Bericon is often asked to prepare reports evaluating the effects of corrosive liquid exposure, such as acid, on individuals in close quarters. These assessments also include analysing the persistence of acid residues on clothing, typically involving laboratory examination of the items.
Case Study – Key Information
– The defendant was accused with Applying a Corrosive Liquid with Intent.
– It was reported by the complainant, that the defendant had thrown a liquid over them and that they experienced a burning sensation.
– The complainant reports that they were able to promptly shower themselves and their clothing was recovered.
– The defendant was arrested in connection with the offence and items of their clothing were recovered.
– A plastic container of liquid was recovered.
– The defendant denies throwing or pouring any corrosive substance and believes that the complainant is responsible for any such substances being present on their clothing.
– A forensic scientist instructed by the prosecution concluded that the liquid within the container was a strong solution of hydrochloric acid.
– They commented that the complainants clothing, bore acidic and chloride deposits. They concluded that a solution of hydrochloric acid had been in contact with the item and that given the information supplied to them, the origin of the liquid was that submitted.
– The prosecution scientist also reported that no such traces of corrosive deposits were noted on the clothing items from the defendant but that such findings did not assist his assessment of whether the defendant may have been responsible for pouring or throwing acid onto the complainant.
Expert Instruction:
Bericon’s expert was requested to prepare a report that reviewed the conclusions of the prosecution scientist in relation to the aforementioned items and assess any findings considering the witness evidence, the defendant’s Proof of Evidence and record of interview.
Expert Findings:
Bericon’s expert visited the forensic laboratory where they examined the items referred to above together with data and information that the prosecution scientist had acquired during their investigation.
Bericon’s expert concluded that they are confident that the complainants clothing bore chloride and highly acidic deposits across its surface but it is not possible to say how much corrosive liquid was deposited onto it or specifically where this liquid was deposited.
A part-used container of mortar and brick cleaner was recovered from the address and given the information supplied about this case, it seemed reasonable to the expert to assume that this is the liquid deposited onto the complainant’s clothing.
Our expert couldn’t comment on when the liquid came into contact with the garment or who was responsible for the deposition but they agreed that the absence of such deposits on the defendant’s clothing does not really assist in the evaluation of the evidence against him.
Are you a criminal defence solicitor looking for an expert witness in this type of case? Contact us today.
Curious to Learn More?
Stay informed about the fascinating intersection of science and justice. Keep reading our blog for more insights into forensic science case studies, expert witnesses, and their impact on the UK legal system.
