I spent the five happiest years of my life in a morgue. As a forensic scientist in the Cleveland coroner’s office I analyzed gunshot residue on hands and clothing, hairs, fibers, paint, glass, DNA, blood and many other forms of trace evidence, as well as crime scenes. Now I'm a certified latent print examiner and CSI for a police department in Florida. I also write a series of forensic suspense novels, turning the day job into fiction. My books have been translated into six languages.
A forensic lab wouldn't examine a hyoid bone. That would be done at the autopsy by the pathologist. To the best of my knowledge there isn't anything else to examine, just whether it's broken or not, and as I said it doesn't conclusively prove anything one way or the other.Best of luck.
Send me your email address. If you don't want to post it here you can email me through my website: www.lisa-black@live.com.
Wouldn't that get the whole crime scene wet? And wouldn't a layer of hair indicate that the hair was a diversion, since obviously no one would normally shed that much hair while committing a crime. It scattering hair wouldn't affect fingerprints or touch DNA, which crime scene techs would be looking for more than hair anyway. Most labs don't even analyze hair any more. Also, I should clarify, hair cells don't have nuclear DNA. DNA in hair usually comes from the skin cells that hold the hair in your scalp and cling to the root. So if you're using cut hair there would not be any nuclear DNA to obtain. Mitochondrial DNA is a different type of DNA present in your cells' mitochondria. It will be the same throughout your body but is passed down unchanged from mother to child so it will be identical with your mother, your mother's siblings (assuming the same grandmother), your siblings from the same mother, your first cousins from your maternal aunts, etc. But very very few labs test mitochondrial DNA so it's unlikely it would be tested from your crime scene unless it was extremely high-profile and they had no other evidence to use. And then they'd have to have a suspect to compare it to or it would be useless. (CODIS, the national DNA database, is nuclear DNA.)
A forensic scientist, forensic specialist, forensic technician can all be the same job or different jobs--your title is whatever your agency/boss says it is. There's no strict uniform code for titles. Usually any natural science is a good background for forensics. It may depend on whether you intend to work in a lab or on crime scenes. The best way is to look at job postings that interest you and see what the requirements are. You can view job postings on professional organizations' websites such as www.aafs.org or www.theiai.org. Good luck.
Audiologist
Hairstylist and Makeup Artist
CPR Trainer
I'm sorry but that can, and has, fill several textbooks. There's just no way for me to summarize it in a paragraph.
Wow I am sorry I somehow didn't answer this question!! In my experience we do a presumptive test for both and then send to DNA testing because they will confirm the presence of DNA in the quantitative step. We do have the OBTI test for human blood but there's no reason to do it u less we're in a huge hurry to confirm human blood.
-OR-
(max 20 characters - letters, numbers, and underscores only. Note that your username is private, and you have the option to choose an alias when asking questions or hosting a Q&A.)
(A valid e-mail address is required. Your e-mail will not be shared with anyone.)
(min 5 characters)
By checking this box, you acknowledge that you have read and agree to Jobstr.com’s Terms and Privacy Policy.
-OR-
(Don't worry: you'll be able to choose an alias when asking questions or hosting a Q&A.)