Forensic Science International 120 (2001) 132±139

The forensic entomologist in the context of the forensic

pathologist's role$
Carlo Pietro Campobasso*, Francesco Introna
Section of Legal Medicine (DIMIMP), University of Bari, Piazza Giulio Cesare, Policlinico-Bari 70100, Italy

Abstract

An adequate death investigation requires the combined efforts and cooperation of experts in different disciplines: crime scene
technicians, death investigators, forensic pathologists, anthropologists, entomologists, other medical and non-medical
professionals. These front-line experts play a crucial role in every death investigation process. The forensic pathologist
normally has the legal authority to take charge of the dead body at a death scene and his primary functions are the exterior and
interior examination of the cadaver by analyzing the extent of antemortem injuries and the postmortem changes and the
recovery of physical evidence. He is responsible for determining how, when and why of any death which is the result of
violence, suspicious or unexplained circumstances or a death which is sudden or unattended, defending and explaining the
reasons for making these diagnoses in a courtroom. The forensic entomologist can provide invaluable aid in death cases where
human remains are colonized by insects and in the overall investigation. His principal role is to identify the arthropods
associated with such cases and to analyze entomological data for interpreting insect evidence. He is responsible for determining
the period of insect activity according to all the variables affecting insect invasion of remains and their development. The major
goal of medico-criminal entomology is to contribute to the determination of the time, cause, manner and place of the
investigated death (especially on badly decomposed corpses or skeletonized human remains) with the support of all the elements
which can be inferred from the study of insects found on the cadaver or nearby. The application of techniques devised recently
in forensic entomology can allow experts in the ®eld to collect strong entomological evidence and provide useful information
not only in a death investigation including movement or storage of the remains following death, time of dismemberment,
postmortem artifacts on the body but also at the scene, and even more in child neglect, sexual molestation and identi®cation of
suspects. As the role of the forensic entomologist at the death scene, at the autopsy and in the laboratory is de®ned and well
known, this paper focuses on the dif®culties that could arise if forensic pathologists and entomologists are uncertain about the
procedures that they have to follow, do not realize the value of objective ®ndings or fail to evaluate them. Although every
forensic case presents a slightly different set of circumstances and has to be tackled individually, the forensic pathologist should
work with the forensic entomologist from the visual observations of the cadaver on the scene, through the collection of
arthropods and temperature data at the death scene and at the autopsy, up to the ®nal report with the interpretation of
entomological and other biological evidence. # 2001 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Forensic entomology; Forensic entomologist; Forensic pathologist

1. Introduction and non-medical professionals. All these front-line experts

An admissible death investigation requires the combined
efforts and cooperation of experts in different disciplines:
crime scene technicians, death investigators, forensic
pathologists, anthropologists, entomologists, other medical
$
Oral communication presented at the International Congress
of Entomology (Iguassu Falls, Brasil, 20±26 August 2000).
*
Corresponding author.
play a crucial role in every death investigation process.
Unfortunately, not all these disciplines are always repre-
sented. They may become involved during the course of the
investigation depending on the procedures adopted by the
medico-legal jurisdiction, on the nature of the case and the
need for veri®cation of essential evidence [1].
Around the world unexplained or suspicious deaths are
commonly investigated by some legal process. Although
death investigation reporting laws vary from state to state in

0379-0738/01/$ ± see front matter # 2001 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 3 7 9 - 0 7 3 8 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 4 2 5 - X
 C.P. Campobasso, F. Introna / Forensic Science International 120 (2001) 132±139
the US (see medical-examiner and coroner systems) and
from country to country elsewhere (see different procedural
standards in inquisitional Roman systems of law where the
prosecutor is empowered to investigate and inquire), a
physician, not always a forensic pathologist, usually is
empowered to certify the death [2]. However, in most
medico-legal jurisdictions the forensic pathologist has the
legal authority to take charge of the dead body. His primary
functions are the exterior and interior examination of the
cadaver by analyzing the extent of antemortem injuries and
postmortem changes and the recovery of physical evidence.
He is responsible for determining how (manner), when
(time) and why (cause) of any death which is the result
of violence, suspicious or unexplained circumstances or a
death which is sudden or unattended [3], defending and
explaining the reasons for making these diagnoses in a
courtroom.
When insects are found associated with the body, samples
must be collected in conjunction with other biological
evidence. Even if the important role of insects in human
decay is well known, unfortunately the medical training and
experience of forensic pathologists usually do not fully
prepare them to extract all of the available information from
arthropods. For many years, maggots crawling on dead
bodies were considered just another disgusting element of
decay; something to be rinsed away as soon as the body was
placed on the table for autopsy [4].
During the last three decades, the utility of medico-
criminal entomology in death investigations has been largely
documented by several case studies both in Europe [5±8] and
in US [9±11]. These case studies constitute the most fasci-
nating references in forensic entomology literature as they
show different applications of this discipline in medico-legal
investigations. The techniques devised recently in forensic
entomology allow experts in the ®eld to collect strong
entomological evidence and provide very useful information
not only in a death investigation including time since death
[5,6,9,10], season of death, geographical location of death
[12], movement or storage of the remains following death
[13], time of decapitation and/or dismemberment [14,15],
submersion interval [16,17], speci®c sites of trauma on the
body [18,19], postmortem artifacts on the body but also at
the scene [4], use of drugs [20,21], and even more in linking
a suspect to the scene of a crime [8,22], in child neglect
[23,24], sexual molestation and identi®cation of suspects
[25,26].
Based on the above experiences, the forensic entomolo-
gist may be a valuable adjunct to the pathologist. His
principal role is to collect and identify the arthropods
associated with such cases and to analyze entomological
data for interpreting insect evidence. Speci®c collecting
techniques and standard procedures in different environ-
ments at the death scene [1,27], at the autopsy [28] and in the
laboratory [29] have been developed to enhance the recovery
of insect specimens. Basic assumptions for analyzing ento-
mological data have been also pointed out by Catts [30]. The
133
forensic entomologist is responsible for determining the
period of insect activity based on the composition of arthro-
pod community found on the cadaver (as it relates to
expected successional patterns) or on the age of developing
immature insects according to all the variables affecting
insect invasion of remains and their development [31].
Occasionally, the forensic entomologist can be also called
upon as an expert witness to testify in a courtroom for
defending and explaining his conclusions.
Respecting the different disciplines and competences, in
our opinion, the complex ecology of the decay process and
the role which insects play in the breakdown of corpses
suggest that the collection and interpretation of entomolo-
gical evidence associated with dead bodies should be done
preferably by both the forensic entomologist and pathologist
correlating circumstantial information and ®ndings noted at
the crime scene and at the autopsy. This paper focuses on the
dif®culties that could arise if forensic pathologists and
entomologists are uncertain about the procedures that they
have to followed, do not realize the value of objective
®ndings, or fail to evaluate them.
2. At the death scene and at the autopsy
The death scene is usually the focal point of any criminal
investigation. A death scene properly processed can yield
information useful to reconstruct events and circumstances,
link a suspect to the victim or scene, establish the credibility
of the statements made to investigators by witnesses [1].
In a death investigation, it would be extremely useful to
determine if carrion-¯y larvae have been feeding on human
tissue since Diptera larvae can be discovered in the absence
of human remains at a location where the body is suspected
to have been [8]. The presence of live maggots in the absence
of a dead body at a location is almost certain evidence that
some kind of corpse has been removed from the scene. There
was a case from southern Italy (Brindisi County) where a
police informant identi®ed a cellar in an isolated farmhouse
where a murder had occurred and the body had been left. It
was later learned that the criminal organization responsible
for the murder learned of this ``betrayal'' and removed the
body in an effort to discredit the informant. Police investi-
gators recovered only a large number of Chrysomya albiceps
larvae, and no other biological evidence from the cellar. Our
research work, in collaboration with Prof. Jeffry D. Wells of
the University of Alabama in Birmingham, USA and Prof.
Felix A.H. Sperling of the University of California in
Berkeley, USA has demonstrated the possibility of extract-
ing, amplifying and sequencing human mitochondrial DNA
from Diptera larvae thus associating maggots and their last
source of food [32].
At the recovery site, the main function of the pathologist
is to look and observe, making such written notes and taking
photographs for depicting the position of the body within the
scene environment, the extent of antemortem injuries and
134 C.P. Campobasso, F. Introna / Forensic Science International 120 (2001) 132±139
the stage of decay. He has the responsibility of collecting
environmental and body temperature (algor mortis) and
other main postmortem changes as stiffness (rigor mortis),
settling of the blood (livor mortis or lividity) and the break-
ing down of the body's tissues (decomposition) useful for
determining the time of death [33]. He is also responsible for
moving the body in order to look underneath at the pre-
viously covered surface, recovering physical evidence from
the body, seeing that the body is properly transported to a
mortuary without the loss of any trace evidence or any
interference that would negate the subsequent examination
[2].
In cases where the human remains are associated with
insects the entomologist may support the pathologist sig-
ni®cantly. Between the postmortem changes insect activity
must be carefully noted preferably by both pathologist and
entomologist. This procedure is also recommended to death
investigators in the National Guidelines for Death Scene
Investigation developed by the National Institute of Justice
(USA) in 1999 [34].
Corpses may be more decomposed in areas of the body
where there are injuries which result in the exposure of blood
and underlying tissues thus providing a portal entry for
carrion insects and bacteria [35]. Any region of the body
surface where putrefaction is disproportionately advanced
should be examined with particular attention due to the
possibility that it could represent a site of antemortem injury.
Moritz stated in 1956 that it is a frequent mistake in forensic
pathology to pass over such a region lightly, inasmuch as it
seems to be particularly un®t for examination [36].
However, inferences of trauma can be supported by
locations where insect colonization is found [4]. Flies but
also animal scavengers are usually attracted to blood and can
produce a quick consumption of soft tissues in that region.
They can alter or destroy indications of the cause and
manner of death or create postmortem artifacts. For exam-
ple, a knife or bullet wound can be distorted, enlarged or
made unrecognizable by feeding larvae at the injury site
[19]. Autopsy ®ndings such as extravasation of blood
through the underlying tissues at the wound location or
penetrating injuries of the internal organs with haemor-
rhages may con®rm the diagnosis of antemortem trauma.
Discriminating postmortem insect artifacts from antemor-
tem or perimortem injuries requires a considerable experi-
ence from both forensic entomologist and pathologist [4].
Together they can avoid confusion between shotgun wounds
and entry holes in skin made by maggots, between perimor-
tem sexual assault and insect clothing displacement [37].
They can avoid confusion also between rat droppings and ¯y
puparia often overlooked on the recovery site, between blood
stains and pseudo-blood spatters left by insects coming from
a body or a large pool of blood [4], between ``translucent red
®bers'' and Chironomidae larvae such as a forensic case
illustrated by Hawley et al. in 1989 [38].
Recognition of the crime scene and of variations in the
decompositional sequence is of extreme importance to the
forensic scientists including death investigator, pathologist
and entomologist, as it may provide clues to circumstances
at death [35]. Only a multidisciplinary approach and the
interaction of different professionals can provide an high-
quality death scene investigation.
The sequence of the entomological investigation at the
death scene has been summarized in ®ve stages [27]: visual
observations and notations of the scene; collection of cli-
matological and temperature data; collection of specimens
from the body before body removal; collection of specimens
from the surrounding area before removal of the remains;
collection of specimens from directly under and in close
proximity to the remains after their removal.
Generally, the time spent collecting evidence at the crime
scene is relatively brief; it requires approximately 1±2 h.
However, there are circumstances that can prolong this
period; for example, with longer postmortem intervals, more
time is required to collect evidence that may be obscured by
weather or environmental conditions or that may prove a
movement or storage of human remains [39]. There are also
restrictions that may be imposed on the immediate sampling
of insects as it can result in some unavoidable disturbance to
the remains. Protection of the scene and of the body to
preserve all possible evidence is obviously of primary
importance [27].
Forensic scientists involved in a death investigation such
as the forensic entomologist must be careful in order not to
intrude prematurely into evidence. Such intrusion includes:
(a) casually walking about the death scene, thus inadver-
tently destroying footprints and/or tire tracks of the perpe-
trator of the crime; (b) moving items or disturbing the
corpse; (c) handling items or touching surfaces that may
yield latent ®ngerprints or (d) removing an item from the
scene without speci®c permission of the person in charge of
the investigation [40].
Haskell and Williams [27] suggest that at the scene of
crime the forensic entomologist should concentrate on
collecting from around and under the corpse. Nothing must
be moved or taken from the corpse without speci®c permis-
sion of the pathologist except the insects which are on the
surface and clearly visible. The entomologist should collect
only those stages of insects which can be seen readily on the
body and use extreme caution when using forceps or other
tools for collecting since postmortem artifacts can be
in¯icted inadvertently while collecting specimens. Lord
and Burger [41] provided instructions dealing with collec-
tion of insects and other arthropods from corpses.
It is our opinion that collection of insect evidence from the
body and of temperature data should be done in conjunction
with the forensic pathologist both at the death scene and at the
autopsy. The forensic entomologist and pathologist can assist
one another in their collection of evidence while performing
together the recognition of decay stage and insect activity
since they can support one another their own interpretation of
®ndings. A complete and detailed examination of clothing
should be also done by the pathologist interacting with the
 C.P. Campobasso, F. Introna / Forensic Science International 120 (2001) 132±139
death investigator and the entomologist to document defects
consistent with body injuries, to ®nd personal possessions
useful for the identi®cation or insects sheltered in folds or
pockets.
Before removal of the corpse a thorough examination of
the body bag must be conducted to exclude insect infesta-
tions. However, after the corpse has been taken from the
body bag and placed on the autopsy table, the entomologist
should examine again the outer and inner surfaces of the
body bag for insects as correctly suggested by Haskell [28].
Sometimes in cadavers largely colonized by insects, Diptera
larvae or even adults can be found on the outer surface of the
body bag. The insects may have also crawled from the body
in transit due to changes in temperatures and may be found
only on the inside surfaces.
Changes in ambient temperature between the crime scene
and the autopsy room must be considered by both the
forensic pathologist and entomologist. Often human remains
are stored from several hours to few days in coolers or
refrigeration units prior to autopsy. The forensic entomol-
ogist should be aware of the total time the body was cooling
and the temperature of cold storage. In cases where the
corpse is heavily infested with Diptera larvae, temperature
of maggot mass should be recovered when the body is
removed from the cooler.
Heat generated by larvae due to their frenetic activity and
fast metabolism essentially depends on two main factors,
density of larval mass [42] and size (dimensions and weight)
of the carcass [43]. The heat generated from larval aggrega-
tions has very important forensic implication since it can
prevent the cooling effect both outdoors [44] and in refrig-
eration units. Temperatures of 27±358C were recorded by
Haskell [4,28] in aggregations of Diptera larvae feeding on
corpses held under refrigeration prior to autopsy (2±48C). In
our experience, we have frequently observed in coolers the
heat produced by maggot mass as steam vapors rising from
the body as described by Bass [45] and Diptera larvae
actively feeding on. The forensic entomologist and pathol-
ogist should aware that these ®ndings mean the maggot mass
was well established prior to the body being placed in the
cooler and the refrigeration units do not stop the feeding
activity of large maggots clustered in dense masses or their
development. Hence, since Diptera larvae could destroy the
residual part of physical evidence still present on the body,
corpses heavily colonized by maggots should be considered
a forensic pathology urgency. The autopsy should be per-
formed as soon as possible. These cases can be easily
recognized only by a previous examination of insect activity
on the body at the death scene and measurement of maggot
mass temperatures.
Historically the most common applications of forensic
entomology deal with the estimation of postmortem interval.
The assessment of death chronology is always dif®cult for
the forensic pathologist, especially on badly decomposed
corpses or skeletonized human remains. Exact time of
death cannot be determined with certainty. Analyzing the
135
successional patterns of arthropods found on the corpse or
nearby or simply from their stage of development the forensic
entomologist can estimate the period of insect activity only
[31]. Based on the stage of decay, period of insect activity
and the multitude of factors affecting the rate of decom-
position and insect colonization the forensic pathologist
should be able to determine a minimal and maximal prob-
able time interval between death and corpse discovery.
Among the numerous variables affecting the rate of
postmortem decay (concerning the corpse itself and the
external environment), access of the body to insects is the
second most important after temperature according to Mann
et al. [46]. The environment is usually the main factor in
determining the postmortem interval since the ambient
temperature has a direct in¯uence on both the putrefaction
processes and insect activity [45]. Cold temperatures slow
down organic matter decay, inhibiting bacterial proliferation
and preserving corpse tissues longer. Warm temperatures
speed up the decomposition process increasing bacterial
proliferation but also the number and type of carrion insects.
On badly decomposed corpses or skeletonized human
remains infested with insects, where no classical postmor-
tem changes in soft tissues (hypostasis, cadaveric rigidity,
body cooling) are available, only the entomological evi-
dence can provide invaluable aid to the forensic pathologist
for predicting the postmortem interval. In similar cases,
warm temperatures and the activity of animal predators
(mainly ¯ies but also mammalian carnivores such as dogs,
rodents, birds) can reasonably explain the faster degradation
of a cadaver. Galloway [47] described an exceptional case of
pre-skeletonisation as soon as 7 days after death. We
observed a case of pre-skeletonisation as soon as 10 days
in a body of a young male found in September (mean
temperature ¯uctuating between 20 and 268C), in a rural
area of Lecce (southern Italy) close to agricultural ®elds
covered by stones. The head, the trunk and the arms were
largely skeletonized and infested by Diptera larvae. The
stones preserved the body from large animal scavengers but
not from C. albiceps (Diptera) which were found in dense
masses inside body cavities. In this case, the postmortem
interval was determined by aging the oldest specimens of C.
albiceps (puparia) sampled on the crime scene according to
the weather record.
Unlike the previous situation (shallow grave), deep bur-
ials or aquatic environments signi®cantly reduce the rate of
decomposition resulting primarily from cooler temperatures
and inhibition of insect activity [19]. Rodriguez and Bass
[48] observed that Diptera could not colonize bodies buried
deeper than 30 cm (1 ft) and at greater depths they did not
®nd sign of relevant carrion-insect activity. Based on their
experimental studies a complete skeletonization of a buried
corpse takes approximately 2±3 years. Like burials, the
aquatic environments also restrict the access of many carrion
insects to the bodies, delaying corpse degradation. In similar
cases, some aquatic insects can be associated with bodies
immersed in water and they can be used to determine
136 C.P. Campobasso, F. Introna / Forensic Science International 120 (2001) 132±139
submersion intervals [16,17] while terrestrial insects asso-
ciated with bodies ¯oating can indicate the length of time the
body resurfaced [19].
Estimation of time since death in charred bodies is
another challenge for the forensic pathologist. Only in cases
where the human remains are infested with larvae the
probable time interval between death and corpse discovery
can be determined essentially based on the period of insect
activity. In our experience, forensic cases involving charred
remains or bodies almost completely combusted or carbo-
nized found in burnt out cars to cover up the murder or the
identity of the victim are not infrequent [49]. In these cases,
adult blow¯ies and ¯esh¯ies are attracted in large numbers
by the smell of inner viscera widely exposed by ®re con-
sumption of the head, thorax and abdomen walls. Depending
on the extent of burn injury Diptera can have easy access to
the body inner cavities and are very skillful at getting to the
uneven internal recesses laying eggs or depositing larvae
soon after the ®re has gone out and the body has cooled
enough [49]. These observations on cadavers were later
con®rmed by an experimental study on animal carcasses
by Avila and Goff [50]. The authors observed on the burnt
¯esh signi®cant oviposition by ¯ies of Calliphoridae family
1 day earlier than on the unburnt carcass.
In the literature, there are few case histories of Diptera
larvae associated with charred bodies [6,51]. A case worth
mentioning is the one illustrated by Ubelaker and Scammel
[52] in which the time since death was assessed based on the
analysis of some cooked maggots found inside the brain
following the burning of the car where the remains were
discovered. Live maggots were also observed all over the
surface of the burnt body as the body proved to have been
colonized by a second wave of Diptera. The age of these
larvae indicated when the ®re had been started by the
murderer in the car in the hope of getting rid of the corpse
or in order to hide the real cause of death.
The forensic entomologist can assist the forensic pathol-
ogist's determination of the postmortem interval not only on
badly decomposed bodies. To evaluate the reliability of the
entomological method in estimation of the postmortem
interval Kashyap and Pillay [53] carried out a comparative
analysis of the various procedures commonly used (autopsy
report, entomological and circumstantial evidence) in 16
forensic cases. They found the entomological method sta-
tistically more reliable, mainly 72 h after death, and superior
when compared to other prevalent procedures such as the
medico-legal method based only on the classical postmor-
tem changes in soft tissues (hypostasis, rigor mortis, body
cooling, autolysis, decomposition).
The forensic entomologist can support the pathologist
also on his diagnosis of narcotic or drug intoxication since
insects may serve as reliable alternate specimens for tox-
icological analyses [20]. A thorough toxicological analysis
of postmortem specimens may be crucial to the proper
determination of death. It is typically performed to evaluate
if alcohol, drugs or other poisons directly caused a death
(e.g. overdose), contributed to the medical cause of death
(toxicity in combination with natural disease) or indirectly
contributed to the death by causing impairment (e.g. motor
vehicle or other accident) [54]. In mummi®ed bodies, ske-
letonized remains or bodies in advanced decomposition
more traditional sources, such as blood, urine or internal
organs are usually not available or the recovery and quanti-
tation of drugs can be severely affected by tissue-decom-
position products as demonstrated by Nolte et al. [55] and
Kintz et al. [56]. In similar cases the entomological evidence
can only provide a potentially valuable source of toxicolo-
gical information and a more suitable specimen without any
decomposition interference. In fact, maggots feeding on
intoxicated human tissues introduce into their own metabo-
lism drugs and toxins taken by the person when still alive.
Several studies have described correlations between drug
concentrations found in human tissues and in developing
Diptera larvae [57±59], in puparial cases and insect fecal
material [60]. However, the precipitous decrease in drug
concentrations observed by Sadler et al. [61] in post-feeding
larvae and at pupariation suggests that only larvae actively
feeding on a corpse and fully developed should be sampled
for toxicological analysis.
The interaction between the forensic pathologist and
entomologist should be also advisable for interpreting of
postmortem toxicology results. The forensic pathologist
should be aware that the absence of a drug in feeding larvae
does not necessarily imply its absence in the food source as
demonstrated by Sadler et al [62,63]. Before using maggots
for postmortem interval determination the forensic entomol-
ogist should be aware of the toxicological results on post-
mortem specimens to evaluate the effect of drugs and toxins
on the rate of Diptera development [20] or on the delayed
invasion of tissues [64]. Even if in entomotoxicology much
more has to be investigated, especially on bioaccumulation
and insect metabolism of drugs, recovering prescription and
illegal drugs and toxins from arthropods may be an admis-
sible evidence in death investigations.
3. Discussion
Determining whether a death was a natural one, a suicide
or a homicide is of paramount importance in any legal
system and it is responsibility of the forensic pathologist.
Where insects are found associated with corpses, the for-
ensic entomologist can be a valuable adjunct to the pathol-
ogist since he can reasonably support and defend his ®nal
determination. The major goal of medico-criminal entomol-
ogy is to contribute to the determination of the time, cause,
manner and place of the investigated death, especially on
badly decomposed corpses or skeletonized human remains,
based on the elements which can be inferred from the study
of insects found on the cadaver or nearby.
Although every forensic case presents a slightly different
set of circumstances and has to be tackled individually, it is
 C.P. Campobasso, F. Introna / Forensic Science International 120 (2001) 132±139
our opinion the forensic pathologist should work with the
forensic entomologist on death investigation cases, from the
external examination of the cadaver, through the collection
of arthropods and temperature data both at the death scene
and at the autopsy, up to the ®nal report with the interpreta-
tion of entomological and other physical evidence.
In many instances of unexplained death, it is a fact that
appreciation of the full signi®cance of the autopsy ®ndings
may depend on evidence that may be obtained only at the
scene and before the body has been moved [36]. Correctly,
Davis [65] pointed out that the autopsy must not be per-
formed blindly but in the light of circumstances and of
®ndings at the death scene; according to the circumstances
of death the investigation autopsy should be goal orientated
to con®rm what is already known or suspected. Only a strict
cooperation between various professionals can get an overall
appreciation of the circumstantial information and ®ndings
noted at the death scene and at the autopsy and only
collecting insect evidence at each step of the investigation
can provide the full potential of medico-criminal entomol-
ogist and support admissible forensic evaluations [28].
Unfortunately, the attendance of a pathologist or even
more of an entomologist at the scene of the death may vary
from place to place. It is usually dependent on the suspects or
opinions of the police of®cer or (in Roman system of law) of
the prosecutor. Enlightened and perhaps wealthy jurisdic-
tions are aware of the considerable advantages to having a
pathologist visit the body at the scene of recovery [2]. In
many cases, the initially suspicious circumstances may be
dispelled by the pathologist who may recognize some non-
criminal circumstances.
How many jurisdictions are aware of the considerable
advantages in having an entomologist at the crime scene or
at the autopsy? In 1988, Nuorteva stated in Liege (Belgium)
at the XIVth Congress of the International Academy of
Legal and Social Medicine that forensic entomology needs a
permanent status in criminal laboratories [66]. Actually to
the best of our knowledge, except for the FBI and several
crime labs in US and for the Gendarmerie Nationale in
France, there are not so many forensic entomologists per-
manently on duty in law enforcement agencies. Further-
more, in contrast to the US where entomological evidence is
accepted by the courts, the method has just started to be
accepted in several European countries (France, Belgium,
England, Germany, Italy and Russia) [67].
It is no longer admissible that law enforcement of®cers,
death investigators or pathologists could are sceptical or
could not appreciate the value of insects as forensic indi-
cators [5,68]. Insects are an important source of information
for forensic scientists and particularly for pathologists. The
amount and variety of information contained in necropha-
gous insects often surprises those who have never had
occasion to work with an experienced forensic entomologist.
Actually, the entomologist is still not often included in the
investigation from the beginning and he is rarely called upon
to visit the death scene. This may be due to several reasons:
137
the ®rst one could be that investigators are generally called
to a crime scene at a moment's notice at any hour of the day;
therefore, entomologists are often not readily available to
participate [39]. In some jurisdictions having an entomol-
ogist as a routine member of the investigation team could not
prove practical. However, as stated by Goff [31] the ento-
mologist could and, in this case, should be supplied with
specimens collected from the corpse by crime scene inves-
tigators.
Other reasons could be simply that such specialists are
rare in different geographical areas or there are not enough
entomologists fully quali®ed and well trained or willing to
work in this ®eld of forensic sciences. As forensic scientists
it is our responsibility to encourage all local jurisdictions and
police of®cers to spend some resources including on routine
crime-scene investigation teams or adopting in death inves-
tigations many different professionals (as entomologist
familiar with cadavers or pathologist familiar with insects)
or, at least, training crime-scene technicians to recognize
and properly preserve entomological evidence. Seminars
and workshops on the applications of medico-criminal
entomology are annually arranged at the Pennsylvania State
University by the Department of Entomology and in Indiana
by a world authority in forensic entomology, Neal Haskell.
In 1998, for the ®rst time in Europe an international three-
day seminar in forensic entomology was held in Bari (Italy)
with Prof. Lee Goff from the University of Hawaii as
instructor. The main purpose of these courses is to assist
forensic investigators, crime technicians and other personnel
working for law-enforcement agencies, including state
police, forensic pathologists and entomologists in the proper
collecting and processing of entomological evidence. Once
collected the insect specimens should be brought to experi-
enced forensic entomologists for identi®cation and determi-
nation of elapsed time of insect development. However, the
forensic entomologist should have access to information that
may be essential in establishing the period of insect activity
such as circumstances of body recovery, death environment
and temperature data, presumptive cause and manner of
death. Only this information could be correctly used to
provide supportive data, along with the pathologist's report
and crime lab evidence, in determining time, cause and
manner of death.
In conclusion, we strongly encourage the interaction
between forensic scientists involved in criminal investigations
and in particular between pathologists and entomologists in
death cases where insects are associated with the remains.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of
Jeffrey D. Wells (Assistant Professor, Department of Justice
Sciences, University of Alabama at Birmingham, USA),
Kenneth G.V. Smith (formerly of the Department of Ento-
mology, British Museum of Natural History, London, UK)
138 C.P. Campobasso, F. Introna / Forensic Science International 120 (2001) 132±139
and Mark Benecke (Internationale Kriminalbiologische
Beratung) in reviewing the article.
References
[1] C.L. Meek, C.S. Andrews, Standard techniques and proce-
dures at the death scene, in: E.P. Catts, N.H. Haskell (Eds.),
Entomology and Death. A Procedural Guide, Joyce's Print
Shop, Clemson, SC, 1990, pp. 72±81.
[2] R.K. Wright, W.G. Eckert, Forensic pathology, in: W.G.
Eckert (Ed.), Introduction to Forensic Sciences, CRC Press,
Boston, 1997, pp. 93±106.
[3] M.F. Ernst, Y.H. Caplan, The death scene, in: Y.H. Caplan,
R.S. Frank (Eds.), Medicolegal Death Investigation, The
Forensic Sciences Foundation Press, Colorado Springs, 1999,
pp. 7±17.
[4] N.H. Haskell, R. Hall, V.J. Cervenka, M.A. Clark, On the
body: insect's life stage presence and their postmortem
artifacts, in: W.D. Haglund, M.A. Sorg (Eds.), Forensic
Taphonomy: the Postmortem Fate of Human Remains, CRC
Press, Boston, 1997, pp. 415±448.
[5] P. Nuorteva, Sarcosaprophagous insects as forensic indicators,
in: C.G. Tedeschi, W.G. Eckert, L.G. Tedeschi (Eds.),
Forensic Medicine: a Study of Trauma and Environmental
Hazards, Vol. 2, Saunders, Philadelphia, 1977, pp. 1072±
1095.
[6] K.G.V. Smith, A manual of forensic entomology, British
Museum Natural History, London and Cornell University
Press, 1986.
[7] M. Leclerq, Entomology and legal medicine, in: M. Leclerq
(Ed.), Entomological Parasitology: the Relations between
Entomology and the Medical Sciences, Pergamon Press,
Oxford, 1969, pp. 128±142.
[8] M. Benecke, Six forensic entomology cases: description and
commentary, J. Forensic Sci. 43 (1998) 797±805, 1303.
[9] W.D. Lord, Case histories of the use of insects in
investigations, in: E.P. Catts, N.H. Haskell (Eds.), Entomol-
ogy and Death. A Procedural Guide, Joyce's Print Shop,
Clemson, SC, 1990, pp. 9±37.
[10] B. Greenberg, Forensic entomology: case studies, Bull.
Entomol. Soc. Am. 31 (1985) 25±28.
[11] M.L. Goff, C.B. Odom, Forensic entomology in the Hawaiian
Islands: three case studies, Am. J. Forensic Med. Pathol. 8
(1987) 45±50.
[12] A.L. Byrne, M.A. Camann, T.L. Cyr, E.P. Catts, K.E. Espelie,
Forensic implications of biochemical differences among
geographic populations of the black blow ¯y, Phormia regina
(Meigen), J. Forensic Sci. 40 (1995) 372±377.
[13] F. Introna Jr., J.D. Wells, G. Di Vella, C.P. Campobasso,
F.A.H. Sperling, in: Proceedings of 51st Annual Meeting
AAFS Human and Other Animal mtDNA Analysis from
Maggots, 15±20 February 1999, Orlando, FL (abstract G74-
oral communication), pp. 196.
[14] B.M. Altamura, F. Introna Jr., A new possibility of applying
the entomological method in forensic medicine: age determi-
nation of postmortem mutilation, Med. Leg. Quad. Cam. 4
(1982) 127±130.
[15] G.S. Anderson, The use of insects to determine time of
decapitation: a case-study from British Columbia, J. Forensic
Sci. 42 (1997) 947±950.
[16] N.H. Haskell, D.G. McShaffrey, D.A. Hawley, R.E. Williams,
J.E. Pless, Use of aquatic insects in determining submersion
interval, J. Forensic Sci. 34 (1989) 622±632.
[17] J.B. Keiper, E.G. Chapman, B.A. Foote, Midge larvae
(Diptera: Chironomidae) as indicators of postmorterm sub-
mersion interval of carcasses in a woodland stream: a
preliminary report, J. Forensic Sci. 42 (1997) 1074±1079.
[18] R.D. Hall, N.H. Haskell, Forensic entomology. Applications
in medicolegal investigations, in: C. Wecht (Ed.), Forensic
Sciences, Matthew Bender, New York, 1995.
[19] W.R. Rodriguez, Decomposition of buried and submerged
bodies, in: W.D. Haglund, M.A. Sorg (Eds.), Forensic
Taphonomy: the Postmortem Fate of Human Remains, CRC
Press, Boston, 1997, pp. 459±467.
[20] M.L. Goff, W.D. Lord, Entomotoxicology: a new area for
forensic investigation, Am. J. Forensic Med. Pathol. 15
(1994) 51±57.
[21] D.J. Pounder, Forensic entomotoxicology, J. Forensic Sci.
Soc. 31 (1991) 469±472.
[22] J.G. Prichard, P.D. Kossoris, R.A. Leibovitch, L.D. Robert-
son, F.W. Lovell, Implications of trombiculid mite bites:
report of a case and submission evidence in a murder trial, J.
Forensic Sci. 31 (1986) 301±306.
[23] W.D. Lord, W.R. Rodriguez, Forensic entomology: the use of
insects in the investigation of homicide and untimely death,
Prosecutor 22 (1989) 41±48.
[24] M.L. Goff, S. Charbonneau, W. Sullivan, Presence of fecal
material in diapers as a potential source of error in
estimations of postmortem interval using arthropod develop-
ment rates, J. Forensic Sci. 36 (1991) 1603±1606.
[25] J. Reploge, W.D. Lord, B. Budowle, T.L. Meinking, D.
Taplin, Identi®cation of host DNA by ampli®ed fragment
length polymorphism (Amp-¯p) analysis of human crab louse
excreta, J. Med. Entomol. 31 (1994) 686±690.
[26] W.D. Lord, J.A. DiZinno, M.R. Wilson, B. Budowle, D.
Taplin, T.L. Meinking, Isolation, ampli®cation and sequen-
cing of human mitochondrial DNA obtained from human crab
louse, Pthirus Pubis (L.), blood means, J. Forensic Sci. 43
(1998) 1097±1100.
[27] N.H. Haskell, R.E. Williams, Collection of entomological
evidence at the death scene, in: E.P. Catts, N.H. Haskell
(Eds.), Entomology and Death. A Procedural Guide, Joyce's
Print Shop, Clemson, SC, 1990, pp. 82±97.
[28] N.H. Haskell, Entomological collection techniques at autopsy
and for speci®c environments, in: E.P. Catts, N.H. Haskell
(Eds.), Entomology and Death. A Procedural Guide, Joyce's
Print Shop, Clemson, SC, 1990, pp. 98±110.
[29] N.H. Haskell, Procedures in the entomology laboratory, in:
E.P. Catts, N.H. Haskell (Eds.), Entomology and Death. A
Procedural Guide, Joyce's Print Shop, Clemson, SC, 1990,
pp. 111±123.
[30] E.P. Catts, Analyzing entomological data, in: E.P. Catts, N.H.
Haskell (Eds.), Entomology and Death. A Procedural Guide,
Joyce's Print Shop, Clemson, SC, 1990, pp. 124±137.
[31] M.L. Goff, Estimation of postmortem interval using arthro-
pod development and successional patterns, Forensic Sci.
Rev. 5 (1993) 81±94.
[32] J.D. Wells, F. Introna, G. Di Vella, C.P. Campobasso, J.H.
Hayes, F.A.H. Sperling, Human and insect mitochondrial
DNA analysis from maggots, J. Forensic Sci. 46 (2001) 261±
263.
 C.P. Campobasso, F. Introna / Forensic Science International 120 (2001) 132±139
[33] W.U. Spitz, R.S. Fischer, Medicolegal Investigation of Death.
Guidelines for the Application of Pathology to Crime
Investigation, Charles C. Thomas Publisher, Spring®eld, IL,
1980.
[34] http://www.ncjrs.org.
[35] W.C. Rodriguez, W.M. Bass, Insect activity and its relation-
ship to decay rates of human cadavers in east Tennessee, J.
Forensic Sci. 28 (1983) 423±432.
[36] A.R. Morits, Classical mistakes in forensic pathology, Am. J.
Clin. Pathol. 26 (1956) 1383±1397.
[37] D. Komar, O. Beattie, Postmortem insect activity may mimic
perimortem sexual assault clothing patterns, J. Forensic. Sci.
43 (1998) 792±796.
[38] D.A. Hawley, N.H. Haskell, D.G. McShaffrey, R.E. Williams,
J.E. Pless, Identi®cation of red ``®ber'': Chironomid larvae, J.
Forensic. Sci. 34 (1989) 617±621.
[39] C.L. Meek, M.D. Andis, C.S. Andrews, Role of the
entomologist in forensic pathology, including a selected
bibliography, Bib. Entomol. Soc. Am. 1 (1983) 1±10.
[40] R.H. Fox, C.L. Cunningham, Crime Scene Search and
Physical Evidence Handbook, US Department of Justice,
Washington, DC, 1973, pp. 11±43.
[41] W.D. Lord, J.F. Burger, Collection and preservation of
forensically important entomological materials, J. Forensic
Sci. 28 (1983) 936±944.
[42] J.R. Goodbrod, M.L. Goff, Effects of larval population
density on rates of development and interactions between two
species of Chrysomya (Diptera: Calliphoridae) in laboratory
culture, J. Med. Entomol. 27 (1990) 338±343.
[43] K.A. Hewadikaram, M.L. Goff, Effect of carcass size on rate
of decomposition and arthropod succession patterns, Am. J.
Forensic Med. Pathol. 12 (1991) 235±240.
[44] C.C. Deonier, Carcass temperatures and the relation to winter
blow¯y populations and activity in the southwest, J. Econ.
Entomol. 33 (1940) 166±170.
[45] W.M. Bass, Outdoor decomposition rates in Tennessee, in:
W.D. Haglund, M.A. Sorg (Eds.), Forensic Taphonomy: the
Postmortem Fate of Human Remains, CRC Press, Boston,
1997, pp. 181±186.
[46] R.W. Mann, W.M. Bass, L. Meadows, Time since death and
decomposition of the human body: variables and observations
in case and experimental ®eld studies, J. Forensic Sci. 35
(1990) 103±111.
[47] A. Galloway, W.H. Birkby, A.M. Jones, T.E. Henry, B.O.
Parks, Decay rates of human remains in an arid environment,
J. Forensic Sci. 34 (1989) 607±616.
[48] W.C. Rodriguez, W.M. Bass, Decomposition of buried bodies
and methods that may aid in their location, J. Forensic Sci. 30
(1985) 836±852.
[49] F. Introna Jr., C.P. Campobasso, A. Di Fazio, Three case
studies in forensic entomology from southern Italy, J.
Forensic Sci. 43 (1998) 208±212.
[50] F.W. Avila, M.L. Goff, Arthropod succession patterns onto
burnt carrion in two contrasting habitats in the Hawaiian
Islands, J. Forensic Sci. 43 (1998) 581±586.
[51] P. Nuorteva, M. Isokoski, K. Laiho, Studies on the
possibilities of using blow¯ies (Dipt.) as medicolegal
indicators in Finland, Ann. Entomol. Fenn. 33 (1967)
217±225.
139
[52] D.H. Ubelaker, H. Scammell, Bones: a Forensic Detective's
Casebook, Edward Burlingame Books, New York, 1992.
[53] V.K. Kashyap, V.V. Pillay, Ef®cacy of entomological method
in estimation of postmortem interval: a comparative analysis,
Forensic Sci. Int. 40 (1989) 245±250.
[54] G.R. Jones, P.P. Singer, Forensic toxicology, in: Y.H. Caplan,
R.S. Frank (Eds.), Medicolegal Death Investigation, The
Forensic Sciences Foundation Press, Colorado Springs, 1999,
pp. 181±209.
[55] K.B. Nolte, R.D. Pinder, W.D. Lord, Insect larvae used to
detect cocaine poisoning in a decomposed body, J. Forensic
Sci. 37 (1992) 1179±1185.
[56] P. Kintz, A. Tracqui, P. Mangin, Toxicology and ¯y larvae on
a putre®ed cadaver, J. Forensic Sci. Soc. 30 (1990) 243±246.
[57] F. Introna Jr., C. Lo Dico, Y.H. Caplan, J.E. Smialek, Opiate
analysis of cadaveric blow ¯y larvae as an indicator of
narcotic intoxication, J. Forensic Sci. 35 (1990) 118±122.
[58] M.L. Goff, A.I. Omori, J.R. Goodbrod, Effect of cocaine in
tissues on the rate of development of Boettcherisca peregrina
(Diptera: Sarcophagidae), J. Med. Entomol. 26 (1989) 91±93.
[59] M.L. Goff, W.A. Brown, K.A. Hewadikaram, A.I. Omori,
Effects of heroin in decomposing tissues on the development
rate of Boettcherisca peregrina (Diptera: Sarcophagidae) and
implications of this effect on estimation of postmortem
intervals using arthropod development patterns, J. Forensic
Sci. 36 (1991) 537±542.
[60] M.L. Miller, W.D. Lord, M.L. Goff, B. Donnelly, E.T.
McDonough, J.C. Alexis, Isolation of amitrptyline and
nortriptyline from ¯y puparia (Phoridae) and beetle exuviae
(Dermestidae) associated with mummi®ed human remains, J.
Forensic Sci. 39 (1994) 1305±1313.
[61] D.W. Sadler, C. Fuke, F. Court, D.J. Pounder, Drug
accumulation and elimination in Calliphora vicina larvae,
Forensic Sci. Int. 71 (1995) 191±197.
[62] D.W. Sadler, L. Robertson, G. Brown, C. Fuke, D.J. Pounder,
Barbiturate and analgesics in Calliphora vicina larvae, J.
Forensic Sci. 42 (1997) 481±485.
[63] D.W. Sadler, G. Chuter, C. Senevernatne, D.J. Pounder,
Commentary on D.W. Sadler, L. Robertson, G. Brown, C.
Fuke, D.J. Pounder, Barbiturate and analgesics in Calliphora
vicina larvae, J. Forensic Sci. 42 (1997) 1214±1215.
[64] K. Gunatilake, M.L. Goff, Detection of organophosphate
poisoning in a putrefying body by analyzing arthropod larvae,
J. Forensic Sci. 34 (1989) 714±716.
[65] J.H. Davis, The medicolegal autopsy: procedures and
interpretations, in: Y.H. Caplan, R.S. Frank (Eds.), Medico-
legal Death Investigation, The Forensic Sciences Foundation
Press, Colorado Springs, 1999, pp. 142±154.
[66] P. Nuorteva, Medicolegal entomology at the meeting of Liege
1988 and its future. Synthesis and conclusions of the
workshop 2, Acta Med. Leg. Soc. (Liege) 38 (1988) 309±316.
[67] M. Benecke, Rechtsmedizinisch angewandte kerb und
spinnentierkundliche Begutachtungen in Europa: eine kurze
OÈ bersicht uÈber UrspruÈnge und den aktuellen Stand der
Forschung (Use of insect evidence in history and in Europe's
forensic medicine Ð a short survey), Rechtsmedizin 8 (1998)
153±155.
[68] B. Greenberg, Flies as forensic indicators, J. Med. Entomol.
28 (1991) 565±577.