Forensic Science 10: Unusual Cases With Unusual Evidence

Forensic Science 10: Unusual Cases With Unusual Evidence will be an exploration of the odd and complex features of several older cases, both solved and unsolved.  We will consider modern forensic investigative and testing techniques that could be used in cases where such tools and techniques did not exist at the time.  In addition to the cases listed below, we will cover a handful of brief case studies based on students' interest.

Week 1:  General discussion of the differences in evidence collection and analytical techniques at different points during the past century.  Initially, we will look at fingerprints from the 1920s and recognize that the methods for collection were limited, and investigators did not have access to databases for rapid matching.  Here, we have a starting point both in the collection and analysis of a specific type of evidence, and we will discuss how this would impact an investigation where fingerprints are present.  The discussion will shift to a review of the Lindbergh kidnapping case and the confusing role of fingerprint evidence.
Week 2:  We will continue with the Lindbergh case and discuss the handwriting analysis done by the expert who is widely regarded as the "father of handwriting analysis," including the obvious errors in analysis when we use a more modern approach.  Our review will then move into the unusual evidence in this case, including a home-made wooden ladder, floorboards from the suspect's attic, a handwritten phone number on a closet wall, and some sketchy rules concerning witness statements.
Weeks 3 and 4:  The next case we will examine is the Black Dahlia.  In terms of strange evidence, we have a paradox here.  This is a case which should have had ample blood evidence, but there was almost none.  How can we reconcile this information with the crime itself?  Without even knowing about DNA, the investigators were severely limited when a potential scene was found.  How can we look back and pick new details out of an investigation that hit a wall?  
Week 5:  We will head to Australia for a review of a few specific areas of evidence in the Somerton Man case, including pathological findings, odd persons of interest, and a reappraisal of DNA testing that was completed after three hairs were pulled from a plaster cast taken of the victim's head and chest in 1948.
Week 6:  The Boy in the Box and a similar case in Arizona will be the focus of this week's discussion.  With the Boy in the Box, we will examine an obvious question--how can a young boy from Philadelphia, whose body was found in the same city, not be identified in the period around his disappearance?  How would modern technology have changed this case in its earliest moments?  With a body only recently identified in a case from the 1960s, what can modern forensic science offer in attempts to identify the murderer(s)?  We will then compare this fairly well-known case to the case of a recently identified murder victim in an Arizona case from 1969.  The use of genealogical databases is growing in cold cases, and we will discuss the possibilities and limitations of this technology in a variety of cold case types.
Week 7:  Connecting cases.  During this session, we will discuss attempts, both professional and amateur, to connect crimes that may or may not be connected.  We will look at the ways in which such attempts may help or hinder the investigations in the specific cases.  We will look at a few batches of crimes that some believe may have some connection, including (1) Cleveland Torso Murders/Chicago Lipstick Killer/Black Dahlia; (2) Zodiac/Sonoma County Killings/Unabomber/Ted Bundy.  Just to be clear, no one tried to link the Zodiac with Ted Bundy, but the Zodiac was mistakenly thought to have committed some of Ted Bundy's early crimes by certain investigators.
Week 8:  The Unabomber.  We will examine the ways in which more modern forensic linguistic analysis and perhaps even AI may have been able to crack the identity of the Unabomber more quickly than occurred at the time.  We will also examine Ted Kaczynski's background while at Harvard and examine whether modern technology would have helped identify the causal connection between his mistreatment while a student and his transformation into a killer.  Perhaps, though, this case will suggest that some things in terms of guarded information never change.
Weeks 9 and 10:  The final two weeks will be devoted to finishing up any previous discussions or covering cases that the students collectively choose.  

This class will be taught in my standard "Socratic Discussion" format, which will encourage discussion and critical thinking.