Catching a Killer- 7 Tremendous Advances in Forensic Science

Catching a Killer- 7 Tremendous Advances in Forensic Science

Michelle Powell-Smith - October 9, 2016

Catching a Killer- 7 Tremendous Advances in Forensic Science

Bite Mark Matching, 1978/1979

In January 1978, two young women were murdered by serial killer Ted Bundy. Both had been strangled and beaten. One of the two, Lisa Levy, had been raped and bitten several times. There was relatively little evidence left at the scene; however, photos were taken of the bite marks. Bite mark evidence was not new, but this case was one of the most important decided by bite marks.

Investigators soon came to believe that Ted Bundy was responsible for the killings. He initially refused to provide a dental impression, but with a court order, impressions were taken without warning to prevent him from filing down his teeth. The dental impression of Bundy’s teeth was matched to the photographs of the bite on Levy’s body.

Attempts to have the bite mark evidence thrown out of court were unsuccessful, and the dentist who took the initial impressions and photographs of Bundy’s teeth, Dr. Souviron, showed how the teeth matched the bite mark. Souviron went on to explain the creation of the bite marks.

Dr. Lowell Levine, a forensic dentist, explained how the bite had occurred. With the bite mark evidence, the state of Florida was able to sentence Ted Bundy to death by electric chair. Bundy was the first individual convicted on bite mark evidence in the state of Florida, and the bite mark was the only physical evidence that ever linked Bundy to his crimes.

Today, there are questions about the validity of bite mark evidence, even among skilled forensic dentists. Skin is a poor medium for a dental impression, and teeth are not a unique identifier.

Advertisement