Skip to main content

Schussverletzungen oder Käferfraß

Gunshot wounds or beetle interference

Zusammenfassung

Die in einem Waldstück aufgefundene Leiche eines 47-jährigen Mannes zeigte an Einschussverletzungen erinnernde Hautdefekte; deshalb wurde zunächst an ein Tötungsdelikt gedacht. Die Aaskäfer Nicrophorus humator und N. vespilloides wurden am Körper des Toten gefunden und nach Auskunft des Entomologen als wahrscheinliche Spurenverursacher festgestellt. Käferfraß weist einzigartige Charakteristika auf, die eindeutig von Schuss- oder Stichverletzungen differenziert werden können. Die Kenntnis der morphologischen Merkmale der von Tieren verursachten Wundartefakte ist bedeutsam, da sie Fehldeutungen bei Todesermittlungen vorbeugen kann. Im Ergebnis der Obduktion war der Mann an einer erhängungsbedingten Strangulation verstorben, anscheinend im Zusammenhang mit einer autoerotischen Betätigung.

Abstract

The body of a 47-year-old man found in a wooded area showed skin defects that appeared to be gunshot wounds and initially raised the suspicion of homicide. The carrion beetles Nicrophorus humator and N. vespilloides were found directly on the body and according to the entomologist these silphid beetles could have caused the wounds. Tissue damage caused by beetles shows unique characteristics and can be clearly distinguished from those wounds (e.g. shot and stab wounds) commonly observed in forensic contexts. Knowledge of the morphology of wound artefacts produced by animals is important as it may avoid misinterpretation of the cause of death. The results of the autopsy showed that the man had died from strangulation by hanging, apparently in connection with an autoerotic activity.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4

Literatur

  1. Anderson GS (2004) Determining time of death using blow fly eggs in the early postmortem interval. Int J Legal Med 118:204–241

    Google Scholar 

  2. Asamura H, Takayanagi K, Ota M et al (2004) Unusual characteristic patterns of postmortem injuries. J Forensic Sci 49:592–594

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Baumjohann K, Schiwy-Bochat KH, Rothschild MA (2011) Maggots reveal a case of antemortal insect infestation. Int J Legal Med 15:487–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Benecke M (2001) Rein einseitiges Auftreten von Schmeißfliegenmaden im Gesicht einer Faulleiche. Arch Kriminol 208:182–185

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Benecke M (2003) Leichenbesiedlung durch Gliedertiere. In: Brinkmann B, Madea B (Hrsg) Handbuch Rechtsmedizin. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokio, S 170–187

  6. Benecke M (2008) A brief survey of the history of forensic entomology. Acta Biol Benrodis 14:15–38

    Google Scholar 

  7. Campobasso CP, Marchetti D, Introna F, Colonna MF (2009) Postmortem artifacts made by ants and the effect of ant activity on decompositional rates. Am J Forensic Med Pathol 30:84–87

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Goff ML (1991) Determination of postmortem interval by arthropod succession: a case study from the Hawaiian Islands. J Forensic Sci 36:607–614

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Haglund WD (1992) Contribution of rodents to postmortem artifacts of bone and soft tissue. J Forensic Sci 37:1459–1465

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Haskell NH, Hall RD, Cervenka VJ, Clark MA (2006) On the body: insects‘ life stage presence, their postmortem artifacts. In: Haglund WD, Sorg MH (Hrsg) Forensic taphonomy: the postmortem fate of human remains. CRC, Boca Raton, S 415–448

  11. Hurka K (2005) Beetles of Czech and Slovak Republics. Nakladatelstvi Kabourek, Zlin, S 1–390

  12. O’Brien C, Turner B (2004) Impact of paracetamol on calliphora vicina larval development. Int J Legal Med 118:188–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Patel F (1994) Artefact in forensic medicine: postmortem rodent activity. J Forensic Sci 39:257–260

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Pollak S, Reiter C (1988) Maggot-induced postmortem changes simulating gunshot wounds. Arch Kriminol 181:146–154

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Pukowski E (1933) Ökologische Untersuchungen an Nicrophorus F. Z Morphol Oekol Tiere 27:518–586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ratcliffe BC (1996) The carrion beetles (Coleoptera: Silphidae) of Nebraska. Bull Univ Nebr State Mus 3:1–100

    Google Scholar 

  17. Roeterdink EM, Dadour IR, Watling RJ (2004) Extraction of gunshot residues from the larvae of the forensically important blowfly Calliphora dubia (Macquart) (Diptera: Calliphoridae). Int J Legal Med 118:63–70

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ropohl D, Scheithauer R, Pollak S (1995) Postmortem injuries inflicted by domestic golden hamster: morphological aspects and evidence by DNA typing. Forensic Sci Int 72:81–90

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Rossi ML, Shahrom AW, Chapman RC, Vanezis P (1994) Postmortem injuries by indoor pets. Am J Forensic Med Pathol 15:105–109

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Rothschild MA, Schneider V (1997) On the temporal onset of postmortem animal scavenging. ‚‚Motivation’‘ of the animal. Forensic Sci Int 89:57–64

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Schoenly A (1992) Statistical analysis of successional patterns in carrion-arthropod assemblages: implications for forensic entomology and determination of the postmortem interval. J Forensic Sci 37:1289–1513

    Google Scholar 

  22. Scott MP (1998) The ecology and behavior of burying beetles. Annu Rev Entomol 43:595–618

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Steadman DW, Worne H (2007) Canine scavenging of human remains in an indoor setting. Forensic Sci Int 173:78–82

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Tsokos M, Schulz F (1999) Indoor postmortem animal interference by carnivores and rodents: report of two cases and review of the literature. Int J Legal Med 112:115–119

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Watson EJ, Carlton CE (2005) Succession of forensically significant carrion beetle larvae on large carcasses (Coleoptera: Silphidae). Southeastern Nat 4:335–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Willey P, Snyder LM (1989) Canid modification of human remains: implications for time-since-death estimations. J Forensic Sci 34:894–901

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Witzgall K (1971) 10. Familie Histeridae. In; Freud H, Harde KW, Lohse GA (Hrsg) Die Käfer Mitteleuropas. Fischer, Jena, S 156–189

Download references

Einhaltung ethischer Richtlinien

Interessenkonflikt. K. Baumjohann, M. Benecke und M.A. Rothschild geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht. Der Beitrag enthält keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. Baumjohann.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Baumjohann, K., Benecke, M. & Rothschild, M. Schussverletzungen oder Käferfraß. Rechtsmedizin 24, 114–117 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00194-013-0934-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00194-013-0934-1

Schlüsselwörter

  • Forensische Wissenschaften
  • Entomologie
  • Artefakte
  • Wunden und Verletzungen
  • Nicrophorus

Keywords

  • Forensic sciences
  • Entomology
  • Artefacts
  • Wounds and injuries
  • Nicrophorus