Tool Marks. Factors Involved in Their Comparison and Use as Evidence
David Q. Burd, Paul L. Kirk · Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1931-1951) · 1942
Comparison of tool marks as an aid in the solution of crime is a well known and widely used procedure which is generally considered as yielding valid court evidence. It is true, nevertheless, that much misapprehension exists as to the individuality of such marks and the probability of repetition of a mark by more than one tool. Such misappre-hension as existshas undoubtedly arisen in part from a lack of careful study of the factors which influence the char-acter of the marks left by a tool, and which must be considered in the identi-fication of such marks. Although many authors mention and discuss briefly the use of marks in identification of tools, apparently none of them have reported an adequate study of these factors, or if they have, a careful search of the literature of the subject has failed to reveal such a record. Aside from brief mention of tool marks in such standard works as those by Lucas, and Siderman and O'Connell,2 the most publicized account of their employment in criminal in-vestigation seems to be that of May,3 portions of which have been reproduced by Dieckmann and by others. Details of the matching of marks are given in these accounts, but no comparative study of methods of evaluating the doubtful case is reported. Moreover, the criminal case chiefly concerned in the latter articles involved cutting of the branches of a tree, which is con-siderably different from the usual type