How Crime Scene Insects Reveal the Time of Death

When a suspicious death occurs, a forensic entomologist may be called to assist in processing the crime scene. Insects found on or near the body may reveal important clues about the crime, including the victims time of death. Insects colonize cadavers in a predictable sequence, also known as insect succession. The first to arrive are the necrophagous species, drawn by the strong scent of decomposition. Blow flies can invade a corpse within minutes of death, and flesh flies follow close behind. Soon after coming, the dermestid beetles, the same beetles used by taxidermists to clean skulls of their flesh. More flies gather, including house flies. Predatory and parasitic insects arrive to feed on the maggots and beetle larvae. Eventually, as the corpse dries, hide beetles and clothes moths find the remains. Forensic entomologists collect samples of crime scene insects, making sure to take representatives of every species at their latest stage of development. Because arthropod development is linked directly to temperature, she also gathers daily temperature data from the nearest available weather station. In the lab, the scientist identifies each insect to species and determines their exact developmental stage. Since the identification of maggots can be difficult, the entomologist usually raises some of the maggots to adulthood to confirm their species. Blow flies and flesh flies are the most useful crime scene insects for determining the postmortem interval or time of death. Through laboratory studies, scientists have established the developmental rates of necrophagous species, based on constant temperatures in a laboratory environment. These databases relate a species life stage to its age when developing at a constant temperature, and provide the entomologist with a measurement called accumulated degree days, or ADD. ADD represents physiological time. Using the known ADD, she can then calculate the likely age of a specimen from the corpse, adjusting for the temperatures and other environmental conditions at the crime scene. Working backward through physiological time, the forensic entomologist can provide investigators with a specific time period when the body was first colonized by necrophagous insects. Since these insects almost always find the corpse within minutes or hours of the persons death, this calculation reveals the postmortem interval with good accuracy.

Laws, Crime and Punishment in Great Expectations by...

Laws, Crime and Punishment in Great Expectations by Charles Dickens Great Expectations criticises the Victorian judicial and penal system. Through the novel, Charles Dickens displays his point of view of criminality and punishment. This is shown in his portraits of all pieces of such system: the lawyer, the clerk, the judge, the prison authorities and the convicts. In treating the theme of the Victorian system of punishment, Dickens shows his position against prisons, transportation and death penalty. The main character, a little child who has expectations of becoming a gentleman to be of the same social position of the girls he loves, passes from having no interest on criminality and its penalties to be very concerned on the issue. By†¦show more content†¦In this acquisitive society, the only important thing was to make fortune, so people were much terrified of losing it. Because of this, any sort of theft was regarded as a serious crime and laws were made to show people that this offence was harshly punished. At the time when Great Expectations is set, the 1810-20s, there were a great number of offenders, most of whom were convicted of theft. Theft was considered a felony like homicide and was punishable with death. Jails were dark, overcrowded and filthy. All kinds of prisoners were kept together with no separation of men and women, the young and the old, or the sane and the insane. The poor conditions of the Victorian prisons are described in detail by Dickens in Great Expectations. In the 2nd volume of the novel, Pip comes across â€Å"a grim stone building† (163): Newgate Prison. Looking with horror, Pip offers us a portrait of the inside of the prison and criticism on capital punishment: â€Å"As I declined the proposal on the plea of an appointment, he was so good as to take me into a yard and show me where the gallows was kept, and also where people were publicly whipped, and then he showed me the Debtors’ door, out of which culprits came to be hanged: heightening the interest of that dreadful portal by giving me to understand that ‘‘four on ‘em’’ would come out at the door the day after tomorrow at eight in theShow MoreRelatedEssay about Dickens Great Expectations712 Words   |  3 PagesDickens Great Expectations The novel Great Expectations uses the central character, Pip, to depict the ups and downs of a young child on a quest to become not only a man, but a gentleman. Dickens uses a variety of different techniques to create mood, setting, and atmosphere. Charles Dickens grew up in the nineteenth century, when times were hard and punishments were extremely harsh. So harsh you could be imprisoned or even hanged for stealing a loaf of bread. Dickenss Read More Dickens Attitude toward Victorian Customs of Crime and Punishment828 Words   |  4 PagesDickens Attitude toward Victorian Customs of Crime and Punishment During the novel called Great Expectations, Charles Dickens makes it obvious to us how he feels about crime and punishment in the Victorian era. This essay will examine some of the ways he expresses his feelings and makes his attitude clear. The first way that Dickens reveals part of his attitude is by the words and phrases he uses to describe the escaped convict. To show the readers that the man he is describing is anRead MoreVictorian Era Research Paper1048 Words   |  5 PagesDickens Exploits 19th Century Criminal Profiling in Great Expectations In the nineteenth century, the harsh consequences for committing crimes depended on various factors, including social status, appearance, behavior and gender. The law was biased towards those who were both superior in appearance and thoroughly educated. Women were seen as respectable but naà ¯ve rather than murderers. Through his distinction of characters, Dickens shows his interest of profiling in his novel Great ExpectationsRead MoreMagwitch Character Analysis1683 Words   |  7 Pagesseveral appearances similar to this one in Charles Dickens’ Great Expectations. While he does play a man whose circumstances made him lead a life a crime, Magwitch’s character has much more depth. This profound character in fact can be found in almost all of the other characters within the book, including the main character, Pip. He can be found outside of the novel in the life of Charles Dickens as well. Throughout this novel Great Expectations, Dickens draws parallels between lifesty les and characteristicsRead MoreCharles Dickens Great Expectations1669 Words   |  7 PagesCharles Dickens He was one of England s greatest authors of the 1800 s, better known as the Victorian era. The various themes and ideas of that time are perfectly showcased in his many novels and short stories, such as Nicholas Nickelby, Great Expectations, Oliver Twist, A Tale of Two Cities, and A Christmas Carol. Much of the inspiration for these works came from the trials and conflicts that he dealt with in his own life. His volumes of fictional writing show the greatRead MoreGreat Expectations: the World of Laws, Crime and Punishment3378 Words   |  14 PagescenterbThe World of Laws, Crime and Punishment in Great Expectations/b/center brGreat Expectations criticises the Victorian judicial and penal system. Through the novel, Charles Dickens displays his point of view of criminality and punishment. This is shown in his portraits of all pieces of such system: the lawyer, the clerk, the judge, the prison authorities and the convicts. In treating the theme of the Victorian system of punishment, Dickens shows his position against prisons, transportationRead MoreCrime And Criminality In Charles Dickenss Great Expectations1752 Words   |  8 PagesDuring the 19th century, crime and criminality was largely debated upon. Social reformists, poets and writers of this era wrote provocatively about this topic, and many considered crime to be an â€Å"inescapable social problem†. The surge of industrial development across Britain created new problems for Victorian society as the incline of wealth altered the structure of the class system. In addition to this, the lack of a welfare structure resulted in numerous men, wom en and children being exposed toRead MoreEssay on Great Expectations by Charles Dickens2511 Words   |  11 PagesGreat Expectations by Charles Dickens Great Expectations was written by Charles Dickens in 1861. Great Expectations is a coming of age story that revolves around the life of one man Pip. From the time he was seven years old until he was in the mid thirties, Pip shows us the important events in his life that shaped who he became. Along the way, he enquires many different acquaintances and friends that influence him in his decisions and goals in his life. Great ExpectationsRead More Great Expectations: Gods Law Vs. Human Law Essay1164 Words   |  5 Pages Great Expectations: Gods Law vs. Human Law In his book Great Expectations, the problematic nature of moral judgement and justice that stems from a conflict between Gods law and human law is one of several topical themes that Charles Dickens addresses. This paradox regularly surfaces in his treatment of plot and setting, and is more subtlety illustrated in his use of character. To facilitate the readers awareness of such a conflict, the narrator often uses language that has Christian connotationsRead More Oliver Twist Essay1641 Words   |  7 Pages Charles Dickens wrote Oliver Twist, in 1883, to show the reader things as they really are. He felt that the novel should be a message of social reform. One of its purposes was to promote reform of the abuses in workhouses. In no way does Dickens create a dream world. His imagination puts together a bad place during a bad time; an English workhouse just after the Poor Law Act of 1834 (Scott-Kilvert, 48). In the first chapter of Oliver Twist, Dickens moves from comedy to pathos and from pathos

Stalin man or monster Free Essays

Source A is very different to sources B and C. Stalin is shown standing by pyramids ‘visit Russia’s pyramids’. The picture is symbolising the results of Stalin’s policies in which many people died. We will write a custom essay sample on Stalin: man or monster? or any similar topic only for you Order Now Stalin is showing no emotion. Sources B and C are very similar in that they are both showing Stalin as a popular, liked man. In source B it shows him with some of the workers on a hydro-electric power station. Stalin looks very relaxed and casual standing with his hand in one pocket and holding his pipe. However, the painting is an official soviet painting so it was probably manipulated to make Stain look good with happy workers. Source C was taken by a soviet photographer so the picture was probably planned on purpose to show Stalin’s popularity and to make it look like all the people adore him. Sources B and C give very similar impressions of Stalin, showing him as a loved man. Whereas source A gives the impression that he is a monster. Source D is a speech written by a writer to the congress of soviets in 1935. The speech was published in Pravda, the paper of the communist party. The fact that it was published in Russia in 1935 already tells us that this source has probably been manipulated in some way to make Stalin look better. The only reason people would lie about him is because they were terrified of him so they had no choice but to suck up to him or face execution. This article does show us how Stalin had many people terrified and you can see this in the source because of how fake and obsessed the writer is. However because of the purges most of the stuff written about him was propaganda. Therefore meaning the information is of little use as it is purely either opinion or fake. I believe that the fact Bukharin’s speech is written after becoming a victim of the purges and the fact it’s written in Paris, where he is out of Stalin’s control makes his assessment more reliable. The writer expresses his anger and hatred towards Stalin. Yet I think the reason Bukharin’s assessment is reliable is the fact that he was very close to Stalin in helping him against Trotsky. Nonetheless he then fell into disagreement with him and he became a victim of the purges, but managed to escape to Paris, in exile out of Stalin’s reach, meaning he can not be caught and punished. Khrushchev’s speech is talking about how distrustful and truthfully scared Stalin was. This assessment does match others in saying how terrorising and malicious Stalin could be. For instance, the purges were an example of how Stalin would block any threats and oppositions by destroying them. Furthermore the fact that the speech was delivered in 1956 after Stalin’s reign also makes the speech more likely to be accurate and trustworthy. Source G is showing Stalin as the judge prosecuting 4 defendants. They are all sarcastically admitting what they have done as they know even if they plea ‘not guilty’ they will still be sentenced. The fact they will be sentence no matter what is shown in the background of the picture where you can see the gallows. Source H shows Stalin in the court, but in every position or role. This illustrates how Stalin manipulated everyone in the soviet party. Stalin was in effect, the Judge, the Jury, the Witness, the Clerk and the prosecutor. They were called ‘show trials’ for a reason, that they were for show. The defendant was already a ‘dead man’ before he had entered the court. The trial was purely so Stalin could say, ‘I gave them a chance’. Both sources are very similar in that they both give the same message, that Stalin was always in charge and that there would always be the same outcome in the verdict. Source I is from a biography of Stalin published in 1947 in Russia. This shows that what was written was probably fake or inaccurate as it was during the purges, meaning that the author had the fear of execution. Source J on the other hand was written in 1974 in Britain long after Stalin’s rule. This means what is said about him is more likely to be true as there would be no fear of being prosecuted. Also the cold war was going on in 1974 so Britain was fighting against Russia. Yet I believe this could mean that the assessment is exaggerated because of Britain’s dislike towards Russia at the time. Although we know they both disagree about Stalin we deduce this because of when and where they were written and our knowledge of what would happen to people who spoke out about Stalin. Most of the evidence shown in the sources points to Stalin as being a monster. After studying and analysing sources, A, D, E, F, G, H, and J, they all show or explain how evil, malicious and cruel Stalin was. It is only sources, B, C, D and I, which are either praising or supporting him and this is only because the artists or writers are either terrified or their assessments have been manipulated in some way from fear of execution. Different sources of information I have read indicate that Stalin was a monster For instance, to start with Stalin stated his 5 year plans. They consisted of different aims: to provide machinery and other equipment to farmers, to catch up with the western world so they were less dependant on industrial goods from other countries and finally to produce more armaments so that Russia could defend itself from attack. Although these aims sounded good they never actually happened. Stalin then introduced the purges. This was simply to a way to get rid of any opposition or threats. Stalin would find someone that had been opposing him in someway (even if it was that they spoke better than he did). He would then have them put on trial (know as show trails) and they would be found guilty and executed, hence out of Stalin’s way. The Purges claimed over 10 million people’s lives. Collectivisation was introduced for people in each village to join their farms together to make one large collective farm (Kolkhoz). Every one as a whole would then be able to afford the machinery and be more efficient. Because no-one listened there was a famine so Stalin made collectivisation compulsory. Peasants hated the idea so killed all their livestock and burned all their crops. Those who had done what Stalin said proved that collectivisation had worked and that numbers in cows and grain had gone up approximately 10 million in 25 years, but it is debateable whether this was a huge success, to the extent that many lives were ruined and many livestock and crops destroyed. Stalin had many people employed to work on building dams and bridges. However, many of the workers were slaves and kulaks. Strikers were shot, and wreckers could be executed or imprisoned. Thousands died from accidents, starvation or weather. Housing and wages were terrible; they would have to do a certain amount of work in their shift or they would go without food. Stalin’s 5 year plans also came into this, he would often set an aim to complete a dam in 1 year, then when it was finished he would congratulate the workers and say ‘as you did so well, you have two more dams to do in the same amount of time’. This would then continue on and on. On the other hand, it could be argued that there were things that Stalin did during his reign that did benefit Russia. During the war Stalin helped by co-ordinating the arms production and making sure everyone was fully equipped. He was also very good at bringing everyone together and motivating people to fight for their country. Although collectivisation was not a huge success it did increase some of the numbers of livestock and grain farmers were producing, which arguably means that the idea did work. He did also have some other achievements, such as: Turkestan-Siberian railroad, the Dneiper dam and the Belomor canal. Some of the sources do support Stalin and show him as an adored man. Even though we have been looking at how most of the assessments are likely to of been manipulated, Stalin would have had some followers that were with him and supported him when some of the pictures were taken. Throughout Stalin’s reign there were many things that he did that were horrific and malicious that did make him a real monster and from the research that I have collected I believe him to be just that, yet there were some things that he did for Russia that were in his favour, the main one being that he did, at a heavy cost, bring Russia foreword along way, and that did make his seem like a real man. How to cite Stalin: man or monster?, Papers

Stalin man or monster Free Essays

Source A is very different to sources B and C. Stalin is shown standing by pyramids ‘visit Russia’s pyramids’. The picture is symbolising the results of Stalin’s policies in which many people died. We will write a custom essay sample on Stalin: man or monster? or any similar topic only for you Order Now Stalin is showing no emotion. Sources B and C are very similar in that they are both showing Stalin as a popular, liked man. In source B it shows him with some of the workers on a hydro-electric power station. Stalin looks very relaxed and casual standing with his hand in one pocket and holding his pipe. However, the painting is an official soviet painting so it was probably manipulated to make Stain look good with happy workers. Source C was taken by a soviet photographer so the picture was probably planned on purpose to show Stalin’s popularity and to make it look like all the people adore him. Sources B and C give very similar impressions of Stalin, showing him as a loved man. Whereas source A gives the impression that he is a monster. Source D is a speech written by a writer to the congress of soviets in 1935. The speech was published in Pravda, the paper of the communist party. The fact that it was published in Russia in 1935 already tells us that this source has probably been manipulated in some way to make Stalin look better. The only reason people would lie about him is because they were terrified of him so they had no choice but to suck up to him or face execution. This article does show us how Stalin had many people terrified and you can see this in the source because of how fake and obsessed the writer is. However because of the purges most of the stuff written about him was propaganda. Therefore meaning the information is of little use as it is purely either opinion or fake. I believe that the fact Bukharin’s speech is written after becoming a victim of the purges and the fact it’s written in Paris, where he is out of Stalin’s control makes his assessment more reliable. The writer expresses his anger and hatred towards Stalin. Yet I think the reason Bukharin’s assessment is reliable is the fact that he was very close to Stalin in helping him against Trotsky. Nonetheless he then fell into disagreement with him and he became a victim of the purges, but managed to escape to Paris, in exile out of Stalin’s reach, meaning he can not be caught and punished. Khrushchev’s speech is talking about how distrustful and truthfully scared Stalin was. This assessment does match others in saying how terrorising and malicious Stalin could be. For instance, the purges were an example of how Stalin would block any threats and oppositions by destroying them. Furthermore the fact that the speech was delivered in 1956 after Stalin’s reign also makes the speech more likely to be accurate and trustworthy. Source G is showing Stalin as the judge prosecuting 4 defendants. They are all sarcastically admitting what they have done as they know even if they plea ‘not guilty’ they will still be sentenced. The fact they will be sentence no matter what is shown in the background of the picture where you can see the gallows. Source H shows Stalin in the court, but in every position or role. This illustrates how Stalin manipulated everyone in the soviet party. Stalin was in effect, the Judge, the Jury, the Witness, the Clerk and the prosecutor. They were called ‘show trials’ for a reason, that they were for show. The defendant was already a ‘dead man’ before he had entered the court. The trial was purely so Stalin could say, ‘I gave them a chance’. Both sources are very similar in that they both give the same message, that Stalin was always in charge and that there would always be the same outcome in the verdict. Source I is from a biography of Stalin published in 1947 in Russia. This shows that what was written was probably fake or inaccurate as it was during the purges, meaning that the author had the fear of execution. Source J on the other hand was written in 1974 in Britain long after Stalin’s rule. This means what is said about him is more likely to be true as there would be no fear of being prosecuted. Also the cold war was going on in 1974 so Britain was fighting against Russia. Yet I believe this could mean that the assessment is exaggerated because of Britain’s dislike towards Russia at the time. Although we know they both disagree about Stalin we deduce this because of when and where they were written and our knowledge of what would happen to people who spoke out about Stalin. Most of the evidence shown in the sources points to Stalin as being a monster. After studying and analysing sources, A, D, E, F, G, H, and J, they all show or explain how evil, malicious and cruel Stalin was. It is only sources, B, C, D and I, which are either praising or supporting him and this is only because the artists or writers are either terrified or their assessments have been manipulated in some way from fear of execution. Different sources of information I have read indicate that Stalin was a monster For instance, to start with Stalin stated his 5 year plans. They consisted of different aims: to provide machinery and other equipment to farmers, to catch up with the western world so they were less dependant on industrial goods from other countries and finally to produce more armaments so that Russia could defend itself from attack. Although these aims sounded good they never actually happened. Stalin then introduced the purges. This was simply to a way to get rid of any opposition or threats. Stalin would find someone that had been opposing him in someway (even if it was that they spoke better than he did). He would then have them put on trial (know as show trails) and they would be found guilty and executed, hence out of Stalin’s way. The Purges claimed over 10 million people’s lives. Collectivisation was introduced for people in each village to join their farms together to make one large collective farm (Kolkhoz). Every one as a whole would then be able to afford the machinery and be more efficient. Because no-one listened there was a famine so Stalin made collectivisation compulsory. Peasants hated the idea so killed all their livestock and burned all their crops. Those who had done what Stalin said proved that collectivisation had worked and that numbers in cows and grain had gone up approximately 10 million in 25 years, but it is debateable whether this was a huge success, to the extent that many lives were ruined and many livestock and crops destroyed. Stalin had many people employed to work on building dams and bridges. However, many of the workers were slaves and kulaks. Strikers were shot, and wreckers could be executed or imprisoned. Thousands died from accidents, starvation or weather. Housing and wages were terrible; they would have to do a certain amount of work in their shift or they would go without food. Stalin’s 5 year plans also came into this, he would often set an aim to complete a dam in 1 year, then when it was finished he would congratulate the workers and say ‘as you did so well, you have two more dams to do in the same amount of time’. This would then continue on and on. On the other hand, it could be argued that there were things that Stalin did during his reign that did benefit Russia. During the war Stalin helped by co-ordinating the arms production and making sure everyone was fully equipped. He was also very good at bringing everyone together and motivating people to fight for their country. Although collectivisation was not a huge success it did increase some of the numbers of livestock and grain farmers were producing, which arguably means that the idea did work. He did also have some other achievements, such as: Turkestan-Siberian railroad, the Dneiper dam and the Belomor canal. Some of the sources do support Stalin and show him as an adored man. Even though we have been looking at how most of the assessments are likely to of been manipulated, Stalin would have had some followers that were with him and supported him when some of the pictures were taken. Throughout Stalin’s reign there were many things that he did that were horrific and malicious that did make him a real monster and from the research that I have collected I believe him to be just that, yet there were some things that he did for Russia that were in his favour, the main one being that he did, at a heavy cost, bring Russia foreword along way, and that did make his seem like a real man. How to cite Stalin: man or monster?, Papers