Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Ladies, Know Your Lipstick!

                We've all seen detectives on crime shows pick up a champagne glass to examine the lipstick prints. We've also seen how that exact print, color, and brand was matched perfectly to either a victim or a suspect and within the hour the crime is solved. We all know how bogus that really all is. First of all, there is no way the crime was solved in an hour. Secondly, can they really match someone’s lipstick of all things? Isolating the DNA from any saliva mixed in the print, sure, but the brand? Maybe.
                Scientists from the University of Kent are now able to identify the brand of lipstick from crime scene lip prints. Not only can they do this, but they don’t even have to take the champagne glass (or water bottle, soda can, etc for all the non-fancy murderers) out of the evidence bag! Okay, okay, so crime scene techs have likely lifted the lip print in the past contrary to what TV shows depict, but now Raman spectroscopy is used to analyze the lipstick marks on a variety of pieces of evidence. Tissues, glasses, and even cigarette butts can be run under a specific type of laser light for analysis. This keeps evidence intact, allowing for it to be further processed if necessary.
                Prior to this advancement, scientists were forced to destroy evidence to analyze lipstick evidence. If that were not the preferred choice, the analysis had to be left to matter of opinions. I don’t know about you ladies, but sometimes Peachy-Pink Kiss can look a lot like Sunburst Coral to me. I wouldn't want someone to practically guess that the lipsticks match. Now that scientists have found that this technology can match brands of lipsticks, they’re working to apply this to other cosmetics as well.

If you’re interested in learning more about the Raman spectroscopy, you can read about the article I found here

6 comments:

  1. I love your story line. I think the advancement is great. Being that I am a Forensics Masters student, I think this is a great attribute to add to the capabilities of the crime lab. I might have to read the article myself though, I'm so curious as to how they can identify the brand with a laser and not by chemical analysis! I mean, wouldn't it seem logical that they would compare the chemical break down.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I feel that it would be more logical to chemically analyze the lipstick as well, but I think the main idea is to keep the evidence intact and to not destroy the objects the lipstick is on for whatever reason. As a forensics student, I'm sure you also know how delicate evidence can be when submitted to different testing methods. They may want the prints in place to make a match to someone, or maybe just for courtroom effect. Who knows?

      Delete
  2. Okay, so from what I can ascertain, this method, raman spectroscopy, is similar to IR spectroscopy except maybe it is easier to use (no extensive sample preparation as in IR), but it is more expensive. If this can be used to process evidence more efficiently then it might be worth it. On the other hand, I wonder about the applications beyond cosmetics. How important, in general, is cosmetic identification usually in criminal investigations?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't really know how important cosmetic identification is in investigations, either, but maybe this is just a stepping stone into bigger things. Since we know this is how science often works, I'd say it's safe to assume that this could open up the opportunity for more advances later on down the line.

      Delete
  3. This was an very interesting find! As a master's student in the forensic science program we've talked about how the tv shows portray over exaggerations of what actually occurs in a crime lab. This article makes me think that maybe some of the ideas that really have only been used on tv are now being developed for real crime labs. As Lori commented, how important is cosmetic identification in an investigation, but television shows have shown time and time again that it can be use so maybe it's made scientists think that maybe this technology could be used, and have worked on developing it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. Maybe the pressures and expectations from society have led to the development of such technology.

      Delete