This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and educational

use, including for instruction at the author’s institution and sharing with colleagues.

Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are

prohibited.

In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or institutional repository. Authors

requiring further information regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are encouraged to visit:

http://www.elsevier.com/copyright

Forensic Science International 224 (2013) 68–72

Author's Personal Copy

An investigation into the effects of decomposition on the post-mortem location oftrans-dermal artefacts

A. Starkie a,*, L. White b, T. Thompson a

a School of Science and Engineering, Teesside University, Borough Road, Middlesbrough, Tees Valley, TS1 3BA, UKb Department of Archaeology, University of Sheffield, Northgate House, West Street, Sheffield, S1 4ET, UK

A R T I C L E I N F O

Article history:

Received 1 June 2011

Received in revised form 21 June 2012

Accepted 22 October 2012

Available online 23 November 2012

Keywords:

Forensic archaeology

Forensic anthropology

Excavation

Exhumation

Burial

Deposition

Crime scene

Search area

A B S T R A C T

A search area of a crime scene to recover trans-dermal artefacts (here, earrings) was conducted using 12

pig carcasses, of various sizes, with pierced ears; 6 were buried and 6 deposited on the surface in a

wooded area. After 28 months, the remains were excavated and recovered, and the final location of the

earrings recorded. The furthest recorded earring from its associated surface remains was 119 cm. In the

buried remains, on three occasions earrings were found located 6 cm below the recorded base of the

grave. Formal recommendations for the search area of a crime scene have been established as 120 cm

radius from the originally located remains, whether surface deposition or burial, and confirmation of

excavation below the assumed floor of the grave in burials is essential, at least to 10 cm.

� 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Forensic Science International

jou r nal h o mep age: w ww.els evier . co m/lo c ate / fo r sc i in t

1. Introduction

Body modifications in the forensic context have received littlefocus. It is our aim to highlight to those that may attend or areinvolved in crime scenes, that artefacts of seemingly minorsignificance may in fact be quite the opposite.

Archaeology and forensic investigations are both beneficial inscenes involving deposited human remains and have united in theform of forensic archaeology; the application of archaeologicaltechniques to fully recover and record a scene in a forensic or legalsetting [1–4]. The incorporation of a forensic archaeologist early inthe scene investigation process is now commonplace. Not only canhuman events at a location be detected and recorded, but they canalso be distinguished from taphonomic factors such as animal,geological and weathering activity, all of which can significantlyaffect the scene in the interim period between deposition anddiscovery. In order to fully interpret the scene, the archaeologistmust have full comprehension of the taphonomic factors that mayhave affected the scene and must ensure that full appropriaterecovery of organisms (both dead and alive), vegetation and animalactivity is completed [2]. Forensic archaeologists, through their

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 7908 755583.

E-mail address: a.starkie@yahoo.co.uk (A. Starkie).

0379-0738/$ – see front matter � 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2012.10.035

training and experience, will also have a good basic knowledge ofanimal behaviour, including territory size and diet which can be ofsignificance to site interpretation [2].

Full excavation and recording of the site, even after exhuma-tion, is crucial as in this stage detailed recordings of the burialcontext can be undertaken and allow for lower layers of the graveor deposit site to be fully excavated, possibly revealing personalitems, bullet casings, or even ‘false floors’ concealing areas forfurther investigation [1,3,5]. Small objects are commonly displacedat deposition or burial sites by insect and animal activity [3] andcan have significant consequences in the recovery and interpreta-tion of a scene. It is a phenomenon that we are specificallyinvestigating here with the use of earrings.

Items carried on a person may include wallets, keys, jewellery orpaperwork, and are collectively termed ‘personal effects’ [6]. Thedecomposition process, along with taphonomic factors describedabove, can often result in a limited identification of the remains.Personal effects often withstand the passage of time better than thebody, and so can be of significant use at this stage [8]. In the recentdiscovery of skeletonised female remains at aM5 junction (UK), thepresence of a distinctive gold coloured ring on the finger bone ofthe remains greatly aided the identification of these remains to beMelanie Hall, who disappeared in 1996. The marriage of informationretrieved from the bones by the anthropologist and the presence ofthe ring, provided an extra level of certainty of identification than

Fig. 1. 10 kg buried pig demonstrating earring colour coding and position. (For

interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred

to the web version of this article.)

A. Starkie et al. / Forensic Science International 224 (2013) 68–72 69

Author's Personal Copy

either detail could alone [7]. The presence and, specifically, locationof personal effects at a crime scene can also aid the deciphering ofevents at a scene. Secondary burials or post-mortem changesassociated with a grave can be indicated by the condition andlocation of personal effects [1,7]. The nature of personal effectsimplies their close proximity to the body. In the case of jewellery,particularly piercings, the continued contact with the body mayresult in the presence of DNA, the proof of which is insurmountablein identifications [7].

Personal effects are not only crucial in the aiding of identifica-tion, but can be considered evidence in their own right, and as such,may also be displayed to promote identification in situationswhere images of the person or remains may be inappropriate fordistribution among the general public [7]. The recovery of an itemof jewellery can also have implications in the identification processwhen comparing ante- and post-mortem information. Jewelleryintended for insertion through the ears differs greatly from thosefor navel or eyebrow piercings, for example, and such informationcan be retrieved and forensically exploited. The ability to recognisea body modification as such, even in the case of partial orskeletonised remains, or at the site of a struggle, can aididentification (of both victim and perpetrator) as body modifica-tions are easily recognisable personal identifying characteristicsante-mortem.

Within this study we aim to highlight: the potential importanceof piercing artefacts within the forensic context, and to makerecommendations of distances to be searched from the originallocation of remains. This study also entailed the comparativeobservation and recording of decomposition of remains in the twodepositional styles.

2. Methods

The site is located at Riseholme, Lincolnshire, and the woodlandconsists of Scots Pine, Norway Spruce and Beech, with very littleunder storey. The burials and surface depositions were centralwithin the wooded area. The soil type of the area was clay-basedwith a detritus humic top layer.

12 whole pig carcasses were acquired, of varying sizes tofacilitate the observation of the decomposition process. All wereacquired after having died of natural causes. 6 were assignedsurface depositions and 6 for burial. Each type of depositionincluded pigs of the following weights: 1–2 kg, 3–4 kg, 10 kg,15 kg, 25 kg, and 50 kg.

Prior to their deposition, the pigs’ ears were pierced withvarious coloured standard stud earrings (Table 1 and see Fig. 1).The depth to which the burials would be dug was decided assufficient depth to deter unearthing by large scavengers [8] but arealistic depth when considering forensic cases of clandestineburials, and shallow enough that oxygen levels would be sufficientto support microbial and invertebrate activity to promotedecomposition [9].

The depositions were protected from large scavengers from theoutset of the experiment by way of an electric fence (11 m � 7 m)comprising a 50 m roll of 8 wire single spike Sheep netting (90 cm)

Table 1Colour of earrings for each deposition, and burial depths.

Surface Buried

1–2 kg Pink 1–2 kg Blue Depth: 30 cm

3–4 kg Blue 3–4 kg Pink Depth: 40 cm

10 kg Green 10 kg Pink Depth: 30 cm

15 kg Pink 15 kg Blue Depth: 30 cm

25 kg Green 25 kg Pink Depth: 40 cm

50 kg Pink 50 kg Green Depth: 40 cm

and an electrical current powered by a 12 V Gallagher Batterymaster B75 Wet Battery Energiser and 12 V leisure battery. Thissupplies 6200 V with stored energy of 0.75 J and an output of 0.55 J.Full excavation of the site was carried out 28 months afterdeposition. Wire net frames were also secured over the surfacedeposits to deter bird activity.

The surface deposits were photographed in situ, then photo-graphed again once leaf litter and detritus had all been cleared.They were then graphically recorded with a 1 m2 planning frame,in accordance with well established forensic archaeologicaltechniques [1]. The distance and direction of each earring’smovements was recorded (Tables 2 and 3). Metal detectors wereused in accordance with conventional forensic archaeologicaltechniques [1,4].

The buried deposits were photographed once they had beencleared of leaf litter and detritus also. Clear ‘edges’ could be seen atall the burial deposits (Fig. 2), but in all cases these were in fact

Fig. 2. The appearance of grave ‘edges’ from soil cracking.

Table 2Direction and distance of artefact movement in surface depositions.

No. recovered

earrings (of 2)

Distance travelled (cm) Direction

of travel

Topographical travel

1–2 kg 1 46 cm from cranium (5 cm from mandible). 52 cm from originally

located remains.

North West Flat ground, no obstacles, following

tree-line

3–4 kg 2 12 cm from cranium, 15 cm apart. 12 cm from originally located remains. North West Flat ground, towards 1–2 kg surface

10 kg 2 12 cm from cranium, 12 cm apart. 12 cm from originally located remains. South Downhill, towards 25 kg surface

15 kg 2 34 and 77 cm from centre cranium. 119 cm from originally located remains. South East Downhill, towards 25 kg surface

25 kg 1 19 cm from centre cranium. 19 cm from originally located remains. North West Buried 5 cm into molehill

50 kg 2 33 and 62 cm from centre cranium. 62 cm from originally located remains. North West Uphill, towards tree-line, following

mole tracks

Table 3Location of artefact at time of recovery and relating observations to buried deposits.

No. recovered

earrings (of 2)

Depth of burial

(cm)

Depth earrings found

(cm)

Observations

1–2 kg 2 30 27 and 30 Small areas of adipocere still present at time of excavation

3–4 kg 2 40 34 and 39 None of note

10 kg 2 30 32 and 36 None of note

15 kg 2 30 36 and inside cranium Excessive invertebrate activity at time of excavation. Patches of

hair still present around cranium

25 kg 2 40 29 and 32 None of note

50 kg 2 40 35 and 46 Considerable adipocere still present at time of excavation

Fig. 3. Surface map of 15 kg surface deposit at time of recovery. Location of earrings

marked and highlighted in pink, coordinating with the earrings. (For interpretation

of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web

version of this article.)

A. Starkie et al. / Forensic Science International 224 (2013) 68–7270

Author's Personal Copy

cracks in the clay soil created by natural weathering processes [10],though the real edges of each grave were all found outside of thesecracks. Each burial was excavated in spits of 5 cm. Their originaldepths had been recorded for ease of excavation, but spits werecarried out to record any alteration in the relationship between thedepth of skeletal fragments and earrings. Metal detectors were tobe employed at each spit level to identify the earrings’ locationsprior to excavation. A C.Scope CS2MX Pro Metal Detector with a20 cm waterproof ISOCON search head and dual-channel, full-range discrimination was used.

3. Results

See Tables 2 and 3.

4. Discussion

The metal detectors were found to be unresponsive to the metalof the earrings. This was of significance as their use in manyforensic contexts is well attested, but is now questioned by theauthors in such scenarios as recovery of standard stud earrings.Even when the earrings were visible, the metal detectors remainedunresponsive at various frequencies and so the excavation andrecovery continued without further use of the metal detectors. Theinability for the metal detectors to respond to the presence of theearrings may have been due to operational fault, the hypoaller-genic nature of the earring metal or the small quantity of metalpresent in each earring. It is important to note, however, that this isa possible outcome, and so the authors urge practitioners to exertcaution when relying on metal detectors in the field to accuratelyindicate the presence of standard stud earrings or othercomparable jewellery items. It should also be noted at this stagethat jewellery is becoming ever more diversified in material and sovisual and manual searching for such items is recommended infavour of using metal detectors.

The results support the assumption that surface deposits willdecompose faster and will experience greater interference and willtherefore result in more extensive movement of artefacts than theburial deposits [4]. Of the total 24 earrings, 22 were recovered; theremaining two were both absent to within a 150 cm radius, and a

5 cm depth, of their respective original surface deposit sites. Thedistance of movement recorded in the 15 kg (77 cm, Fig. 3) and50 kg (62 cm) surface depositions, as well as the recovery of onlyone of the two earrings from both the 1–2 kg and 25 kg surfacedeposit pigs and the recovery of all earrings correlating to theburials further supports this hypothesis. A trend can be seen in thesurface deposits’ earrings travelling downhill and/or towards otherdeposits. Where direction of travel did not match this pattern(25 kg (Fig. 4) and 50 kg), movement appeared dictated by thedirection of animal activity, in this case, moles (Fig. 5). This animalactivity in turn appeared dictated by the trees in the area which is

Fig. 4. Surface map of 25 kg surface deposit at time of recovery. Location of earring

recovered marked and highlighted in green, coordinating with the colour of the

deposit’s earrings. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure

legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

Fig. 5. The extent of disturbance the 25 kg surface deposit experienced from mole

activity.

A. Starkie et al. / Forensic Science International 224 (2013) 68–72 71

Author's Personal Copy

influenced by the tree roots. Sub-surface structures and dis-turbances should therefore still be strongly considered, even insurface deposition cases.

What is most notable, however, is the extent to which theearrings in the burial contexts moved, especially with regard to‘self burial’. This is particularly evident in the depths at which theywere recovered in the 10 kg, 15 kg and 50 kg burials (Table 3). In

Figs. 6 and 7. The extent of lateral movement within

the 15 kg burial there was much invertebrate activity at the time ofexcavation, which is likely to have contributed to the movement ofthe earrings – namely the recovery of one earring 6 cm below therecorded base of the grave, and the recovery of the second fromwithin the cranial cavity. No such invertebrate activity was notedat the time of excavation in either of the other two burials thatexperienced notable movement of earrings (10 kg and 50 kg). Inthe case of the 10 kg burial, the earrings were recovered 2 and 6 cmdeeper than the recorded bottom of grave. The 50 kg burialresulted in the recovery of one earring 6 cm below the recordedbottom of the grave. The reason for these movements is unclear –decomposition and taphonomic factors are difficult to distinguish– but their occurrence is still significant. The order of disturbanceof this site is also clear, further supporting the taphonomicassumptions. Invertebrate activity is evident even 28 months afterdeposition (15 kg burial) and mole activity at the site wasparticularly noted from 05/2009 and was still evident at time of

the burial context of the 50 kg buried deposit.

A. Starkie et al. / Forensic Science International 224 (2013) 68–7272

Author's Personal Copy

excavation (08/2009). Whilst rodent activity was recordedinitially, the bones did not show evidence of gnawing.

The ‘self-burial’ of one earring in the 50 kg buried deposit issignificant in itself, but the lateral movement of the uppermostearring is well demonstrated when we compare Figs. 6 and 7.

These results, with respect to buried remains, further supportthe recommendations made in prior publications [e.g. 1,2] toexcavate below the grave’s floor as evidence may be concealed.Previously, attention has been paid in this respect to the recoveryof bullets, bullet casings, seeped stomach contents for toxicologicalanalysis, or chemicals such as lime introduced to the grave toencourage faster decomposition, but we show here that smallpersonal effects may also be recovered below the assumed featurebase, and are just as significant to the forensic investigation.

The results obtained from the surface depositions also furthersupport recommendations to search beyond the primary recoveredand clustered remains [e.g. 1] to a radius of at least 120 cm of theoriginally located remains (Table 2, 15 kg). This is not only for therecovery of personal effects such as earrings, but also for the fullrecovery of skeletal elements, the importance of which is clear [e.g.1,4,11,12].

5. Conclusion

The ability to retrieve items from below the ‘true’ bottom of aburial or pit emphasizes the need for complete excavation of thesite, and not just exhumation of the remains by a trainedprofessional, as detailed above. Burials are frequently considered‘self contained’, but the evidence presented by this study provesthat the parameters of burials should also be extended to ensurecomplete recovery and recording.

The distance the earrings travelled across the site in the surfacedeposits also highlights the necessary measures crime sceneinvestigators must employ, namely to search a radius of at least120 cm from the originally located remains. The earring leading tothis recommendation had travelled 119 cm from the 15 kg surfacedeposit towards the 25 kg surface deposit. However, its recoveredlocation was only 134 cm from the centre cluster of remains of the25 kg surface deposit, it was identified as belonging to the 15 kgdeposit from its colour coding, though it must be borne in mindthat in real cases, such prior information will almost never beknown.

Small items such as earrings may harbour identificationevidence in the form of DNA, or may help illustrate thecircumstances surrounding the deposition. The potential for

DNA storage was particularly evident in this experiment as4earrings were recovered (1 surface, 3 burials) still with soft tissueand hair attached. This type of further investigation may be criticalas it cannot be assumed that an artefact found associated withparticular remains means it belongs to them, nor that it confirmstheir identity [2,6,10], but may provide additional informationpertaining to other individuals involved in the scene.

The extent to which items may travel is of direct significance tothe three dimensional size of the search area. Results and data suchas these allows for a better indication of the search area, both in therecovery of the body to find associated items, and vice versa.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Department of Forensic andBiomedical Sciences at the University of Lincoln, who made landavailable for the experimental purposes of this study. Theirassistance is gratefully acknowledged.

References

[1] T. Dupras, J. Schultz, S. Wheeler, L. Williams, Forensic Recovery of HumanRemains: Archaeological Approaches, CRC Press, 2006.

[2] W. Haglund, M. Sorg, Method and theory of forensic taphonomic research, in: W.Haglund, M. Sorg (Eds.), Forensic Taphonomy: The Post-Mortem Fate of HumanRemains, CRC Press, 2006, pp. 13–22.

[3] J. Hunter, M. Cox, Forensic Archaeology: Advances in Theory and Practice,Routledge, 2005.

[4] E. Killam, The Detection of Human Remains, 2nd ed., Thomas, 2004.[5] J. Saul, F. Saul, Forensics, archaeology and taphonomy: the symbiotic relationship,

in: W. Haglund, M. Sorg (Eds.), Advances in Forensic Taphonomy: Method, Theory,and Archaeological Perspectives, CRC Press, 2002, pp. 71–98.

[6] R. Jensen, Mass Fatality and Casualty Incidents: A Field Guide, CRC Press, 2000.[7] T. Thompson, A. Puxley, Personal effects, in: T. Thompson, S. Black (Eds.), Forensic

Human Identification: An Introduction, CRC Press, 2007, pp. 365–375.[8] W. Krogman, M. Iscan, The Human Skeleton in Forensic Medicine, Charles C.

Thomas, Springfield, IL, 1986.[9] A. Galloway, H. Walsh-Haney, J. Byrd, Recovering Buried Bodies and Surface

Scatter: The Associated Anthropological, Botanical, and Entomological Evidencein Forensic Entomology: The Utility of Arthropods in Legal Investigations, CRCPress, Boca Raton, FL, 2001.

[10] M. Hochrein, An autopsy of the grave: recognizing, collecting, and preservingforensic geotaphonomic evidence, in: W. Haglund, M. Sorg (Eds.), Advances inForensic Taphonomy: Method, Theory, and Archaeological Perspectives, CRCPress, 2002, pp. 45–70.

[11] W. Haglund, Recent mass graves, an introduction, in: W. Haglund, M. Sorg (Eds.),Advances in Forensic Taphonomy: Method, Theory, and Archaeological Perspec-tives, CRC Press, 2002, pp. 243–262.

[12] S. Schmitt, Mass graves and the collection of forensic evidence: genocide, warcrimes, and crimes against humanity, in: Haglund, Sorg (Eds.), Advances inForensic Taphonomy: Method, Theory, and Archaeological Perspectives, CRCPress, 2002, pp. 277–292.