that Lewis was for many years the research officer for the Sr. Louis Police Department.

In 1938, the Scientific Crime Detection Laboratory (SCDL), at Northwestern University, was bought by the City of Chicago. The equipment was transferred from the University to the Chicago Police Department and existing laboratory personnel were offered positions in the new laboratory.

In 1940, the Indianapolis Police Department (IPD) established a fully equipped crime laboratory under the direction of a trained scientist. The IPD crime laboratory ceased operation on December 31, 1985 and became part of the Indianapolis-Marion County Forensic Services Agency.

In 1944, John E. Davis joined the Police Department in Oakland, California establishing its first criminology laboratory.

In 1947, the State of Wisconsin established a State Crime Laboratory with Charles M. Wilson as the Superintendent. Wilson had been associated with Goddard at the SCDL at Northwestern and was later Director of the Chicago Police Department Crime Lab.

In 1948, a meeting titled ‘The First American Medicolegal Congress’ was held in St. Louis, Missouri. This meeting, a subsequent meeting later in the same year, and several committee meetings during 1949, was the genesis for the American Academy of Forensic Sciences to be organized and named in 1950. Interestingly, two of the papers presented at the initial meeting concerned firearms identification. One was titled “Firearms Evidence — Fact and Fiction” and presented by George W. Keenan, Department of Public Safety, Rochester, New York. The other paper was titled “The Recovery, Custody, Marking, and Preservation of Physical Evidence and Standards of Comparison Including Firearms Exhibits” and presented by Charles M. Wilson, of the Wisconsin Stare Crime Lab, Madison, Wisconsin. Over a period of several years meeting participants, especially firearms examiner practitioners and those interested in the field, would meet in the evenings and discuss their cases with one another. These informal meetings became the genesis for the Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE) to be organized 21 years after the initial AAFS meeting in 1948. Credit and recognition should be given the 36 original participants individuals who presided at the birth of AFTE.

In 1949, Colonel Calvin H. Goddard became the Commanding Officer of the US Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory – Far East, in Tokyo, Japan. He was instrumental in training examiners within the US Army Laboratory System until his retirement for the US Army.

In 1955, Calvin H. Goddard presented an address before the American Academy of Forensic Sciences meeting in Los Angles, California the tide of his talk was “The Unexpected in Firearms Identification”. Two days after his presentation, Goddard passed away. Many firearms examiners, especially in the United States, are well aware of the significant contributions that Goddard made to the field of firearm and toolmark identification. He is considered by many examiners in the United States to be the ‘father’ of the science.

In 1957, a complete revision of Major General Julian S. Hatcher’s textbook “Firearms Identification, Investigation & Evidence” was published. The revised book was under the direction of Frank J. Jury, New Jersey State Police Crime Laboratory and Jac Weller, a Firearms Consultant from Princeton, New Jersey. The revised book contained substantial new material and updated much of the original material from the original text.

In 1958, John E. Davis (deceased); an eminent criminalist and Director of the Oakland Police Department (CA) Criminalistics Section (Crime Lab) wrote a book titled An Introduction to Tool Marks, Firearms and the Striagraph”. In his book, Davis provided excellent information about the examination and identification of firearms and toolmark evidence. He also discussed, in great length, his development of a specialized instrument that he named the ‘Striagraph’. He described the instrument as follows: “the Striagraph is primarily a measuring, tracing and recording device suited to the analysis of micro surface-contours, that is, to the detection of microscopic irregularities in surface smoothness”. Although the instrument never proved to be successful past the research stage, it was the forerunner of later technology for scanning the surface of a bullet using advanced laser and digital imaging techniques.

In 1961, Frances Russell, a Boston author who was convinced of the innocence of Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti, arranged to have the firearms evidence reexamined. He arranged for the services of two men well known in the firearms community. The two, Frank Jury - formerly a Lieutenant Colonel in charge of the New Jersey State Police Laboratory, and Jac Weller of the West Point Museum in New York, had revised Hatcher’s textbook, which was published in 1957. Reexamination of the evidence included test firing the evidence firearms and comparing the test bullets to the bullet that had killed the payroll guard. The evidence and test bullets were identified as having been fired from the same firearm - that belonging to Sacco.

In 1962, Dr. J. H. Mathews (deceased), who had retired from the University of Wisconsin in 1952, after nearly a 40-year career, published a two-volume set of books titled “Firearms Identification”. These two books were well received and sold well throughout the forensic community as they contained extensive reference materials that had been collected by Dr. Mathews both during the course of his nearly 40 years in the field of firearms identification and his subsequent years in retirement. Volume I contained information concerning the laboratory identification of a firearm, measurements of rifling data on a wide variety of handguns, and a series of appendices which include photographs of the firing pin impressions on rim fire cartridges. Volume II contained several hundred photographs of handguns to assist in their identification, illustrations of other handguns, and photographs of trademarks and other identification marks. Of the hundreds of photographs of firearms that Mathews photographed during his research, many were from his own collection while others were boa owed from various sources such as from weapons reference collections of numerous forensic (crime) laboratories as well as private weapons collections. In 1973, a third volume of the book was published posthumously as Dr. Mathews had passed away in April 1970. The final preparation of the manuscript was carried out by the family of Dr. Mathews’ with the assistance and counsel of Senior Firearms Examiner Alan Wilimovsky, then of the Wisconsin State Crime Laboratory in Madison, (now deceased). Volume III contained additional data on rifling characteristics, notes on less well-known American revolvers and pistols, several hundred original photographs and illustrations of firearms, and other reference material.

In 1962, the Office of the Surgeon General, Department of The United States Army, Washington, DC, published a book titled “Wound Ballistics”. The book, edited by Major James C. Beyer, MC (Medical Corps), contained some 833 pages and is an excellent reference source as it contains an exhaustive study of all types of wounds. Among the chapters, there are discussions on ballistic characteristics of wounding agents, the mechanism of wounding, and wound ballistics and body armor. The book contains a significant amount of tabulated data gleaned from the research into wound ballistics.

In November 1963, the President of the United States, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, was assassinated by being shot to death during a visit to the City of Dallas, Texas. Shortly after the assassination of Kennedy, the suspected assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, is alleged to have shot and killed Officer J. D. Tippit who was attempting to arrest him. Subsequent to Oswald’s arrest, and while being transported to a judicial hearing, he was shot and killed by Jack Ruby in the basement of police headquarters. Analysis of the firearms evidence in these tragic incidents, excepting the evidence of Ruby shooting Oswald, figured prominently in the conclusions of the Warren Commission (a legal commission formed by direction of the United States Congress to investigate the assassination). The FBI Laboratory’s Firearms Unit was responsible for conducting the analysis and examination of the firearms related evidence as assassination of the president is a federal crime. Three senior firearms examiners from the FBI Laboratory; Robert A. Frazier, Cortlandt Cunningham (deceased) and Charles Killion, examined the evidence and provided testimony, along with that of Joseph D. Nicol, (deceased) then Superintendent of the Illinois State Bureau of Criminal Identification before the Warren Commission. At the conclusion of the Warren Commission’s lengthy proceedings, a 26 volume report titled “Report of the Warren Commission on the Assassination of President Kenned/’ was published by the United States Government Printing Office, and made available to interested parties. Although the commission’s report contained a massive amount of data, a number of individuals and groups then, and even today, regard the report as nothing more than a ‘whitewash’ which was intended to cover up what they believe to be a conspiracy to assassinate the president. Since the assassination, several authors have written books espousing various theories about who actually killed Kennedy. Many of the authors of these books have benefited financially from their writings on this subject.

In 1963, the science of firearm and toolmark identification suffered a great loss when Major General Julian S. Hatcher died at his home at age 75. Hatcher was a very prolific writer and well known in the field of firearms identification for both his Textbook of Firearms Identification, Investigation & Evidence (1935) as well as Hatcher’s Notebook (1947).

In April 1968, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., an active civil rights proponent in the United States, was assassinated during a visit to Memphis, Tennessee. King was shot and killed while standing on the second floor of a motel (lodging). Subsequent to the assassination, a high power rifle was found. The FBI’s Latent Print Unit, which, after an exhaustive period of some three months of searching their print card file, was identified to a suspect - James Earl Ray, developed partial latent fingerprints on the rifle. Robert A. Frazier, a senior member of the FBI Laboratory’s Firearms Unit, examined the firearms evidence and a report issued. The report concluded that the recovered evidence cartridge casing “was fired in and extracted from” the evidence rifle but that “it was not possible to determine whether or not this bullet was fired from this rifle”. Ray was arrested some months after the assassination and confessed to having shot Dr. King. Ray was tried in court and sentenced to life in prison. He later recanted his confession and explained that the killing was done by various shadowy factions. As occurred after President Kennedy was assassinated, numerous individuals wrote and spoke extensively on their thoughts as to what they thought had-occurred in Memphis.

In June 1968, Senator Robert Kennedy, the brother of President Kennedy, who while campaigning for the office of President of the United States was shot and killed as he was leaving a Los Angeles hotel. During the assassination of Kennedy, others nearby were wounded by the gunfire. The gunman, Sirhan B. Sirhan, was captured at the scene of the shooting, tried in court, and given a life sentence in prison. Examination of the firearms evidence was performed by Officer DeWayne A. Wolfer (now retired) of the LAPD Crime Laboratory. As occurred after the assassinations of President Kennedy and Doctor King, and the murders of Officer Tippit and suspect Lee Harvey Oswald, a number of individuals, including several ‘experts’ publicly contended that Sirhan had nor acted alone and that a second firearm was involved.

In 1969, in recognition of the potential requirement for an association dealing specifically with the identification of firearms and toolmarks, thirty-five police and civilian specialists from throughout the United States and Canada gathered at the Chicago Police Department Crime Laboratory to discuss formation of an association. Many of these original participants had informally gathered for years during annual meetings of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) and felt the need for an association to address the requirements of firearms and toolmark examiners. The purpose of the conference was described by a statement from the program that read, “This meeting is being held to determine the advisability of forming an organization of Firearms and Tool Mark Examiners. It is hoped that the organization will consider future meetings that could be devoted to the presentation of scientific and technical papers, descriptions of new techniques and procedures, review of instrumentation and the solution of common problems encountered in these scientific fields”. The formation meeting was a success and the participants decided to form an association to be named the Association of Firearm and Tool Mark Examiners (AFTE). The officers elected to lead the association were: President Walter J. Howe, Wilton, CT (now retired); Secretary John C. Stauffer, Chicago Police Department Crime Laboratory, Chicago, IL (now deceased); and Charles M. Wilson, Wisconsin State Crime Laboratory, Madison, WI (now deceased). The first official publication of the association was AFTE Newsletter Number 1; published on May 15, 1969 (the name of the newsletter was subsequently changed to the AFTE Journal in 1972). From the original thirty-five participants, the number of members continued to grow as information concerning the newly created association reached other firearm and toolmark examiners. Specific credit should be given to two individuals who were very instrumental in the formation of AFTE: Burton D. Munhall, H.P. White Laboratory, Maryland (now deceased) and Walter J. Howe, Wilton, CT.  

 

1970 - 2000

In 1970 and each subsequent year to date, the Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE) has hosted an Annual Training Seminar at a location throughout the United States and Canada. The meeting site is based on both having members volunteer to host the meeting as well as the needs of the members of the association as determined by the Board of Directors. One primary purpose of the annual seminars is to provide for the interchange of information as it relates to all aspects of the science of firearms and toolmark identification.

In 1974, the Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE) hosted its 5th Anniversary Annual Training Seminar in Washington, DC. Some 87 individuals, representing three countries, attended the seminar.

In 1975, due to continuing controversy surrounding the killing of Senator Kennedy, a petition by Paul Schrade (one of the shooting victims) and CBS, Inc., (a nation-wide television broadcaster) was made to the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, requesting that the firearms evidence be reexamined. The court granted the petition and ordered that a panel be formed to conduct the reexamination. The American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) and the Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE) were contacted and requested to submit names of firearms examiners to the Attorney General (senior law enforcement official) of the State of California. All interested parties were allowed to participate in the selection of members for the panel and the then Presiding Judge ordered that the following members serve on the panel. The seven-member panel included the following individuals:

• Cortlandt Cunningham, FBI Laboratory Firearms Unit — Washington, DC (deceased);

• Stanton 0. Berg, Independent Firearms Examiner — Minneapolis, MN (retired);

• Alfred A. Biasotti, California DOJ Crime Laboratory — Sacramento (deceased);

• Lowell W. Bradford, Santa Clara County Crime Laboratory - San Jose, CA (now retired);   Professor Ralph Turner, Michigan State University - Lansing, MI (deceased);

• Charles V. Morton, Private Crime Laboratory - Oakland, CA (now retired);

• Patrick V. Garland, Commonwealth of Virginia Crime Laboratory — Norfolk, VA (now retired).

After a thorough examination of the firearms evidence by each panel member individually, the members collectively reported to the court that their examination of the evidence revealed that ‘there is not evidence to indicate that more than one gun was used to fire the items examined”.

In late 1977, and during a major portion of 1978, a distinguished panel of firearms experts reexamined firearms related evidence pertaining to the following previous investigations:

1. The assassination of President John F. Kennedy,

2. The murder of Police Officer J. D. Tippit,

3. The murder of Lee Harvey Oswald, and

4. The assassination of Doctor Martin Luther King, Jr.

The reexaminations of the firearms related evidence was due to increasing public pressure for additional answers into the events cited. In response to public demands, the United States House of Representatives assembled the Select Committee on Assassinations to conduct analysis of the firearms related evidence. After their reexamination of the evidence, the panel presented testimony before the Select Committee investigating the assassinations of President Kennedy and Doctor King, and the murders of Officer Tippit and Mr. Oswald. The panel consisted of several distinguished members of the Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE) which included

• Monty C. Lutz, Wisconsin State Crime Laboratory — Milwaukee;

• Donald E. Champagne, Florida State Crime Laboratory —Tallahassee (deceased);

• John S. Bates, New York State Police Laboratory — Albany (now retired);

• Andy M. Newquist, Iowa State Crime Laboratory — Des Moines (now retired);

• Russell M. Wilhelm, Maryland State Police Laboratory —Pikesville (deceased);

• George R. Wilson, Metropolitan DC Police Department Firearms Unit (now retired).

The panel members (except Wilhelm) testified before the Select Committee in September 1978 concerning their examination of the Kennedy, Tippit and Oswald evidence. Their written and verbal testimony essentially verified the findings of the original firearms examiners. The entire panel, including Wilhelm, testified before the Select Committee in November 1978 concerning their examination of the King evidence. Again, their testimony essentially verified the findings of the original firearm examiners.

In 1979, the Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE) hosted its 10”’ Anniversary Annual Training Seminar in Milwaukee, WI. 149 individuals, representing seven countries, attended the annual training seminar.

In the fall of 1980, after a two-year pilot project with 44 forensic laboratories participating, the FBI started providing to the entire forensic community the General Rifling Characteristic (GRC) file via the National Criminal Information Center (NCIC). The GRC file, at the time of inception, provided over 18,000 rifling characteristic measurements. The measurements — number of lands and grooves, direction of twist, and measurement of land impressions — were provided by the FBI Laboratory and those laboratories that provided test fired components for entry into the system. One of the authors knows a firearms examiner who has provided in excess of 200 samples, from various recovered firearms, for entry into the GRC file. The GRC file has been found to be a very useful tool in the majority of crime laboratories.

In 1980, AFTE published the AFTE Glossary. The glossary consisted of 219 pages of definitions and illustrations related to the field of firearm and tool-mark identification, commonly used abbreviations, various formulas for determining bullet energy and rate of spin, and useful chemical formulas. The glossary was the product of the five members AFTE Standardization Committee, assisted by at least 57 other individuals. Subsequent to publication of the glossary in 1980, a second more comprehensive edition was published in 1982. A third edition of the glossary was published in 1994. This edition featured material from the first two editions with additional definitions and illustrations; new appendices which included definitions for computer terminology, fingernails examination (a toolmark in a biological matrix), knives, machining terms, gunshot wound terminology, and shooting scene reconstruction terminology.

In 1982, AFTE published an official training manual to be used as a modular guide for the training of firearm and toolmark examiners. It was the intention of the AFTE Training Committee to develop and provide a modular education program that could then be tailored to meet the needs of individuals and their agencies. The training committee, consisting of six experienced examiners, and aided by numerous other members of the association, produced a 400 -page manual that has provided an excellent source of material for assisting in training numerous firearm and toolmark examiners.

In 1983, another reexamination of the Sacco-Vanzetti firearms evidence occurred. In the latest reexamination, a distinguished panel of 4 individuals was assembled to examine the evidence. The panel consisted of:

• Dr. Henry C. Lee, Lab Director, CT State Police Lab, Meriden, CT (retired)  

• Anthony L. Paul, Firearms Examiner, Philadelphia PD Firearms Lab, Philadelphia, PA (retired)

• Marshall K. Robinson, Firearms Examiner, CT State Police Lab, Meriden, CT (retired) 

• George R. Wilson, Firearms Examiner, Washington DC Police Lab, Washington, DC (retired)

Except for Dr. Lee, the other panel members are all distinguished members of the Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE). Reexamination of the evidence, and the subsequent report, was undertaken at the request of Westinghouse Broadcast and Cable, Inc. (a television company located in Boston, Massachusetts). The committee’s report validated the original firearms identification examinations of some 62 years earlier.

In 1984, the Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE) hosted its 15th Anniversary Annual Training Seminar in Metairie, Louisiana. Some 126 individuals, representing seven countries, attended the seminar.

In 1986, the FBI’s Forensic Science Research & Training Center (FSRTC), at Quantico, VA (the FSRTC is part of the FBI Laboratory Division) announced the creation of a training course for firearms examiners. The course, titled “Specialized Techniques in Firearms Identification”, was designed for court-qualified examiners and covers a variety of subject matter designed to enhance the level of proficiency for examiners.

In 1989, the Association of Firearm and Tool-mark Examiners (AFTE) hosted its 2Oth Anniversary Annual Training Seminar in Virginia Beach, VA. Some 210 individuals, representing 12 countries, attended the seminar.

In late 1989, in the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, the FBI Laboratory Division announced the implementation of a new program — DRUGFIRE. The FBI’s DRUGFIRE was an electronic database and computer network that was designed to digitally image fired bullets and cartridge casings for collation within both the laboratory and those laboratories that also have the equipment. The DRUGFIRE System was replaced in forensic laboratories by the IBIS System circa 2000. 

In 1990, the International Wound Ballistics Association (IWBA) was organized in California (USA). The formation documents stated the following “It (IWBA) is comprised of scientists, physicians, criminalist, law enforcement members, engineers, researchers, and others engaged or interested in the study of wound ballistics”. Many AFTE members belong to 1WBA and the official publication of the association — ‘Wound Ballistics Review’ — allows for the timely dissemination of a wide variety of wound ballistics information. The IWBA, after several years of operation, ceased to exist.

In 1992, the Integrated Ballistics Identification System (IBIS) was introduced as another method of utilizing digital imaging and computer programming to allow firearms examiners to ‘capture’ images from fired bullets and cartridge cases for comparison with other images.

In 1993, the United States Supreme Court changed a legal standard for those that provide scientific testimony (including expert testimony for firearms and toolmark identification) in US Federal Courts as well as some state courts. The new standard, referred to in the United States as the ‘Daubert’ ruling, required trial judges to be the ‘gatekeepers’ of expert evidence. The ‘Daubert’ court set four criteria (nor all-inclusive) which must evaluate scientific testimony before it can be admitted. The criteria are 1- testability of scientific principal, 2 -known or potential error rate, 3 - peer review and publication, and 4 - general acceptance in a particular scientific community. This ruling has generated an appreciable amount of discussion within the firearms examiner community, as it essentially requires that examiners be able to explain how they reached their conclusions. One method of meeting elements of the criteria is to conduct scientific research and then publish the findings in a peer-reviewed journal such as the AFTE Journal. Subsequent to this ruling, there has been a significant amount of research conducted and reported on in the AFTE Journal.  

In 1994, the Association of Firearm and Tool-mark Examiners (AFTE) hosted its 25th Anniversary Annual Training Seminar in Indianapolis, Indiana. Some 300 individuals, representing 21 countries, attended the seminar.

In 1994, the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), Washington, DC, released a study titled “Benchmark Evaluation Studies of the Bulletproof and Drugfire Ballistic imaging Systems”. The study consisted of a technical evaluation by various individuals, including members of AFTE, and included recommendations for various actions as outlined by the contractor performing the study for ONDCP.

In 1996, the National Institute of Standards (NIST), Gaithersburg, Maryland, was directed to provide technical assistance to assist with ‘ballistic imaging interoperability’ between the Drugfire and IBIS technologies.

In 1996, Tom A. Warlow published a text on firearms identification titled “Firearms, the Law and Forensic Ballistics”. Warlow, a senior firearms examiner, then assigned to the Forensic Science Service (FSS) Laboratory in Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire, England, is now located at the FSS Laboratory in London, England. (This laboratory was previously the Metropolitan Police Laboratory of the New Scotland Yard until absorbed by the Forensic Science Services in 1997. This was an effort by the government to curtail costs). Warlow has written a useful text that contains excellent information for firearm and toolmark examiners.

In 1997, Brian J. Heard published a text on firearms identification titled “Handbook of Firearms and Ballistics — Examining and Interpreting Forensic Evidence”. Heard, then a senior firearms examiner is Officer in Charge of the Forensic Firearms Identification Bureau (FFIB) for the Hong Kong Police Force. (The current name is now the Hong Kong Police Force as in June 1997, Hong Kong was handed over by the British Government to the People’s Republic of China where it is now a Special Administrative Region (SAR) of China). Heard has written a useful text that also contains excellent information for firearm and toolmark examiners.

In 1997, the assassination of Dr. King again entered the news. Attorneys working to exonerate James Earl Ray (now deceased), petitioned the court to reopen the case. They claimed that ‘new ground-breaking technology’ now exists which was not available during previous examinations in 1968 and 1977. As stated previously in this article, previous examinations were conducted in 1968 by firearms examiners of the FBI Laboratory Firearms Unit and in 1977 by a panel of firearms examiners who testified before the Select Committee of the House of Representatives. Ray’s attorneys touted the ‘new’ technology —Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) and fiber optic lighting — as nor being available to the previous examiners. A search of literature reveals the use of SEM in firearms identification research prior to 1972 while a list of equipment used by the King panel members in 1977 lists fiber optics lighting as being part of one of the comparison microscopes used for the reexamination. The petition to reopen the case was denied.

In 1998, in the AFTE Journal (Volume 30, Number 1), and subsequent to that time, numerous articles have been published that were the result of some excellent research concerning both criteria for identification studies and striae reproducibility on a firearms barrel. These research articles and several that concern meeting the Daubert challenge (a judicial notice for many of the forensic sciences in the United States) are part of an ongoing process by members of AFTE to articulate the science behind their field of firearm and toolmark identification.

In 1998, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) established the Scientific Working Group for Firearms and Toolmarks (SWGGUN). The purpose of SWGGUN is to develop a series of consensus guidelines for the firearm and toolmark discipline and to disseminate SWGGUN guidelines, studies, and other findings that may be of benefit to the forensic community. The SWGGUN consists of some 21 members with experience and knowledge in the discipline.

In 1999, in late March and early April, several members of the Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE) participated as members of the ‘Angoff Committee. This committee was formed to provide validation of the testing methodology to be used as part of an ongoing certification study process. The ultimate goal of the Association was to offer a certification program to qualified AFTE members. The purpose in presenting the program was two fold:  

1. To act toward the public benefit by attesting that successful applicants meet certain standards as defined by members of AFTE, and

2. To promote professionalism among firearm and toolmark examiners by establishing certification as a level of accomplishment.

Certification examinations were developed to offer the following tests for certification:

• Firearm Evidence Examination and Identification;

• Toolmark Evidence Examination and Identification; and

• Gunshot Residue Evidence Examination and Identification.

In 1999, the Association of Firearms and Tool-marks Examiners (AFTE) celebrated its 30th Anniversary as an association. AFTE conducted the Annual Training Seminar, which was held being held in Williamsburg, Virginia. The current membership of AFTE numbers approximately 850 members, technical advisors and subscribers that represent over 40 countries from around the world.

In 1999, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) was signed. The MOU outlined the necessary steps to deploy computer ballistics imaging equipment throughout the United States with ATF assuming overall responsibility for all current and future systems while the FBI will establish and maintain high-speed, secure communications networks. It was announced that DRUGFIRE would be phased out and that Forensic Technology’s Integrated Ballistic Identification System (IBIS) deployed US-wide.

In 1999, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) announced the formation of the ‘ATF National Firearm Examiner Academy’ (NFEA) for the purpose of providing training for apprentice/entry level firearm and toolmark examiners from Federal, State and local law enforcement agencies. The NFEA Academy was developed in conjunction with the Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE). 

 

2000 – Present

Since the ‘Daubert’ legal ruling by the US Supreme Court in 1993 – and especially from 2000 until the present - there have been numerous legal challenges to all of the impressions forensic sciences that   include:

• firearm and toolmark identification,

• questioned documents examination and

• latent print identification.

These challenges are due in part to the ‘Daubert’ ruling as well as the expectation, by some individuals, that all forensic science should be like DNA Analysis. In a few instances, the courts have ruled that the firearms examiner could provide their testimony but not provide an ‘opinion’. This was due, in part, to a lack of suitable foundation on the part of the prosecutor or of the examiner not being fully prepared for the line of questioning. In other courts, the courts have ruled favorably on the admissibility of firearms related evidence.  

As previously mentioned, in 1998, in the AFTE Journal (Volume 30, Number 1), and subsequent to that time (Volume 39, Number 1), numerous articles have been published that were the result of some excellent research concerning criteria for identification studies and striae reproducibility on fired bullets, cartridge casings, and other materials. These research articles are part of an ongoing process by members of AFTE to fully articulate their science of firearm and toolmark identification. It should be noted that during the past 10 years, numerous research articles have been published both in the AFTE Journals as well as other peer-reviewed forensic journals.

In addition to the certification tests that are available to individual members of AFTE, forensic laboratories have the opportunity to request that their laboratory become accredited. Accreditation is a process that evaluates the entire process used by a laboratory to manage and achieve the technical results necessary for good laboratory operations. Part of the accreditation process requires that all examiners participate in approved external proficiency tests. Firearm and toolmark examiners have the opportunity to participate in a firearm and/or toolmark proficiency test offered by Collaborative Testing Services, Inc., Sterling, Virginia.

In 2001, Forensic Technology, Incorporated (FTI) of Montreal, Canada initiated the Calvin H. Goddard Award to honor “an individual or group that has demonstrated excellence in the area of firearms identification through sustained superior performance, exemplary handling of a case, the implementation of best practices or in some other outstanding of unique contribution to the field of firearms identification.” Goddard is considered by most firearms examiners to be the ‘father’ of the science of firearms identification – especially in the United States. The Calvin Goddard Award has been awarded since 2001 to a very qualified firearms examiner and presented at the AFTE Annual Training Seminar.

In 2004, the Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE) celebrated their 35^th Anniversary by holding their Annual Training Seminar in Vancouver, Canada.

In May 2005, the ISO/IEC 17025:2005 document was published. This new document requires that all forensic laboratories currently accredited under the old ISO 17025 standards conform to the new standard by June 2007. Two companies offer accreditation services for forensic laboratories. They are:

• ASCLD/LAB

• FQS – I

In 2005, Forensic Technology Incorporated (FTI) announced the deployment of their BulletTRAX-3D™ bullet imaging system. In 2006, they announced deployment of their BrassTRAX-3D™ cartridge case imaging system. Both BulletTRAX-3D™ and BrassTRAX-3D™ (IBIS-TRAX 3D™) use confocal microscopy to create a 3D image of the fired bullets and cartridge casings for analysis. The goal of the company is to replace the current IBIS Heritage which currently records the acquired data in 2D. The new systems can be integrated with the existing IBIS systems until the older systems are replaced. FTI currently has ballistics imaging equipment in some 35+ countries around the world. Intercomparison of fired components has been reported between states in the United States as well as between countries in Europe.       

In 2006, a number of examiners have taken (and passed) the three certification examinations. The number of currently certified examiners is 61 for the firearms test; 26 for the toolmark test and 24 for the GSR/Distance Determination tests. In some instances, some examiners have taken all three tests. The written portions of the three tests are offered at the AFTE Annual Training Seminar while other arrangements are made to take the practical portion of the examination.

In 2007, the SWGGUN – established in 1998 and currently consisting of members from Federal, State, Local and Private Laboratories in three countries – created an Admissibility Resources Kit (ARK) for use by firearms examiners, and others, within the forensic community.   

In 2007, the ATF National Firearm Examiner Academy (NFEA) has graduated a total of 74 graduates from the Academy. The majorities of the graduates have returned to their assigned laboratories and continue to work in the field of firearm & toolmark identification. These individuals, as part of their NFEA requirements, have completed numerous excellent research projects in the field of firearm and toolmark identification and the results either presented at professional meetings and/or published in professional journals, primarily the AFTE Journal. Currently 12 students are attending the academy and scheduled to graduate in early 2008.

The field of firearm and toolmark identification continues to evolve in a very positive manner. Several examiners have taken the recently offered AFTE sponsored certification examinations and others are contemplating taking the examinations. Numerous laboratories – especially in the United States – have become accredited (or reaccredited) under the ISO 17025 standards. Research is being conducted and the results shared throughout the forensic community. Examiners are continuing to learn how to properly articulate the results of their laboratory examinations before the various legal proceedings. As we continue into this century, scientific advances will continue within the field of firearm and toolmark identification.

 

References

AFTE Criteria for Identification Committee. “Theory of Identification, Range Striae Comparison Reports and Modified Glossary Definitions – AFTE Criteria for Identification Committee Report.’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 24, No. 2, April 1992.

AFTE Newsletters (Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE)), Newsletter (Numbers 1 through 20) published from early 1969 until mid-1972.

AFTE Journal (Association of Firearm and Tool-mark Examiners (AFTE)), Journal (Volume 4, Number 3, through Volume 38, Number 4, Winter 2006), published from August 1972 through present.

AFTE Glossary (Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE)), 1^st Edition published in 1980, 2^nd Edition published in 1985, 3^rd Edition published in 1994, 4^th Edition published (in CD format) in 2001

AFTE Training Manual (Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE)), 1st Edition published in 1982, 2nd Edition on-line at www.afte.org.

AFTE, ‘Theory of Identification as it Relates to Toolmarks,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 30, No. 1, Winter 1998.

Anonymous. ‘Inostranzeff’s Comparison Chamber for the Microscopical Study of Opaque Minerals and other Objects’, Journal of the Royal Microscopical Society, (1886).

Anonymous, ‘Criteria of Firearms Identification’, The Technician, Ed. John Davis, Vol. 1, No. 5, September 1943.

Arther, R., ‘The Scientific Investigator’, Charles C. Thomas — Publisher, Springfield, Illinois, 1970.

Balthazard, V., ‘Du l’identification par les empreintes digitales,’ Compté. Rend. 152, (1911)

Balthazard, V., ‘Identification des douilles de pistolets automatiques,’ Archives d’Anthropologie Criminelle 28, (1913).

Balthazard, V. ‘Identification de projectiles d’armes a feu,’ Archives d’Anthropologie Criminelle 28, (1913).

Balthazard, V. ‘Identification de projectiles,’ Perfectionnement de la technique. Annales de Médicine légale 2, (1922).

Belveal, D., ‘Firearms Identification – Based on Bullet Comparisons: Expertise or Guess-Work?’ Forum, March/April 1977.

Berg, S., ‘The History of Firearms Identification’, Identification News, Vol. 15, No. 6, June 1965.

Berg, S., ‘The Drama of Forensic Ballistics,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 11, No. 3, July 1979. 

Biasotti, A., ‘A Statistical Study of the Individual Characteristics of Fired Bullets,’ Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 4, No. 1, January 1959.

Biasotti, A., ‘The Principles of Evidence Evaluation as Applied to Firearms and Tool Mark Identification,’ Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 9, No. 4, October 1964.

Biasotti, A., ‘Bullet Bearing Surface Composition and Rifling (Bore) Conditions as Variables in the Reproduction of Individual Characteristics on Fired Bullets,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 13, No. 2, April 1981.

Biasotti, A., ‘Rifling Methods – A Review and Assessment of the Individual Characteristics Produced,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 13, No. 3, July 1981.

Biasotti, A. and Murdock, J., ‘Criteria for Identification’ or ‘State of the Art’ of Firearm and Toolmark Identification’, AFTE Journal, Vol. 16, No. 4, October 1984.

Biasotti, A. and Murdock, J., ‘Chapter 23, Section, 23-2.0, Modern Scientific Evidence: The Law and Science of Expert Testimony,’ Published 1997, Revised 2002.

Bohan, T., and Heels, E., ‘The Case Against Daubert: The New Scientific ‘Standard’ and the Standards of the Several States,’ Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 40, No. 6, November 1995.

Brackett, J., ‘A Study of Idealized Striated Marks and their Comparisons Using Models,’ Journal of Forensic Science Society, Vol. 10, No. 1, January 1970.

Bradford, L., ‘Forensic Firearms Identification: Competence or Incompetence’, AFTE Journal, Vol. 11, No. 1, April 1979.

Brent, W., ‘Proved Guilty by Ballistics – Hadley v. Arizona,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 5, No. 6, December 1973. 

Brown, C. and Bryant, W., ‘Consecutively Rifled Gun Barrels Present in Most Crime Labs,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 27, No. 3, July 1995.

Brundage, D., ‘The Identification of Consecutively Rifled Gun Barrels,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 30, No. 3, Summer 1998.

Buckleton, J., Nichols, R., Triggs, C. and Wevers, G., ‘An Exploratory Bayesian Model for Firearm and Toolmark Interpretation,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 37, No. 4, Fall 2005.

Bunch, S., ‘Consecutive Matching Striation Criteria: A General Critique,’ Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 45, No. 5, September-October 2000. 

Bunch, S. and Murphy, D., ‘A Comprehensive Validity Study for the Forensic Examination of Cartridge Cases,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 35, No. 2, Spring 2003.

Burd, D. and Gilmore, A., ‘Individual and Class Characteristics of Tools,’ Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 13, No. 3, July 1968.

Burd, D. and Kirk, P., ‘Toolmark Factors Involved in Their Comparison and Use as Evidence,’ Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 32-36, 1942     

Burrard, G., ‘The Identification of Fire-Arms in Murder Cases,’ Game and Gun, Vol. 10, No. 92, May 1933.

Burrard, G., ‘The Identification of Firearms and Forensic Ballistics’ A. S. Barnes and Co., New York, New York, 1st Am Ed, 1962.

Butcher, S. and Pugh, D., ‘A Study of Marks Made by Bolt Cutters,’ Journal of Forensic Science Society, Vol. 15, No. 2, April 1975.

Butters, J., ‘Forensic Engineering Preparation for Daubert / Kumho  Challenges,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 38, No. 1, Winter 2006 (This article originally appeared in the Journal of the National Academy of Forensic Engineers (NAFE))

Buxton, J., ‘The Science of Ballistics: Judicial Applications,’ Law Notes, Vol. 34, May 1930.

Cassidy, H., ‘Ballistics Forensically Applied,’ Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Vol. 20, November 1929.

Churchill, R. ‘The Forensic Examination of Firearms and Projectiles,’ The Police Journal (London), Vol. 2, July 1929.

Churchman, J., ‘The Reproduction of Characteristics in Signatures of Cooey Rifles,’ R.C.M.P. Gazette, Vol. 11, No. 5, May 1949.

Clow, C., ‘Cartilage Stabbing with Consecutively Manufactured Knifes: A Response to Ramirez v. State of Florida,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 37, No. 2, Spring 2003.

Coates, Colonel J., Editor in Chief, ‘Wound Ballistics’, Office of the Surgeon General, Department of the Army, Washington, DC, 1962.

Coffman, B., ‘Computer Numerical Control (CNC) Production Tooling and Repeatable Characteristics on 10 Remington Model 870 Production Run Breech Bolts,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 35, No. 1, Winter 2003.

Collins, J., ‘The Language of Toolmarks,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 30, No. 1, Winter 1998.

Collins, J., ‘Scientific Reliability –Publication, Peer Review, and the AFTE Journal,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 32, No. 2, Spring 2000

Collins, R., ‘How “Unique” are Impressed Toolmarks? – An Empirical Study of 20 Worn Hammer Faces,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 37, No. 4, Fall 2005 (With addendum by Rocky S. Stone)

Commonwealth v. Best, 180 Mass. 492, 62 N.E. 748 (1902)

Commonwealth of Mississippi v. Jason Meeks and Michael Warner (Criminal action #2002-10961 and #2003-10575, dated September 2006)

Crossman, E., ‘The Book of the Springfield’, Small-Arms Publishing Company, Marines, North Carolina, 1932.

Crossman, E. ‘Qualifications of a Ballistics Expert,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 17, No. 3, July 1985. 

Davis, J., ‘The Striagraph: A New Police Science Instrument,’ Police, November – December 1956.

Davis, J., ‘An Introduction to Toolmarks, Firearms and the Striagraph’, Charles C. Thomas —Publisher, Springfield, Illinois, 1958.

Deming, R., ‘The Police Lab at Work’, The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc., New York, New York, 1967.

Dilworth, D.C. (Editor), ‘Silent Witness — The Emergence of Scientific Criminal Investigations’,

International Association of Chiefs of Police, Gaithersburg, Maryland, 1977.

Denio, D., ‘DRUGFIRE,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 31, NO. 3, Summer 1999.

Denio, D., ‘The History of the AFTE Journal, the Peer Review Process, and Daubert Issues,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 34, No. 2, Spring 2002.

DeFrance, C. and Van Arsdale, M., ‘Validation Study of Electrochemical Rifling,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 35, No. 1, Winter 2003.

De Rechter, G. And Mage, J., ‘Considérations sur une méthode d’identification des objets – son application a un case particulier,’ Revue de Droit Pénal et de Criminologie, (1927).

De Rechter, G. And Mage, J., ‘L’identification  des douilles et des projectiles tires,’ ((Ville Congres de Médicine légale de langue française),  Annales de Médicine légale 3, (1923)

De Rechter, G. And Mage, J., ‘L’identification  des douilles et des projectiles tires,’ Revue de Droit Pénal et de Criminologie, (1925).

Derome, W., ‘Expertise en Armes a Feu,’ Privately printed book (1929)

De Smedt, M., ‘Contribution to a Bibliography of Legal Medicine and Criminology,’ Acta Medicinae Legalis et Socialis 7, (1934).

Dillon, J. and Sibert, R., ‘The FBI Laboratory’s DRUGFIRE Program,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 22, No. 2, April 1990.

Di Maio, D. and Di Maio, V., ‘Forensic Pathology,’ CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1993.V

Dolleing, B., ‘Comparison of 4000 Consecutively Fired Steel-Jacketed Bullets,’ Presented at the 53^rd Annual AAFS Seminar, Seattle, WA, February 2001.

Dougherty, P., ‘Report on Two Early United States Firearms Identification Cases,’ Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 14, No. 4, October 1969.

Dutton, G., ‘Commentary: Ethics in Forensic Firearms Investigation,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 37, No. 2, Spring 2005.

Else, W., ‘The Detection of Crime,’ The Police Journal (London), 1934.

Ernest, R., ‘Toolmarks in Cartilage Revisited,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 23, No. 4, October 1991.

Ethridge, M., ‘ATF National Firearm Examiner Academy,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 31, No. 3, Summer 1999.

Evans v. Commonwealth, 230 Kentucky 411 (1929)

Ewins, F., ‘Ballistics and the Police,’ Hong Kong Police Magazine,’ Vol. 1, No. 1, September 1951.

Federal Rules of Evidence, Article VII, Opinions and Expert Testimony, Rules 702 – 705, January 2002.

Freeman, R., ‘Consecutively Rifled Polygon Barrels,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 10, No. 2, June 1978.

Galan, J., ‘Identification of a Knife Wound in Bone,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 18, No. 4, October 1986.

Garcia, C., ‘Are ‘Knife-Prints’ Reliable Evidence: An Analysis of Toolmark Evidence and Ramirez v. State,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 25, No. 4, October 1993.

Garland, P., ‘Reexamination of Firearms Evidence in the Robert F. Kennedy Assassination,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 8, No. 3, July 1976.

Garrison, D., ‘Guns of Brownsville,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 18, No. 4, October 1986. 

Garrison, D., ‘The Gunsmith and the Soldier (Churchill v. Burrard),’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 19, No. 2, April 1987.

Gaute, J., and Odell, R., ‘The New Murderers’ Who’s Who’. Headline Book Publishing PLC, London, UK, 1989.

Georgiades, ‘Une nouvelle méthode pour déterminer l’identité des projectiles,’ Annales de Médicine légale 2, (1922).

Gertner, N., ‘US v. Green – Memorandum and Order RE: Motion to Exclude Ballistics Testimony,’ US District Court for District of Massachusetts, December 2005.

Goddard, C., ‘A History of Firearms Identification to 1930’, AFTE Journal, Vol. 25, No. 3, July 1993.

Goddard, C., ‘A History of Firearms Identification,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 21, No. 2, April 1989. (This article originally in the Chicago Police Journal, 1936)

Goddard, C., ‘The White Laboratory,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 19, No. 3, July 1987.

Goddard, C., ‘Scientific Identification of Firearms and Bullets,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 11, No. 4, October 1979. (This article originally appeared in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Vol. 17, 1926)

Goddard, C., ‘The Identification of Projectiles in Criminal Cases’. Military Surgeon, Vol. 88, No. 12, February 1926.

Goddard, C., ‘Bullets as Evidence in Shooting Cases: Important Considerations Relative to their Removal and Preservation’, New York State Journal of Medicine, August 1926

Goddard. C., ‘Who Did the Shooting?’ Popular Science Monthly, November 1927.

Goddard, C., Forensic Ballistics,’ Medical Times, July 1929

Goddard, C., ‘Forensic Ballistics – Popular Style,’ American Rifleman, Volume 77, July 1929.

Goddard, C., ‘The Bullet and the Microscope,’ The Rifleman (London), November 1929.

Goddard, C., ‘Criminal Investigation Laboratory as an Aid to Law Enforcement in the Far East,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 17, No. 3, July 1985.

Goddard, C., ‘The Valentine’s Day Massacre: A Study in Ammunition Tracing,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 12, No. 1, January 19880 (This article originally appeared in the American Journal of Police Science, January-February 1930).

Goddard, C., ‘Scientific Crime Detection Laboratories in Europe,’ American Journal of Police Science, Vol. 1, No. 1, (1930).

Goddard, C., ‘Forensic Ballistics,’ Army Ordinance, Vol. 6, November-December (1925).

Goddard, C., ‘Firearms as Evidence,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 12, No. 4, October 1980, (This article originally appeared in the American Journal of Police Science, Volume II, No. 1, January – February 1931)

Gorman, S., ‘How Bullets and Firearms are matched for Identification’. Scientific Criminology - (Reprinted from 1930 issue of Scientific American).

Gorman, S., ‘Scientific Criminology – The Pistol Witness,’ Scientific American, December 1930.

Griffin, J., and LaMagna, D., ‘Daubert Challenges to Forensic Evidence: Ballistics Next on the Firing Line,’ Champion, September-October 2002.

Grove, C., Judd, G., and Horn, R., ‘Examination of Firing Pin Impressions by Scanning Electron Microscopy,’ Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 17, No. 4, October 1972.

Grove, C., Judd, G., and Horn, R., ‘Examination of SEM Potential in the Examination of Shotgun and Rifle Firing Pin Impressions,’ Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 19, No. 3, July 1973.

Grzybowski, R., Miller, J., Moran, B., Murdock, J., Nichols, R., and Thompson, R., ‘Firearm / Toolmark Identification: Passing the Reliability test under Federal and State Evidentiary Standards’, AFTE Journal, Vol. 35, No. 2, Spring 2003.

Grzybowski, R., and Murdock, J., ‘Firearms and Toolmark Identification – Meeting the Daubert Challenge,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 30, No.1, Winter 1998.

Gunther, C., ‘Markings on Bullets and Shell Fired from Small Arms’, Mechanical Engineering, No. 52, 1930.

Gunther, C., ‘Markings on Bullets and Shell Fired from Small Arms’, Mechanical Engineering, No. 53, 1932.

Gunther, C., ‘Principles of Firearms Identification – Fingerprinting Ordnance in the War on Crime,’ Army Ordnance 12 (1932).

Gunther, G., ‘Principles of Firearms Identification - Further Analysis of Accidental Characteristics,’ Army Ordnance 13 (1932)

Gunther, J., & Gunther, C., ‘The Identification of Firearms’, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., London, 1935.

Haag, L., ‘The Forensic Uses of the Oehler Model 43 Personal Ballistics Laboratory System,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 34, No. 1, Winter 2002.

Haag, M. and Haag, L., ‘Trace Bullet Metal Testing for Copper and Lead at Suspected Projectile Impacts,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 38, No. 4, Fall 2006.

Hall, A., ‘The Missile and the Weapon,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 12, No. 4, October 1980. (This article was originally published in the Buffalo Medical Journal, June 1900)

Hall, E., ‘Bullet Markings from Consecutively Rifled Shilen DGA Barrels,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 15, No. 1, January 1983.

Hall, J., ‘Consecutive Cuts by Bolt Cutters and Their Effect on Identification,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 24, No. 3, July 1992.

Hamby, J., ‘Identification of Projectiles,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 6, No. 5/6, October & December 1974.

Hamby, J. and Thorpe, J., ‘The History of Firearm and Toolmark Identification’, AFTE Journal, Vol. 31, No. 3, Summer 1999. 

Hamby, J. and Thorpe, J., ‘A Historical Perspective of Firearms Reference Collections: Their Size, Composition and Uses,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 31, No. 3, Summer 1999.

Hamby, J., Thorpe, J. and Brundage, J., ‘The Identification of Bullets Fired from 10 Consecutively Rifled Pistol Barrels: A Research Project Involving Forensic Laboratories from 17Countries,’ AFTE Journal (In Press)  

Hastings, M., ‘The Other Mr. Churchill — A Lifetime of Shooting and Murder’, Dodd, Mead & Company, New York, 1963.

Hatcher, J., ‘The Identification of Firearms,’ Army Ordnance, Vol. 14, July – August 1933.

Hatcher, J., ‘Textbook of Firearms Investigation, Identification and Evidence’, Small-Arms Technical Publishing Co. 1935.

Hatcher, J., ‘Hatcher’s Notebook,’ Military Service Publishing Company, Harrisburg, PA, 1947.

Hatcher, J., Jury, F., & Weller, J., ‘Firearms Investigation, Identification and Evidence’, The Stackpole Company, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, 1957.

Heard, B., ‘Handbook of Firearms and Ballistics - Examining and Interpreting Forensic Evidence’, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., West Sussex, UK, 1997.

Herrich, R., ‘Ballistics Jurisprudence,’ Arms and the Man, May 1923.

Hodge, E., ‘Guarding Against Error’, AFTE Journal, Vol. 20, No. 3, July 1988.

Hodge, E., Blackburn, B. ‘The Firearms / Toolmark Examiner in Court’, AFTE Journal, Vol. 21, No. 2, April 1989.

Howe, W., ‘Firearms Identification’, AFTE Journal, Vol. 31, No. 3, Summer 1999 (This article originally appeared in the January 1963 issue of the American Rifleman and was an interview conducted by Walter J. Howe (AFTE’s first president – then Editor of the American Rifleman) of Dr. J. Howard Mathews from the University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI).

Inbau, F., ‘Scientific Evidence in Criminal Cases: Firearms Identification – Ballistics,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 13, No. 2, April 1981, (This article originally appeared in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 1933)

Inostranzeff, A., ‘Uber eine Vergleichungskammer zur mikroskopischen Untersuchung undurchsichtiger Mineralier’, Neus Jahrbuch fur Mineralogie, Geologie, und Palaeontologie, Band II (1885).

Katterwe, H., Goebel, R., and Gross, K., ‘The Comparison Scanning Electron Microscope within the Field of Forensic Science,’ Scanning Electron Microscopy/1982.

Katterwe, H., ‘Science of Fracture Matching and Validation Studies,’ Presented at the AFTE Training Seminar, Vancouver, Canada, May 2004.

Katterwe, H., ‘Fracture Matching and Repetitive Experiments: A Contribution of Validation,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 37, No. 3, Summer 2005.

Kelly, G., ‘The Gun in the Case,’ Whitcombe & Tombs, Limited, New Zealand, 1963.

Kirk, P., ‘Crime Investigation — Physical Evidence and the Police Laboratory’, Interscience Publishers, Inc., New York, New York, 1953.

Kirk, P. and Bradford, L., ‘The Crime Laboratory — Organization and Operation’, Charles C. Thomas Publishers, Springfield, Illinois, 1965.

Kockel, R., ‘About the Appearance of Clues or Marks from Knife Blades,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 12, No. 3, July 1980, (This article was originally a two-part article written by Professor Kockel in 1900 – ‘Ueber die Darstellung der Spuren von Messer-Scharten,’ Archiv fur Kriminal-Anthoropologie und Kriminalistik 5, and  in 1903 - ‘Weiteres uber Identifizierung von Schartenspuren,’ Archiv fur Kriminal-Anthoropologie und Kriminalistik 11)

Kreiser, J., ‘Identification of Cast Bullets and Their Molds,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 17, No. 3, July 1985.

Lardizabal, P., ‘Cartridge Case Study of the Heckler and Koch USP,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 27,  No. 1, January 1995.

Lee, H., ‘Firearms Related Evidence: The Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti Case,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 17, No. 3, July 1985.

Locard, E., ‘Traite de criminalistique,’ Les empreintes et les traces dans l’enquêté criminelle. Desvigne, Lyon, France (1931).

Lucas, A., ‘Forensic Chemistry and Scientific Criminal Investigations,’ 4^th Ed, Edward Arnold & Co., 1945.

Locke, R., ‘Characteristics of Knife Cuts in Tires,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 38, No. 1, Winter 2006.

Lopez, L. and Grew, S., ‘Consecutive Machined Ruger Bolt Faces,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 32, No. 1, Winter 2000.

Loth, D., ‘Crime Lab - Science Turns Detective’, Julian Messner, Inc., New York, New York, 1964.

Lutz, M., ‘Consecutive Revolver Barrels,’ AFTE Newsletter #9, August 1970.

Mathews, J., ‘Firearms Identification,’ Two volumes - University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin 1962, Volume 3 published after Dr. Mathews died by Charles C. Thomas, Publishers in 1973.

Masson, J., ‘Confidence Level Variations in Firearms Identification through Computerized Technology,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 29, No. 1, Winter 1997.  

Matty, W. and Johnson, T., ‘A Comparison of Manufacturing Marks on Smith & Wesson Firing Pins,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 16, No. 3, July 1984.

Matty, W., ‘A Comparison of Three Individual Barrels Produced from One Button Rifled Barrel Blank,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 17, No. 3, July 1985.

Matty, W., ‘Lorcin L9MM and L380 Pistol Breechface Toolmark Patterns,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 31, No. 2, Spring 1999.

May, L., ‘The Identification of Knives, Tools, and Instruments A Positive Science’. American Journal of Police Science, No. 1, 1930

McCallum, J., ‘Crime Doctor’, The Writing Works, Inc., Mercer Island, Washington, 1978.

McLean, D., ‘Examiners Make Explosive Gains in the Ballistic Labs: Productivity Rockets to Levels Unheard of Before,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 31, No. 3, Summer 1999.

Meyers, C., ‘The Objective v. Subjective Boondoggle,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 19, No. 1, January 1987.

Meyers, C., ‘Firearms and Toolmark Identification: An Introduction,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 25, No. 4, October 1993.

Miller, J. and McLean, M., ‘Criteria for Identification of Toolmarks,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 30, No. 1, Winter 2000.

Miller, J., ‘Criteria for Identification of Toolmarks – Part II,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 32, No. 2, Spring  2000.

Miller, J., ‘An Examination of Two Consecutively Rifled Barrels and a Review of the Literature,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 32, No. 3, Summer 2000.

Miller, J., ‘An Examination of the Application of the Conservative Criteria for Identification of Striated Toolmarks using Bullets Fired from 10 Consecutively Rifled Barrels,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 33, No. 2, Spring 2001.

Miller, J., ‘An Introduction to the Forensic Examination of Toolmarks,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 33, No. 3, Summer 2001

Miller, J. and Neel, M., ‘Criteria for Identification of Toolmarks, Part III, Supporting the Conclusions,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 36, No. 1, Winter 2004.

Miller, J. and Beach, G., ‘Toolmarks: Examining the Possibility of Subclass Characteristics,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 37, NO. 4, Fall 2005.

Miller, J. and Kong, H., ‘Metal Fractures: Matching and Non-Matching Patterns,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 38, No. 2, Spring 2006.

Miller, J., ‘An Evaluation of the Persistence of Striated and Impressed Toolmarks Encompassing a Ten-Year Period of Tool Application, and a Summary of Forensic Research on Bolt Cutters,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 38, No. 4, Fall 2006.

Monahan, D., and Harding, H., ‘Damage to Clothing – Cuts and Tears,’ Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 35, NO. 4, July 1990.  

Moran, B., ‘Physical Match/Toolmark Identification Involving Rubber Sole Shoe Fragments,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 16, No. 3, July 1984.

Moran, B., ‘Firearms Examiner Expert Witness Testimony: The Forensic Firearms Identification Process Including Criteria for Identification and Distance Determination,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 32, No. 3, Summer, 2000.

Moran, B., ‘The Application of Numerical Criteria for Identification in Casework Involving Magazine Marks and Land Impressions,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 33, No. 1, Winter 2001.

Moran, B., ‘Toolmark Criteria for Identification: Pattern Match, CMS, or Bayesian?’ INTERface – Forensic Science Society News Letter, No. 28, November 2001.

Moran, B., ‘A Report on the AFTE Theory of Identification and Range of Conclusions for Toolmark Identification and Resulting Approaches to Casework,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 34, No. 2, Spring 2002.

Moran, B., ‘AFTE 2201 Training Seminar Toolmark Criteria for Identification Panel Discussion,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 34, No. 3, Summer 2002.

Moran, B. and Murdock, J., ‘Joseph Ramirez vs. State of Florida – Supreme Court Decision December 21, 2001,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 34, No. 2, Spring 2002.

Moran, B., ‘Photo Documentation of Toolmark Identification – An Argument in Support,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 35, No. 2, Spring 2003.

Moritz, A., A New Method for the Examination of Markings on Bullets,’ London Police Journal, July – September 1938.

Moses, R., ‘Scientific Proof in Criminal Cases – A Texas Lawyer’s Guide,’ AFTE Newsletter, #10, October 1970.

Murdock, J., ‘An Objective Empirical Approach to Toolmark Analysis,’ Unpublished research project completed as a course requirement for Criminology 289, a graduate course under Professor James W. Osterburg, Spring 1968.

Murdock, J., ‘A General Discussion of Gun Barrel Individuality and an Empirical Assessment of the Individuality of Consecutively Button Rifled .22 Caliber Rifle Barrels,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 13, No. 3, July 1981.

Murdock, J., ‘Forensic Examination of Firearms and Ammunition,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 19, No. 2, April 1987. (This was a lecture presented by Robert Churchill in February 1931)

Munhall, B., ‘Fundamental Ballistics Pertaining to Investigations Involving Firearms,’ Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 4, October 1961.

Munhall, B., ‘Report on the Formation of the Association of Firearm and Tool Mark Examiners’. AFTE Journal, Vol. 31, No. 3, Summer 1999 (This article was originally published in the first AFTE publication - AFTE Newsletter, NL #1, May 1969).

Myers, C., ‘Some Basic Bullet Striae Considerations,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 34, No. 2, Spring 2002.

Nicol, R. and Krcma, V., ‘Identification Notes on Firearms,’ Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 10, No. 2, April 1965.

Nichols, R., ‘Firearm and Toolmark Identification Criteria: A Review of the Literature’, Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 42, No. 3, May 1997.

Nichols, R., ‘The History of Firearms and Tool Mark Identification Criteria,’ Presented at the 55^th AAFS Annual Seminar, Chicago, IL February 2003.

Nichols, R., ‘Firearm and Toolmark Identification Criteria: A Review of the Literature, Part II’, Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 48, No. 2, March 2003.

Nichols, R., ‘Consecutive Matching Striations (CMS): Its Definition, Study and Application in the Discipline of Firearms and Toolmark Identification,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 35, No. 3, Summer 2003. 

Nichols, R., ‘Firearm and Toolmark Identification: The Scientific Reliability and Validity of the AFTE Theory of Identification discussed within the Framework of a Study of 10 Consecutively Manufactured Extractors,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 36, No. 1, Winter 2004 and Vol. 36, No. 2, Spring 2004.

Nichols, R., ‘Critical Review of “A Systemic Challenge to the Reliability and Admissibility of Firearms and Toolmark Identification”,’ PowerPoint Summary on the AFTE Web Site – www.afte.org – to the article by Adina Schwartz that appeared in the Columbia Science and Technology Law Review.

Ogihara, Y., Kubota, M., Sanada, M. Fukuda, K., Uchiyama, T., and Hamby, J., ‘Comparison of 5000 Consecutively Fired Bullets and Cartridge Cases from a .45 Caliber M1911A1 Pistol,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 21, No. 2, April 1989. (This article was originally published in the 1983 Issue of the AFTE Journal)

Osterburg, J., Biasotti, A., Kirk, P., Kingston, C., Conrad, E. and Cook, C., ‘The Principles of Evidence Evaluation,’ Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 9, No. 4, October 1964.

Ostrowski, S., ‘Identification of a Toolmark on Human Skull Utilizing Cattle Blade Bones as Test Medium,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 38, No. 4, Fall 2006.

Peterson, J. and Markham, P. ‘Crime Laboratory Proficiency Testing Results 1978-1991, II: Resolving Questioning of Common Origin,’ Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 40, No. 6, November 1995.

Pollard, H., ‘What the Bullet Tells,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 19, No. 3. July 1987, pp. 289 – 294. (This article originally appeared in Discovery Magazine, November 1924)

Poole, R. and Emanuel, G., ‘The Cutting Edge,’ The Detective, Summer/Fall 1989.

Quayle, P., ‘Spark Photography and Its Application to some Problems in Ballistics,’ Bureau of Standards Paper No. 508, Washington, DC, June 1925.

Rao, V. and Hart, R., ‘Tool Mark Determination in Cartridge of Stabbing Victim,’ Journal of Forensic Science, Vol. 28, No. 3, July 1983.

Rathman, G. and Ryland, S., ‘Use of the SEM-EDXA as an Aid to the Firearms Examiner,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 19, No. 4, October 1987.

Richert, K. and Saloom, J., ‘Knife-blade toolmark stabbing study in response to Ramirez vs. State of Florida,’ Presented at the 34^th AFTE Training Seminar, Philadelphia, PA, May 2003.

Saloom, M., Richert, K. and Saloom, J., ‘Knife-blade toolmark stabbing study in response to Ramirez vs. State of Florida,’ Unpublished term paper for Birmingham-Southern College, Spring 2003.

Roberge, D. and Beauchamp, A., ‘The Use of BulletTrax-3D in a Study of Consecutively Manufactured Barrels,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 38, No. 2, Spring 2006.

Rosati, C., ‘Examination of Four Consecutively Manufactured Bunter Tools,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 32, No. 1, Winter 2000.

Rosenberry, J., ‘Firearm / Toolmark Examination and the Daubert Criteria,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 35, No. 1, Winter 2003.

Rowe, W., ‘Firearm and Toolmark Examinations,’ Chapter 18 in Forensic Science: An Introduction to Scientific and Investigative Techniques, edited by James and Nordby, CRC Press, 2003.

Schecter, B. Silverwater, H. and Etzion, M., ‘Extended Firing of a Galil Assault Rifle,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 24, No. 1, January 1992.

Schwartz, Adina, ‘A Challenge to the Admissibility of Firearm and Toolmark Identifications: Amicus Brief for US v. Kain’, Jnl of Philosophy, Science and the Law, Vol. 4, December 2004.

Serhant, J., ‘The Admissibility of Ballistics in Evidence,’ American Journal of Police Science, May – June 1930.

Shem, R. and Striupaitis, P., ‘Comparison of 501 Consecutively Fired Bullets and Cartridge Cases From a .25 Caliber Raven Pistol,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 15, No. 3, July 1983.

Simpson, K., ‘Forty Years of Murder — An Autobiography’, Dorset Press, New York, New York, 1978.

Skolrood, R., ‘Comparison of Bullets Fired From Consecutively Rifle Cooey 22 Caliber Barrels,’ Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, April 1975.

Smith, E., ‘Cartridge Case and Bullet Validation Study with Firearms Submitted in Casework,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 36, No. 4, Fall, 2004.

Smith, S., ‘The Identification of Firearms and Projectiles,’ The Police Journal (London), Vol. 1, July 1928.

Smith. S., ‘Mostly Murder’, Dorset Press, New York, New York, 1959.

Stout, W., ‘Fingerprinting Bullets’, AFTE Journal, Vol. 31, No. 3, Summer 1999. (This is a reprint of the original articles that were from a two-part series that appeared in the Saturday Evening Post during the weeks of June 13 & 20, 1925).

Soderman, H., ‘L’expertise des armes a feu courtes,’ Joannes Desvigne & Sons, Lyon, France (1928) (This is apparently the first book published on the subject of firearms identification).

Souder, W., ‘Identification of Typewriters and Guns by Precision Methods of Comparison and Measurement’, Technical News Bulletin of the Bureau of Standards, No. 147, July 1929.

Souder, W., ‘Firearms Identification’, AFTE Journal, Vol. 17, No. 3, July 1985, pp- 114-118 (Originally published in the Army-Navy Journal, March 1932 issue).

Springer, E., ‘Toolmark Examinations – A Review of its Development in the Literature,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 33, No. 3, Summer 2001.

Starrs, J., ‘Once More Unto the Breech: The Firearms Evidence in the Sacco and Vanzetti Case Revisited: Part 1,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 19, No. 1, January 1987.

Starrs, J., ‘Once More Unto the Breech: The Firearms Evidence in the Sacco and Vanzetti Case Revisited: Part II,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 19, No. 1, January 1987.

State v. Campbell, 213 Iowa 677, 693, 239 N. W. 715, 723 (1931)

State of Kansas v. Robert K. Cordray (Case #00-CR-114, dated December 2000)

State of Alabama v. Deardorf (Case#CR-01-0794, dated June 2004)

Stoney, D., ‘What made us ever think we could individualize using statistics?’ Journal of Forensic Science Society, Vol. 31, No. 2, April – June, 1991.

Strandberg, K., ‘Fingerprinting Ballistics Evidence,’ Law Enforcement Technology, May 2000.

Sullington, D., ‘Ballistics, a New Science,’ The Criminologist, Vol. 5, June 1929.

Teale, E., ‘Secrets of Crime Read on Bullets,’ Popular Science Monthly, February 1932.

‘The Story of the FBI’, Editors of Look Magazine, E.F. Dutton & Co., New York, New York, 1947.

Thomas, F., and Gallet, G., ‘Homicide by Blows Dealt to the Head by Means of an Axe,’ International Criminal Police Review No. 10, (1947).

Thomas, F., ‘Comments on the Discovery of Striation Matching and on Early Contributions to Forensic Firearms Identification’, Jnl of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 12, No., 1, January 1967.

Thomas, F., ‘Striation Matching and Forensic Firearms Identification,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 12, No. 3, July 1980.

Thompson, W., ‘How Who Dunits Are Solved,’ Guns Magazine, August 1955.

Thompson, R., Desrosiers, M. and Hester, S., ‘Computerized Image Analysis for Firearms Identification: The Integrated Ballistic Identification System: IBIS,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 28, No. 3, July 1996.

Thompson, E. and Wyant, R., ‘Consecutively Made Knife Blades: Part I,’ Presented at the 25^th Annual AFTE Training Seminar, Indianapolis, IN., June 1994.

Thompson, E. and Wyant, R., ‘Knife Identification Project (KIP),’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 35, No. 4, Fall 2003.

Thompson, E. and Wyant, R., ‘Magazine Lip Marks on Consecutively Made Magazines,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 38, No. 1, Winter 2006.

Thompson, E. and De Kinder, J., ‘Range of Exclusions,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 38, No. 1, Winter 2006.

Thompson, E., ‘Editorial: Two Dimensional versus Three Dimensional Characteristics,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 38, No. 1, Winter 2006. 

Thornton, J., ‘The Validity of Firearms Evidence’, AFTE Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, April 1979. (This article originally appeared in the California Attorneys for Criminal Justice Forum, Vol. 5, No. 4, August 1978)

Thornton, J., ‘Nationwide Crime Laboratory Proficiency Project’, AFTE Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, April 1979.

Thornton, J., ‘Some Historical Notes on the Comparison Microscope,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 21, No. 2, April 1989 (This article was originally published in the AFTE Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, March 1978)

Thornton, J. and Peterson, J., ‘Chapter 24, Section 24.6-1, Modern Scientific Evidence: The Law and Science of Expert Testimony,’ Revised 2002.

Tomasetti, K., ‘Analysis of the Essential Aspects of Striated Toolmark Examination and the Methods for Identification,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 34, No. 3, Summer 2002.

Thorwald, J., ‘The Marks of Cain (The Drama of Forensic Ballistics),’ Thames & Hudson, London, 1965.

Tulleners, F. and Hamiel, J., ‘Sub Class Characteristics of Sequentially Rifled 38 Special S&W Revolver Barrels,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 31, No. 2, Spring 1999

Turner, W., ‘Hoover’s FBI - The Men and the Myth’, Sherbourne Press, Inc., Los Angeles, California, 1970.

Uchiyama, T., ‘Automatic Comparison Model of Land Marks,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 20, No. 3, July 1988.

Uchiyama, T., ‘Automated Landmark Identification System,’ AFTE Journal, Viol. 25, No. 3, July 1993.

U.S. Supreme Court Decision: Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (509 U.S. 579, (1993)).

U.S. Supreme Court Decision: Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael (526 U.S. 137 (1999)).

U.S. v. Plaza, Acosta, and Rodriguez (US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania) Cr. No. 98-362-10, 11, 12, dated January 2002.

U.S. v. Plaza, Acosta, and Rodriguez (US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania) Cr. No. 98-362-10, 11, 12, dated March 2002.

U.S. v. Joseph Minerd (Criminal action No. 99-215, dated April 2002)

U.S. v. Michael J. O’Driscoll (Criminal #4 CR-01-277, dated February 2003)

U.S. v. Darryl D. Rice (Criminal Action #3-02-CR-00026, dated August 2003)

U.S. v. Aaron D. Foster (Criminal # CCB-02-0410, dated February 2004)

U.S. v. Amando Monteiro, et al. (Criminal #03-10329-PBS, dated November 2005)

U.S. v. Darryl Green, et al. (Criminal #02-10301-NG, dated December 2005)

U.S. v. Jamaal A. Lewis (US Army 217-08-8512, dated October 2006)

Valdez, S., ‘Bullet Identification from HK USP Polygonal Barrels,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 29, No. 3, July 1997.

Vollmer, A., & Parker, A., ‘Crime, Crooks & Cops’, Funk & Wagnall’s, New York, New York, 1937.

Walsh, K., and Weavers, G., ‘Toolmark Identification: Can We Determine a Criteria?’ INTERface – Forensic Science Society News Letter, No. 29, January – March 2003.

Warniment, D., ‘Brownsville Investigation – A Historical Cartridge Case Comparison,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 34, No. 4, Fall 2003.

Warlow, T., ‘Firearms, the Law and Forensic Ballistics’, Taylor & Francis, Inc, Bristol, Pennsylvania, 1996.

Watson, D., ‘The Identification of Toolmarks from Consecutively Manufactured Knife Blades in Soft Plastic,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 10, No. 3, July 1979. 

Weber, P/ and Scott, D., ‘Applying Firearm Identification Procedures in the Analysis of Percussion Caps,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 37, No. 1, Winter 2005.

Wescott, A., ‘The Firearms Expert,’ The Police Journal (London), Vol. 7, October – December 1934.

Williams, C., ‘Fingerprints on Bullets,’ Outdoor Life, May 1922.

Wiard, S., ‘Ballistics as Applied to Police Science,’ American Journal of Police Science, Vol. 1, 1930.

Wiard, S., ‘Application of Ballistics in Legal Cases,’ American Journal of Police Science, Vol. 2, 1931.

Wigmore, J., ‘Evidence – Homicide – Identification of Bullet and Firearms,’ Illinois Law Review, Volume 25, 1931.

Wright, D., ‘Individuality and Reproducibility of Striae on Plastic Wad Components Fired from a Sawed-Off Shotgun,’ AFTE Journal, Vol. 35, No. 3, Spring 2003.

www.aafs.org

www.afte.org

www.daubertontheweb.com

www.firearmsid.com

www.forensicevidence.com

www.goddardaward.com

www.swggun.or

 

Leading Forensic Publications

American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) - publishes the Journal of Forensic Sciences 6 times yearly. The journal includes articles of interest for all forensic specialties with a few articles on firearm and toolmark identification. Inquires may be addressed to American Academy of Forensic Sciences, 410 N. 21st Street, Colorado Springs, Colorado (USA) 80904-2798. Website: www.aafs.org

Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE) - publishes the AFTE Journal 4 times yearly. All articles are related to the science of firearm & toolmark examination and identification. Inquires may be addressed to: Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners, Attn: Mr. Russell McLain, Rockford Forensic Science Laboratory, 200 Wymann – Suite 400, Rockford, Illinois 61101. Website: www.afte.org

British Forensic Science Society (FSS) - publishes Science and Justice 4 times yearly. The journal includes articles of interest for all forensic specialties with a few articles on firearm and toolmark identification. Inquires may be addressed to Forensic Science Society, Clarke House, 1 8A Mount Parade, Harrogate, North Yorkshire, United Kingdom HG1 lBX. Website: www.forensic-science-society-org.uk 

Canadian Society of Forensic Sciences (CSFS) publishes the CSFS Journal 4 times yearly. The journal includes articles of interest for all forensic specialties with a few articles on firearm and toolmark identification. Inquires may be addressed to Canadian Society of Forensic Science, PO Box 37040, 3332                      

McCarthy Road, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada  K1B 4W5. Website: www.csfs.ca/

International Ammunition Association, Inc. (IAA) published the IAA Journal 6 times yearly. The journal Includes articles related to the collection, history, and identification of ammunition. Inquires may be addressed to: International Ammunition Association, Attn: Membership Chairman, 6531 Carlsbad Drive, Lincoln, Nebraska 68510. Website: www.cartridgecollectors.org   

International Association for Identification (IAI) publishes the Journal of Forensic Identification 6 times yearly. The journal includes articles of interest for all forensic specialties with a few articles on firearm and toolmark identification. Inquires may be addressed to International Association for Identification, 2535 Pilot Knob Road (Suite 117), Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55120-1120. Website: www.theiai.org

 

 

Home | Top