138 Forensic dentistry
result of media depictions, some fanciful, others accurate and informative. The
increasing contributions of forensic anthropology, from unidentified remains
cases and homicide investigations to transportation and natural disasters to
crimes against humanity, have been best described by its practitioners.3–8
As public awareness of forensic anthropology has increased, so has the
number of board-certified diplomates, currently about seventy-seven, and the
number of institutions offering advanced degrees in forensic anthropology ,
or physical anthropology with a forensic emphasis.^1 In the 1970s most prac-
titioners of forensic anthropology held academic positions and offered only
occasional assistance to investigative agencies. Once rare, forensic anthro-
pology service laboratories affiliated with universities are no longer unusual.
Some organizations employ a number of full-time forensic anthropologists
(e.g., Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command/Central Identification Labora-
tory [JPAC/CILHI], National Transportation Safety Board [NTSB], and pri-
vate disaster management corporations), and an increasing number of large
medical examiner establishments employ full-time forensic anthropologists.
Consequently, the presence of forensic anthropologists providing case reports,
depositions, and expert testimony in civil and criminal courts and in tribu-
nals around the world has increased dramatically in the past two decades.^9
8.2 Typical Case Progression
Cases requiring the services of forensic anthropologists arise in a variety of
ways. Excluding mass fatality scenarios, the appearance of unknown human
remains may involve skeletal components and scavenged fragments scattered
about the landscape, clandestine burials, submerged remains, or the occa-
sional skull upon a mantel kept as a memento mori discovered incidentally
during execution of a warrant for an unrelated cause. Anthropologists are
increasingly summoned by arson investigators for in situ examination and
recovery of fragile remains prior to transport.
When remains come to light, law enforcement may have a theory about the
identity of the decedent, or perhaps about the manner in which the decedent
came to an end. In such cases, someone may be missing from the commu-
nity, and circumstances lead investigators to believe that the remains might be
that individual. Additional information about the putative cause or manner of
death may also have been developed. In such instances, experienced forensic
anthropologists will follow something akin to the null hypothesis approach.
As the examination progresses, the anthropologist attempts to defeat or dis-
prove the a priori theories offered. In this way, the careful examiner avoids
any inclination to notice only the data that support the favored theory while
ignoring observations that might not fit the official mindset.