xenith: (Default)
Just as a curiosity...

I was looking into whether or not executed criminals were dissected in early Hobart Town. I had assumed they were, but I came across a footnote in a book that referenced this, from the Colonial Times, 19th May, 1826

JEFFRIES and BRADY. Immediately after these unhappy men were taken from the gallows, two plaster of Paris casts of their countenances were taken by Dr. Scott, R. N.the Colonial Surgeon. We believe the Act of Parliament for dissection does not extend to these Colonies, which is to be lamented, not more for the advantage of science, than with reference to other considerations.

Evidence for and against. )
xenith: (Brisbane Hotel)
Local newspaper regularly runs a "100 Years Ago Today" bit where it reprints short bits from an 100 years ago. Late last year, possibly December, they had one announcing the introduction of fingerprinting to the Tasmanian Police force. So that's 1906, which seems quite a late development. It's not they were particularly slow down here in adopting fingerprinting -- Scotland Yard took it up in 1901 (and used it in the first murder case in 1905, prior to that it was used for identifying criminals using pseudonyms) & US Bureau of Identification establishes a fingerprint collection, 1902. There's a lot of playing around with fingerprinting in the 80s & 90s, and they were used in a murder case in Argentina in 1892. But generally, quite a late development.

So what did they use beforehand?

Library has Fingerprints: Murder and the race to uncover the science of identity, by Colin Beavan, which is the source of some of the above dates. Another interesting date is 1812 "In France, Francoise-Eugene Vidocq establishes Europe's first official detective branch and pioneers the use of physical evidence."

So the subject under consideration is "th use of physical evidence prior to fingerprinting". Now to get to the library

Profile

xenith: (Default)
xenith

Most Popular Tags

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags