Can you do it with a gunshot? Probably not by itself, though I suppose with the right weapon Killer could make a good mess of the body.
What if, for instance, the victim suffered gunshot wounds to the head that disfigured the body?
What if, for instance, the victim suffered gunshot wounds to the head that disfigured the body?
The problem with DNA - and to a lesser extent fingerprints - is that the TV shows make them out to be 100% accurate and foolproof most of the time when they aren't quite as effective as that.
For one thing, unless a person is in a DNA database such as for armed forces, criminal record, etc. then DNA won't give a match of any sort. Same with fingerprints. If a person hadn't been fingerprinted then they will not be in any database that law enforcement would search. Fingerprinting is most commonly done for, obviously, criminals as well as certain jobs and other situations.
Secondly more often than not most police stations don't have forensic labs, and even morgues won't have the ability to actually run any sort of DNA test therefore they would have to send it out to a third-party lab which could take anywhere from a few days to several weeks depending on what sort of backlog that lab has. This is actually played well in the first episode of a TV show called Castle when the cops actually tell him that it could be a week or so before they get a DNA match and he calls the mayor to get is rushed through. Though it's never mentioned again afterwards.
Fingerprints are a lot faster, usually that can be done at the station/morgue or whatever. But again, no guarantees that fingerprints will be effective.
I didn't take the OP's question as relating to an unsub, but to a theoretically known person whose identity the authorities were seeking to confirm.
If that's the case, presumably, there's no issue finding biometric identifiers for comparison.
If the OP meant the authorities were attempting to identify a body by attaching to something in a db, then yeah.
Fair enough. My apologies, didn't mean to step on your toes.
And you are very correct, if they are in the system in any way, it's hard not to identify them.
You didn't, I was just trying to clarify. I didn't mean in the system - I read it as it's thought to be Bob, but it's not like they can ask for a family member to make a physical ID, so...
I dunno, hopefully OP will clarify so ppl can answer better.
To clarify, they will not be in the system for crime or their job (so no fingerprints or DNA stored).
What if, for instance, later someone discovers they suffered a fracture to their foot in their childhood? Then upon examination of the autopsy, they discover the body discovered did not have any sign of a past fracture, thus leading them to realise it is not the man they thought it was.
Would that work?
That's kind of related to the question at hand - are the authorities trying to confirm identification or trying to identify an unknown body?
Like, they think it's Person A and are trying to confirm it's him, or do they just have a body and have no idea who it might be and are trying to figure that out without any info?
Oh, I get what you're asking.
So they discover a body, and are trying to figure out who it is, based on the knowledge that he is an employee at a certain company (as this is where the murder occurs, and he is suspected to be an employee).