Historically Speaking: Using Forensic Evidence to Solve Crimes

Today’s DNA techniques are just the latest addition to a toolkit used by detectives since ancient times.

The Wall Street Journal

May 5, 2023

In February, police in Burlington, Vt., announced they had solved the city’s oldest cold case, the 1971 murder of 24-year-old schoolteacher Rita Curran. Taking advantage of genetic genealogy using DNA databases—the latest addition to the forensic science toolbox—the police were able to prove that the killer was a neighbor in Curran’s apartment building, William DeRoos.

The practice of forensic science, the critical examination of crime scenes, existed long before it had a name. The 1st-century A.D. Roman jurist Quintilian argued that evidence was not the same as proof unless supported by sound method and reasoning. Nothing should be taken at face value: Even blood stains on a toga, he pointed out, could be the result of a nosebleed or a messy religious sacrifice rather than a murder.

In 6th-century Byzantium, the Justinian Law Code allowed doctors to serve as expert witnesses, recognizing that murder cases required specialized knowledge. In Song Dynasty China, coroners were guided by Song Ci, a 13th-century judge who wrote “The Washing Away of Wrongs,” a comprehensive handbook on criminology and forensic science. Using old case studies, Song provided step-by-step instructions on how to tell if a drowned person had been alive before hitting the water and whether blowflies could be attracted by traces of blood on a murder weapon.

As late as the 17th century, however, Western investigators were still prone to attributing unexplained deaths to supernatural causes. In 1691 the sudden death of Henry Sloughter, the colonial governor of New York, provoked public hysteria. It subsided after an autopsy performed by six physicians proved that blocked lungs, not spells or poison, were responsible. The case was a watershed in placing forensic pathology at the heart of the American judicial system.

Using forensic evidence to solve criminal crimes

THOMAS FUCHS

Growing confidence in scientific methods resulted in more systematic investigations, which increased the chances of a case being solved. In England in 1784, the conviction of John Toms for the murder of Edward Culshaw hinged on a paper scrap pulled from Culshaw’s bullet wound. The jagged edge was found to match up perfectly with a torn sheet of paper found in Toms’s pocket.

Still, the only way to determine whether a suspect was present at the scene of a crime was by visual identification. By the late 19th century, studies by Charles Darwin’s cousin, the anthropologist Sir Francis Galton, and others had established that every individual has unique fingerprints. Fingerprint evidence might have helped to identify Jack the Ripper in 1888, but official skepticism kept the police from pursuing it.

Four years later, in Argentina, fingerprints were used to solve a crime for the first time. Two police officers, Juan Vucetich and Eduardo Alvarez, ignored their superiors’ distrust of the method to prove that a woman had murdered her children so she could marry her lover.

The success of fingerprinting ushered in a golden age of forensic innovation, driven by ambition but guided by scientific principles. By the 1930s, dried blood stains could be analyzed for their blood type and bullets could be matched to the guns that fired them. Almost a century later, the first principle of forensic science still stands: Every contact leaves a trace.

WSJ Historically Speaking: Remembering the Pueblo: Hostages as Propaganda Tools

The Pueblo incident, involving the North Korean takeover of a spy ship, turns 50

ILLUSTRATION: THOMAS FUCHS

Fifty years ago, on Jan. 23, 1968, North Korean forces captured the U.S. Navy spy ship Pueblo in international waters. North Korea took 82 crew members hostage (one was killed in the attack) and subjected them to 11 months of sporadic torture and starvation, humiliating appearances and forced confessions before an international radio and TV audience. Communications technology had given the ancient practice of hostage-taking a whole new purpose as a tool of propaganda.

Hostages have always been a part of warfare. By the second millennium B.C., Egyptians would take the young princes of conquered states and hold them as surety for good behavior, treating the young nobles well with the aim of turning them into future allies.

The Romans admired this tactic and imitated it. But others were simply interested in money. As a young man, Julius Caesar (100-44 B.C.) was held for ransom by pirates. A biographer of the time writes that while hostage, Caesar amused himself by reading his poems and speeches to his captors. The pirates assumed he was mad, especially when he promised to come back and hang them all. Once the ransom had been paid, the future general fulfilled his vow, hunting down the pirates and executing all of them.

During the Middle Ages, a hostage was better than money in the bank. Negotiating parties used hostages to enforce peace treaties, trade deals and even safe passage. In 1412, for instance, a French political faction sealed an alliance with the English King Henry IV. As part of the guarantee, the 12 year-old John of Orléans, Count of Angoulême, was sent to England, where he remained a political hostage for the next 32 years.

If a deal fell apart, however, retribution could be devastating. During the Third Crusade (1189–1192), King Richard I of England, known as the Lionheart, ordered the massacre of nearly 3,000 Muslim hostages after the Sultan Saladin reneged on his promise to pay a ransom and return his Christian prisoners along with relics of the True Cross.

Brutality toward hostages has been a lamentably common feature of modern warfare. The Germans showed little compunction during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71, when they used civilians as human shields on military trains. During World War II, amid a range of other atrocities, the Nazis killed thousands of civilian hostages across Europe, often in reprisal for earlier attacks. During one massacre in German-occupied Serbia in 1941, 100 hostages were to be shot for each dead German soldier.

The idea of hostage-taking as an end in itself is largely a 20th-century development—a way to exploit the powerful reach of mass media. The North Koreans were hardly alone. Domestic extremists also saw the propaganda value of hostages, as in the 1974 kidnapping of Patty Hearst by the Symbionese Liberation Army.

Just five years later, students supporting Iran’s Islamic revolution stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and took 66 American hostages. The students had various demands, among them the extradition of the deposed shah. But their real motivation seemed to be inflicting pain on the captive Americans—who were beaten, threatened with death and paraded in blindfolds before a mob—and on the U.S. itself. There were some early releases, but 52 hostages were held under appalling conditions for 444 days.

Today, memories of the Pueblo incident and the Iran hostage crisis have faded, but both hostage-takings have had a lasting influence on American attitudes. In certain ways, they still define U.S. relations with the regimes of North Korea and Iran.