Premium
Evaluation of Bluestar ® Forensic Magnum and Other Traditional Blood Detection Methods on Bloodstained Wood Subjected to a Variety of Burn Conditions ,
Author(s) -
Vineyard Autumn R.,
Hazelrigg Eric J.,
Ehrhardt Christopher J.,
Con Catherine C.
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
journal of forensic sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.715
H-Index - 96
eISSN - 1556-4029
pISSN - 0022-1198
DOI - 10.1111/1556-4029.13946
Subject(s) - combustibility , luminol , chemistry , chromatography , chemiluminescence , combustion , organic chemistry
Accurate blood detection is a primary concern for forensic scientists, especially in highly compromised situations. In this study, blood was added to wood blocks and subjected to a variety of fire treatments: the absence or presence of accelerant, burn time (1, 3, or 5 min), and extinguishment method (smothering or dousing with water). Burned blocks were given a qualitative burn score, followed by removal of half of the char from each block and subsequent testing of each half for blood using luminol (13% positive; n = 96), Bluestar ® Forensic Magnum (5.2% positive; n = 96), and combined phenolphthalein tetramethylbenzidine test (0% positive; n = 192). Luminol and Bluestar® Forensic Magnum performed similarly, both outperforming PTMB . Additionally, positive results were more likely from samples that were smothered, had a low burn score, and had more concentrated blood solutions (neat or 1:2). Overall, it is extremely unlikely that blood would be detected on combustible substrates exposed to direct fire.