FORENSIC BIOENGINEERING
A CASE STUDY IN ELECTRICAL EMISSIONS AND CAPITAL CRIME
Robert A. Stratbucker, Health Tech. Corp., 10744 West Center Road, Omaha, NE 68124
Matthew G. Marsh, Paktronix, 1602 North 59th Street, Omaha, NE 68104
Michael J. Dobersen, Coroner - Medical Examiner, Arapahoe County, Littleton, CO 80120
Susan Kitchen, Agent, Colorado Bureau of Investigation, Littleton, CO 80120
Abstract - This report uses elements of a recently adjudicated
capital criminal case to emphasize the importance of biomedical
engineering research to the workings of the criminal justice
system. We relate the cutaneous signature effect of
commercially available battery powered hand held electric pulse
generators, commonly called "stun guns", more officially Less
Than Lethal Weapons (LTLW). We cite examples of how data
from this research may be of critical assistance to the criminal
justice system. We present the physics and patho-physiologic
effects of such LTLWs on experimental animal subjects and
attempt to correlate reactions that characterize such skin
responses in humans both living and dead. We discuss and
compare the relationship between electrically produced
signature effect and mechanically produced Triple Response, an
injury phenomenon characteristic of many tissue surfaces such
as skin, described by Sir Thomas Lewis[1] long before external
pacers, defibrillators, stimulators, ablators, foresors, TASER's,
and their progeny.
A. Introduction
Forensic bioengineering may be thought of as a hybrid science
which deals with the effects of physical phenomena and the
devices which create them as related to causation and proof
before the law. In this paper we consider several patho-physiologic effects on the skin produced by what are popularly,
albeit incorrectly, known as "stun guns".
There now exists a large selection of pen-cell powered, hand
held shock devices of simplistic electrical design capable of
producing a series of less than half-joule, morphologically
complex, electrical pulses at the rate of 5 to 25 per second.
These pulses are most often 50 to 150 Kilovolt, 3 to 5 cycle
damped transients with an energy peak in the 1000 meter radio
navigation band. Finger activated bursts of these pulses of 1 to
5 seconds duration are applied by operators to the limbs and
torso of human subjects. These devices have proliferated
rapidly since the introduction of the semi-ballistic and
operationally more complicated TASER by Cover[2] in the
1970's. During the past decade ubiquitous access, highly
restrictive gun control laws, and bargain basement pricing have
put several hundred thousand of these LTLW's into the hands
of professionals and amateurs alike. While electronically
similar to several important contemporary medical devices,
LTLW's were introduced without medical claims in the early
1980's via the consumer marketplace and have thus bypassed
the exhaustive governmental and scientific review accorded
their medical counterparts. Currently only an occasional ad-hoc
investigation or market research study is found in the easily
accessible literature.
Our report deals primarily with certain cutaneous
manifestations of LTLW electrical shocks, particularly the
reproducibly characteristic "signature effect" on the skin. This
signature effect almost always contains the three elements
required of the well known Lewis Triple Response namely:
1. The rapidly formed (3-10 seconds) red spots directly
beneath two or more points of energy application whose
mechanism is capillary dilatation from endogenous
histamine like substances released in the localized region of
mild injury;
2. The "flare" or expanding reddening response due to
neighboring cutaneous arteriolar dilatation from localized
post synaptic antidromic nerve impulses (axon reflex);
3. The formation of wheals within the reaction sites due to
increased vascular permeability in the dilated region.
A critically important requirement for development and
subsidence of the Lewis Triple Response is the presence of a
functional cutaneous circulation. In other words, the signature
response to the typical low energy level electric current injury
from a stun gun burst is arrested within seconds of the abolition
of vascular perfusion. It follows that any residual signature
response from application of a stun gun to a victim's body
would necessarily have to have been initiated before death and
not afterwards. Furthermore, post shock subsidence of the
signature effect is arrested and "frozen" in place if death occurs
within minutes of a well developed signature response. We
believe this latter effect has not yet been reported.
The resemblance of the signature effect to the Lewis Triple
Response provides a methodology for use in determination of
forensic significance. We analyze this signature response in the
context of bioengineering and physiology. As is typical of most
forensic science this report follows the form of a careful case
study rather than a controlled experimental design. The data
obtained have in recent months served well the jury-based
judicial process in criminal cases. Hopefully, with experimental
reinforcement, they will serve as well the scientific needs of the
bioengineering community.
B. Methods
In a previous paper[3] a method was detailed to quantify the
signature effect from LTLW application to healthy human
volunteers. Those results and the methods of obtaining them
have been used as evidence in numerous court cases involving
alleged "stun gun" injuries. The case herein required additional
data to meet the legal requirements of Frye vs U.S.[4], which
sets new and higher standards for technical and scientific
evidence, particularly in capital matters. The decedent's body
in this case had several generally circular markings on the
exposed skin of the face which at autopsy were thought to be
muzzle abrasions from a handgun. Law enforcement questioned
this interpretation after finding the accused in possession of
several stun guns.
Recalling the human studies cited above[3] a similar method of
skin effect analysis was proposed using anesthetized pigs. This
conferred an advantage over human experiments in that detailed
surface effects could be documented photographically while
permitting generous biopsy sampling of the sites for detailed
histologic examination. Ten serial LTLW applications were
applied to the abdominal skin of a 30 Kg domestic shoat under
halothane-oxygen anesthesia. The duration of continuous pulse
administration was systematically varied at dwell times from
two to thirty seconds duration. Sequences of both ohmic and
arcing contact with the skin was used. The LTLW probes were
directly connected to the tuned output tank coil with no ohmic
ground reference. In no case was any excoriation or disruption
of the skin seen prior to biopsy. All three elements of the triple
response were seen in all sites although wheal formation in the
pig is substantially less than in humans for equal energy levels.
A repeat of the above sequence under potassium chloride
induced ventricular fibrillation showed no demonstrable
signature effects as circulation was arrested within seconds of
shock application. All runs and sites were biopsied for
subsequent sectioning and staining. Parenthetically, purposeful
attempts to stimulate the heart using an identical LTLW applied
variously over the precordium were of no measurable effect[5].
C. Results
There were several noteworthy histologic findings from the pig
skin experiments. These findings were remarkably similar to the
cutaneous pathology seen in super-threshold shocks as reported
in Spitz & Fisher[6], and also in findings from Japan[7].
1: Nuclear streaming and vaculization: Alignment of cell nuclei
along the current path through skin.
2: Epidermal thinning and wheal formation.
3: Dermal hyalinization: Coagulation of dermal collagen.
4: Vascular congestion: Dilation and engorgement of dermal
capillaries with blood.
Relatively little is known about histologic changes that take
place using threshold intensity electric shocks to healthy human
skin. Most published data on electric shock skin changes come
from industrial accidents where current densities are always
much higher causing severe trauma to the skin.
D. Discussion
All the aforementioned surface reactions of the skin to
threshold electrical pulse application bear a striking
resemblance to the Lewis Triple Response. As in the Lewis
response, the initial reddening of the immediate epidermal focus
occurs only when there is normal blood circulation to the skin.
The flare reaction requires an intact and functioning local
nervous system. Finally, when capillary pressure is zero the
wheal reaction cannot occur. In the case of a circulation acutely
arrested during signature response development, reversal of the
established signature response, a process requiring minutes to
hours, and in rare cases even a few days, cannot occur thus
leaving a blurred but permanent record of the signature
response.
If the LTLW is applied such that only the generated arc contacts
the skin there is a very well defined visible signature response.
If the device is applied with the probes touching the skin
(ohmic contact) there is less visible signature effect. The arc
tends to spread the signature response over a wider area. This
is most likely due to the arc concentrating the current density at
the interface between arc and skin. An increased IR drop due to
the limited area of contact defines the current channel to tightly
focused beginning and end points. Applying the probes to the
skin broadens the current interface and the better electrical
contact acts to diffuse the current density.
Little has been published in the medical or bioengineering
literature on the interaction of biologic systems with high
voltage low current electrical pulse devices. Stratbucker[8]
reported the first animal studies involving the devices in the
bioengineering literature in 1986 with further treatment of the
effect on skin and cardiovascular systems in Stratbucker &
Marsh [3] in 1993. Investigations to date into these effects have
been ad hoc at best, since legitimate funding sources are
nonexistent. The impetus for this study was from state law
enforcement agencies attempting to adduce collateral and
supporting proofs of guilt in a widely publicized recently
adjudicated capitol case.
References
[1] T. Lewis, Zotterman, "Vascular reactions of the skin to
electrical injury, Part VIII", J. Physiology LXII, pg 280-288, 1926-27
[2] J. H. Cover, Personal Communication 1989
See also US Patent #s 3803463,4253132
[3] R.A. Stratbucker, M.G. Marsh, "The Relative Immunity
of the Skin and Cardiovascular System to the Direct
Effects of High Voltage - High Frequency Component
Electrical Pulses.", Proc. 15th Ann. Conf. IEEE Eng.
Med. & Bio. Soc., Oct. 1993
[4] Frye vs. U.S., 293 Fed. 1013, 1923
[5] Stratbucker for Douglas County Sheriff's Dept.
[6] Spitz & Fisher (ed), "Medicolegal Investigation of
Death (Guidelines for the Application of Pathology to
Crime Investigation)", 3rd Ed., 1993
[7] N. Ikeda, Harada, Suzuki, "Homocidal manual
strangulation and multiple stun gun injuries", Am. Jour.
Forensic Med. & Path., 13v4:320-323, 1992
[8] R.A. Stratbucker, "The assessment of potential cardiac
hazards in the use of hand-held electronic law
enforcement devices", Proc. 8th Ann. Conf. IEEE Eng.
Med. & Bio. Soc., Nov. 1986
|