Advanced SearchSearch Tips
A study of the distribution of glass particles on patrol car seats
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
  • Journal title : Analytical Science and Technology
  • Volume 29, Issue 3,  2016, pp.136-141
  • Publisher : The Korean Society of Analytical Science
  • DOI : 10.5806/AST.2016.29.3.136
 Title & Authors
A study of the distribution of glass particles on patrol car seats
Kim, Mihye; Ko, Gangseok; Kim, Sookyung; Hong, Sungwook;
  PDF(new window)
In the present study, the distribution of glass particles inside 10 patrol cars of Chungnam Province has been studied. The target seats were front seats (driver’s seat, passenger’s seat) and the back seat. The target areas were the bottom of the seat (seat contacting buttocks, back of the seat, and the corner of the seat (the bottom and back attached part)). The target areas were tape lifted with an adhesive tape. The glass particles adhering to the adhesive tape were examined and counted under a stereomicroscope. The total number of glass particles found was 679. Among them, 471 (driver’s seat 293, passenger seat 178) were collected from front seats, which are usually occupied by police officers. The majority of glass particles were under 0.49 mm size. The results show that the majority of glass particles can be found on the front seats, rather than on the back seat. There is a high probability that glass particles found on the front seat adhere to police officers, so that to get further transferred to the convict upon physical contact (secondary transfer). Thus, there is a risk of misinterpretation of the value of glass evidence in the course of forensic examinations. Hence, a separate method to prevent cross contamination has to be prepared by police authorities as soon as possible.
patrol cars;secondary transfer;glass particles;contamination possibility;
 Cited by
S. Hong, ‘Trace Evidence’, Susa Youngu, Seoul, 2010.

J. A. Lambert, M. J. Satterthwaite and P. H. Harrison, Sci. Justice, 35(4), 273-281 (1995). crossref(new window)

N. N. Daeid, D. McColl and J. Ballany, Forensic Sci. Int., 191(1-3), 19-23 (2009). crossref(new window)

L. Lau, Canadian Soc. Forensic Sci. J., 30(4), 233-240 (1997). crossref(new window)

C. I. Petterd, J. Hamshere, S. Stewart, K. Brinch, T. Masi and C. Roux, Forensic Sci. Int., 103(3), 193-198 (1999). crossref(new window)

S. A. Coulson, J. S. Buckleton, A. B. Gummer and C. M. Triggs, Sci. Justice, 41(1), 39-48 (2001). crossref(new window)

G. Cooper, Sci. Justice, 53(2), 166-170 (2013). crossref(new window)

S. O’Sullivan, T. Geddes and T. J. Lovelock, Forensic Sci. Int., 208(1-3), 149-155 (2011). crossref(new window)

R. V. Gerard, E. Lindsay, M. J. McVicar, E. D. Randall and A. Gapinska, Canadian Soc. Forensic Sci. J., 45(2), 57-63 (2012). crossref(new window)

R. E. Berk, S. A. Rochowicz, M. Wong and M. A. Kopina, J. Forensic Sci., 52(4), 838-841 (2007). crossref(new window)

H. Dorn, D. E. Ruddell, A. Heydon and B. D. Burton, Canadian Soc. Forensic Sci. J., 48(2), 85-96 (2015). crossref(new window)