AN UNUSUAL FORENSIC OF HUMAN IDENTIFICATION: USE OF SELFIE PHOTOGRAPHS

ABSTRACT

As with other methods of identification, in forensic odontology, antemortem data are

compared with postmortem findings. In the absence of dental documentation, photographs of
the smile play an important role in this comparison. As yet, there are no reports of the use of
the selfie photograph for identification purposes. Owing to advancements in technology,
electronic devices, and social networks, this type of photograph has become increasingly
common. This paper describes a case in which selfie photographs were used to identify a
carbonized body, by using the smile line and image superimposition. This low-cost, rapid, and
easy to analyze technique provides highly reliable results.

Nevertheless, there are disadvantages, such as the limited number of teeth that are visible in a
photograph, low image quality, possibility of morphological changes in the teeth after the
antemortem image was taken, and difficulty of making comparisons depending on the
orientation of the photo. In forensic odontology, new methods of identification must be
sought to accompany technological evolution, particularly when no traditional methods of
comparison, such as clinical record charts or radiographs, are available.

1. Introduction

As with other methods of identification, in forensic odontology, antemortem (AM) data are
compared with postmortem (PM) findings. An individual’s dentition forms a unique
tridimensional apparatus because of variations in the size, shape, and position of teeth [1].
However, AM dental data may not be available for various reasons, such as for immigrants
without a clinical history [2], patients without fillings due to efficient preventive dentistry or no
access to a dentist, or cases in which the patient’s dentist is unknown to their family.

In the absence of dental documentation, photographs of the smile can play an important role
[3]. Few authors have been involved in the elaboration of this method [2]. If the individual’s
anterior teeth are clearly defined in an AM photograph, then individual attributes of the teeth
may be compared and matched to PM photographs [1]. Indeed, anterior dentition can provide
sufficient evidence of individuality [1]. Commonly applied and scientifically validated
photographic comparison techniques include direct morphological comparison of the teeth,
superimposition, and analysis of the incisal outline of the anterior teeth [3]. In spite of
advancements in forensic sciences, traditional techniques continue to be of great value,
particularly in emerging and developing countries [3].

Some studies [3–5] have used photographs of the smile for identification purposes, but as yet,
there is no report of a case with the use of selfie photographs. With advancements in
technology, electronic devices, and social networks, selfie photographs are becoming
increasingly common. This present study showed yet another type of AM datum that may be
useful in identification, particularly when there is no other medical/dental documentation
available. The aim of this study was to show a report of a case in which selfie photographs
were used to identify a carbonized body, by using the smile line and image superimposition.

2. Case report
In December 2014, a carbonized body of the male sex was admitted to the Legal Medical
Institute of Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil (Fig. 1). Necroscopic and dental exams were
performed, in which all of the teeth were found to be healthy.

For identification, the family was requested to provide all available medical and dental
documentation. As the victim had no history of dental treatment, the family presented six
selfie photographs that had been taken with the victim’s mobile telephone. These photographs
showed the individual’s teeth at various angles (Fig. 2).

PM photographs were taken in the same spatial orientations as those of the AM photographs,
as described by De Angelis et al. [2], so that comparisons could be made. CorelDRAW X71
(Ottawa, Canada) was used to perform two comparative techniques: the smile line (Fig. 3) and
superimposition of the teeth (Figs. 4 and 5).

The smile line was traced on the AM and PM photographs, highlighting the incisal outline
(canine to canine) of the maxillary anterior teeth. Two matrices were formed, superimposed,
and found to be matching (Fig. 3). The superimposition technique was also used, with layers of
0%, 25%, 75%, and 100% transparency of the AM photographs being superimposed on the PM
photographs (Figs. 4 and 5).

To make the identification more robust, the semiquantitative score proposed by De Angelis et
al. [2] was used. Scores from 0 to 2 were attributed to teeth nos. 13, 12, 11, 21, 22, and 23, in
accordance with the degree of correspondence of each component of the matrix with the
surfaces of the teeth. The index of correspondence (IC) was 81.25, indicating high probability
(Fig. 6).

The victim’s father signed a consent form authorizing publication of the case in a scientific
journal. Therefore, the ethical aspects of this report were respected.

3. Discussion and conclusion

The teeth have biometric properties [6] that may be useful for identification by AM and PM
photographs. A photograph of the smile that shows the anterior teeth has points of reference
that can be established for comparison [1]. Key characteristics for identification that are visible
in a photograph of the smile include the shape of the crown, morphological characteristics,
size, width, outline, facial profile, dental anomalies, distances, and alignment between the
teeth [1].

There has been a growing trend toward using digital cameras to obtain selfie photographs, in
which the main focus is centered on an individual’s face. In 2013, the Oxford English Dictionary
designated ‘‘selfie’’ as the International Word of the Year [7]. The aforementioned text defines
the selfie as ‘‘a photo of yourself that you take, typically with a smartphone or a webcam, and
usually put on a social networking site’’. Such photographs may provide material with the
potential to resolve certain cases of human identification [4]. Some AM photographs used for
comparison likely have originated from social networks on the Internet. As the selfie is taken
with the arm or a supporting rod, the face and smile frequently appear in the photo. Some
cameras even have a function for capturing the smile. Furthermore, due to technological
advancements, the quality of digital photographs has increased.
In a study of photographs of 1000 individuals, 76.7% showed a smile that could be of value in
the identification process [1]. In the case under study, six selfie photographs were made
available, showing the supposed victim’s teeth at different angles.

PM photographs were taken in the same orientations as the AM photographs. Having an AM

photograph is crucial when taking PM photographs, because the angulation of the photograph
must be reproduced in the X, Y, and Z (depth) axes for the comparison to be correct and
accurate [5]. An error of 28 in the orientation of the PM photograph has no influence on the
result [2].

Comparisons between the AM and PM photographs were made by two techniques: the smile
line and superimposition. On the smile line, the incisal outline of the maxillary anterior teeth
was drawn on the AM and PM photographs by CorelDraw1. Resulting matrices were
superimposed to evaluate the degree of coincidence, or only compared, as demonstrated in a
recent study [3]. Perfect correspondence was obtained between the AM and PM matrices of
the smile line (Fig. 3).

The second technique used in this study was that of superimposition when the rigid AM and
PM structures were compared on the same scale. This approach must not be confused with
the superimposition of photographs on a dry skull, in which the bony structures in the
photograph are superimposed with soft tissues, as has been described in other studies [8–10].
Photographic superimposition has become another recent option with the use of digital
photographic analysis software programs [5]. One of the most difficult comparisons for the
dental expert to make is to compare the AM dentition (maxillary incisors and canines) visible in
a photograph of the smile with the PM dentition by superimposition [2]. Two studies in the
literature describe ways for superimposing the smile, by using layers [11] or matrices [2]. Both
studies were conducted with controlled experiments and did not show the application in a real
case, as was proposed in the present article.

In the first method, described by Bollinger et al. [11], a layer of the AM photograph is made
with Photoshop1 software and superimposed on the PM photo. This superimposition can be
made on images of the maxilla and mandible. According to the original study, the chance of
reaching a conclusion that leads to identification is increased when multiple individual
characteristics are visible in the AM image [11]. The case presented here showed giroversion
and vestibularization of the mandibular canines (Fig. 5), anomalies of position that play an
important role in the process of identification [9]. Differences in the present study compared
to the original report include the use of a different software program and four layers (rather
than a single layer) with different percentages of transparency (0%, 25%, 75%, and 100%;

Figs. 4 and 5).

In the second method, described by De Angelis et al. [2], a system of nonmathematical scores
is applied to calculate the IC (Fig. 6). This technique was described as an inexpensive, rapid,
and semiquantitative way to identify individuals when other methods are not applicable [2].
Photoshop1 software is used to make a matrix of the six maxillary anterior teeth. This matrix is
then superimposed on the image in question. A score from 0 to 2 is attributed to each tooth, in
accordance with the following criteria: 0 for the nonvaluable portion, 1 for compatibility, and 2
for significant correspondence [2]. In the present case, the result of 81.25 indicates an IC of
high probability of correspondence.
Although De Angelis et al. endeavored to design a quantitative method [2], the process of
attributing scores involves a degree of subjectivity. Results from subjective methods must be
considered with caution. To resolve this subjectivity, the IC can be combined with other
techniques, such as the smile line and teeth superimposition, as was done in the present case
report. It is important that forensic anthropologists use all available resources to ensure a
robust identification result.

Some researchers have begun to develop algorithms to automate the identification process
using radiographs. When no radiographs are available, identification may be made by
photographs by means of automated algorithms [6]. In the future, some additional descriptors
may be considered for photographic images, to increase their performance [6]. Therefore,
future research is important for enhancing the technique. More cases should also be
described, to strengthen the evidence.

Analysis of photographs of the smile for identification purposes has the advantages of low
cost, rapid speed, and high reliability of the results. However, there may also be disadvantages,
such as the limited number of visible teeth in the photograph, low image quality, and the
possibility of morphological changes in the teeth since the AM photo was taken [2]. Moreover,
a photograph is a two-dimensional visualization of a three-dimensional structure.

Objects are difficult to compare if the orientation of the photograph is not nearly identical to
that of the photograph used for comparison [2]. For this purpose, it is necessary to have the
AM photographs before the PM photographs are taken.

In conclusion, it was possible to make a positive identification of a carbonized body by using

selfie photographs. In forensic odontology, new methods of identification must be sought to
accommodate technological evolution, particularly in the absence of traditional methods of
comparison, such as clinical record charts and radiographs.