...SAPOL UPDATE:
Yesterday's publication of an update on the status of SAPOL’s forensic examination of the exhumed remains, skilfully obtained by Pete Bowes of the Tomsbytwo blog, answers the question regarding when progress will be made.
The news is that the forensic work on the DNA has been completed as this excerpt below shows:
‘Since the exhumation of the remains of Somerton Man two years ago, SAPOL in partnership with the AFP and FSSA, has engaged with forensic specialists here, interstate, and overseas to assist in the identification process. The DNA work on the Somerton Man’s remains was recently completed with analysis of these results to be reported to the State Coroner in the final report along with completed Forensic Anthropology and Forensic Odontology reports, and results of some outstanding forensic analysis that will be completed soon.’
As is par for the course with the Somerton Man case, answers generate more questions. My eye was drawn to the following words:
1. 'SAPOL in partnership with the AFP and FSSA, have engaged with forensic specialists here, interstate and overseas to assist in the identification process.'
The enlistment of local and interstate forensics specialists one can understand. But why overseas specialists? The options, a preliminary identification may have been made and that identification is of a person from a country other than Australia and/or another possibility is that a specific problem with the examination arose and it needed an overseas specialist to help resolve it.
2. The DNA work on the Somerton Man’s remains was recently completed with analysis of these results to be reported to the State Coroner in the final report along with completed Forensic Anthropology and Forensic Odontology reports, and results of some outstanding forensic analysis that will be completed soon.
(Anthropologist Report: Through the established methods, a forensic anthropologist can aid law enforcement in establishing a profile of the unidentified remains. The profile includes sex, age, ancestry, height, length of time since death, and sometimes the evaluation of trauma observed on bones.
ODONTOLOGY REPORT: The forensic investigation should explain orodental findings in details that can be used for identification (age, sex, ethnic group, and occupation if possible). The report must explain if the death could be due to trauma or any family or other violence that led to any injuries or trauma to the teeth, jaws, and any other oral and maxillofacial part. The possible causes should be given, too, if possible. The forensic odontology identification report should be understandable to a general audience (i.e., it should be written using layperson’s language.)
The Odontology and Anthropology reports are of course equally important with the aspect of the teeth being critical, it is the dental chart taken by Dr Dwyer at the autopsy that links the body of the man on the beach to the exhumed remains.
Perhaps what wasn't mentioned tells us more about the investigation. No mention was made about DNA specialists either here in Australia or overseas. Given the significant amount of publicity surrounding the DNA 'discovery' and the use of leading-edge technology, why would a DNA specialist be left out? Was it just an oversight?
That's my immediate take on the matter, maybe others would like to add their views.