Murder weapon

The other scenario would be that the victim did not die on the bed. Even with his injury, he still had enough consciousness to get up from his bed and walk towards the bathroom but eventually lost consciousness, collapsed and died once he got inside. Why head towards the bathroom? First aid kits for one are usually located by the sink inside the bathroom. He might have tried to do some first aid treatment on himself but did not have enough strength to do so. He did not die from being hit on his head. He bled to his death from the injury on his head.

Now for the murder weapon, a blood stained chair leg was found in the bushes outside the victim’s house. There are many ways to confirm if this is the murder weapon. DNA from the blood on it can be checked and compared to that of the victim. Another way is to look in the victim’s house and see if the is a chair there missing a leg. The bloody leg would then have to be matched to the incomplete chair if they do find one. The shape of the weapon can also be matched to the injuries on the victims’ head. If this is indeed proven to b the murder weapon, this then proves the fact that the victim suffered blunt force trauma.

Now for the suspect, the cops had already arrested the victim’s neighbor who admitted to being with the victim the night he died. According to him, they were drinking and had an argument. He did not however, explicitly say that he killed the victim. Since they were both drinking, it is likely that he was too drunk to be sure of what he has done. The only thing that he is sure of is that he was indeed with the victim at that night of the murder and that he probably was mad at the victim considering them having the argument. The victim on the other hand may have just slept due to his drunkenness and was attacked while at it.

There are ways to verify the suspect’s guilt or innocence. First is to verify his presence in that basement with the victim. If they were drinking Diamond Whites, then his finger prints will most likely be on some of those cans with his DNA from his saliva as well on the drinking holes of the same cans. His finger prints should also be located on the weapon itself unless he wore gloves or anything that would prevent direct contact. But he probably was too drunk to have thought of that. Also considering the blood spatter, blood could have gotten on the suspect’s clothes.

And since the cops had already confiscated the clothes he wore that night, the investigators can easily check and confirm the presence of blood on the suspect’s clothes and if it is indeed the victim’s blood. The suspect’s presence in the victim’s basement is undeniable so the prints and DNA on the cans are inevitable and therefore inadmissible to proving his guilt. Any trace of him on the murder weapon on the other hand would be more incriminating. One detail regarding the case is that the suspect left the victim’s house at around 11:30 in the evening.

If it is determined that the victim died beyond 11:30 pm and if it can be proven that the suspect really is no longer there at that time, if his prints are not on the weapon, and if there are no traces of blood on the suspect’s clothes, then those could be a fact that could get the suspect acquitted from the crime. But given the provided case facts alone, time most likely scenario is that the suspect did get angry with the victim after their argument. Out of drunkenness, the victim goes to sleep, while the suspect takes the opportunity to hit him on the head with the chair leg.

Then he flees the scene, tosses the weapon not caring where, and then goes home. But once he was sober again and realized what he might have done, he had conscience enough to turn himself in. Bibliography Bevel, T. , Gardner, R. M. (2001) Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: With an Introduction to Crime Scene Reconstruction. 2nd ed. CRC Press. Drummer O. H. (2004) Postmortem toxicology of drugs of abuse. Forensic Science Interational. 10 June 2004, Pages 101-113 Gill, P. , Jeffreys, A. J. , Werret, D. J. (1985) Forensic Application of DNA ‘fingerprints’. Letters to nature. 12 December 1985, pp 577-579.

Pounder, D. J. , Jones G. R. (1990) Post-mortem drug redistribution – a toxicological nightmare. Forensic Science International. Volume 45, Pp 253-263. Overman, K. S. (1972) Science Against Crime. New York, Doubleday Ruffel A. , McCambridge J. (2008) Suspect burial excavation procedure: A cautionary tale. Forensic Science International. Slemko J. (2007) Bloodstain Pattern Analysis Tutorial. J. Slemko Forensic Consulting [Internet] Available from: <http://www. bloodspatter. com/BPATutorial. htm> [Accessed 25, December 2008] Smith, K. L. M. (1986) A Manual of Forensic Entomology. London, The Trustees of the British Museum (Natural History).