Skip to main content

Forensic Science - Sanjukta Mondal ***(*)

The forensic scientist's work forms a fascinating part of crime drama, with the pathologist playing a big supporting role in many police procedurals, while some shows such as the various CSI series, Silent Witness, Bones, Waking the Dead drive the action from the forensics. It's not surprising, then, that Sanjukta Mondal makes good use of this TV introduction to this science both to introduce real concepts, but also to point out where the fictional versions get it wrong.

It's also essential to cover, as she does, the reality that forensic work has itself slipped up. The book's introduction finishes with a reference to the key phrase 'every contact leaves a trace' becoming a guiding principle, but then tells us 'Does that mean forensic science is foolproof? The answer is no. It comes with its own set of pitfalls.' And these pitfalls will form a significant part of telling the story of the development of forensic science as a discipline.

Although TV shows feature reguarly, the first fictional focus is on written detective science with Poe's Dupin and particularly Sherlock Holmes getting a look in as an inspiration for the real thing. We then take more of a dive into that 'every contact' concept to see the ways such contacts can be left and detected - and how technology has changed our abilities over the years. From there, Mondal moves on to toxicology - here Game of Thrones gets a mention as a fictional starter, but Agatha Christie, with her regular use of poison in her mysteries, takes centre stage.

From there we move onto 'crimes of past and present' - obviously this spends a lot of time on cold cases, where the Bones TV show provides the fictional factor (the 'present' part reflects the way that even with warmer cases, skeletal remains can be important). After taking a dip into the world of art crime (where real life forger Tom Keating provides a better story than any fiction), the final parts of the book take in forensic limitations and some TV show debunking. It's always fun to point out failures in dramas, though I'm not sure the debunking the ideal way to pull together the book.

My star rating for this book is ***(*) - in terms of the interesting stories and background I think it rates four stars, but Mondal's writing style can be a little breathless for my taste and the overall structure of the book feels a little confused. There are also a few little slips - notably that quote in the introduction was from the French forensic pioneer Edmond Locard, who, we are told, coined it in the seventeenth century - Locard was born in the late 1800s, and appears to have coined the phrase in the early 20th century. I can only assume it's a typo as there's quite a lot on Locard later in the book, assigned to the correct period.

If you enjoy a forensic science TV show, though, this is the ideal book to fill in some details of where it all came from. 

Paperback:   
Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support my online work, consider buying a virtual coffee or taking out a membership:
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why Nobody Understands Quantum Physics - Frank Verstraete and Céline Broeckaert **

It's with a heavy heart that I have to say that I could not get on with this book. The structure is all over the place, while the content veers from childish remarks to unexplained jargon. Frank Versraete is a highly regarded physicist and knows what he’s talking about - but unfortunately, physics professors are not always the best people to explain physics to a general audience and, possibly contributed to by this being a translation, I thought this book simply doesn’t work. A small issue is that there are few historical inaccuracies, but that’s often the case when scientists write history of science, and that’s not the main part of the book so I would have overlooked it. As an example, we are told that Newton's apple story originated with Voltaire. Yet Newton himself mentioned the apple story to William Stukeley in 1726. He may have made it up - but he certainly originated it, not Voltaire. We are also told that ‘Galileo discovered the counterintuitive law behind a swinging o...
Post a Comment
Read more

How to Keep a Plane in the Sky - Alex Davies ****

If there's one big gap in the science writing sphere, it's popular engineering (you can quibble over whether engineering is science, but where else would you put popular engineering?). Alex Davies does the field a real service with this insightful introduction to the world of test engineering. The concept is simple. If we build something and sell it, we need to test it to make sure that it won't fail in a way that's dangerous to the consumer. The most obvious example is airliners, which feature at some length, but this applies to everything from cuddly toys to hair straighteners: someone needs to predict what could go wrong and to put the product through its paces to see if it will survive under any reasonable circumstances. When Davies is telling a story of test engineering in action, the book is a delight. He opens with the way that real bears are used to test if bears can get into coolers and trash cans - and the impressive ways these animals can  circumvent human in...
Post a Comment
Read more

On the Equality of All Things - Carlo Rovelli ****

There is a wide gulf between the worldviews of physicists and philosophers. Many physicists present a rather sweetly naive, child-like view of the world, where philosophers bring a distinctly more adult, cynical tone. This being the case, it can be a little worrying when a physicist dips a toe into the philosophical mire. Infamously, in The Grand Design , Stephen Hawking and co-author Leonard Mlodinow told us that philosophy was now dead because science could deal with anything it had previously been needed for. Thankfully, Carlo Rovelli is not trying to do away with philosophy, though it has to be said that when he veers into the topic that physicist's naivety can make it feel like the philosophising of an earnest eighteen-year-old. Take the opening paragraph, which tells us 'electrons and minds, stones and laws, judgements and galaxies do not essentially differ in nature from one another. They are notions that illuminate each other'. I almost expected a Pink Floyd soundtr...
Post a Comment
Read more