Start Submission Become a Reviewer

Reading: Fabricated bite mark in a case of assault


A- A+
Alt. Display

Case Reports

Fabricated bite mark in a case of assault


S. A. Gunawardena ,

University of Colombo, LK
About S. A.
Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, Faculty of Medicine
X close

J. B. Weeratna

Institute of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, Colombo, LK
X close


Identifying a perpetrator by bite mark analysis is generally based on the detection of tooth impressions that correspond to unique and rare odontological traits.


A 34-year-old female presented with a history of assault where she also claimed that the assailant bit her during the struggle. There was a well defined bite mark on her left forearm along with blunt force injuries on the head. During forensic odontological examination, the wax bite registration of the victim showed several common dental irregularities which were also represented in the bite mark. The location and orientation of the injury also favoured the possibility of self-infliction and no inconsistencies could be found to exclude this bite mark as a fabricated injury in the setting of an assault.


The lack of population specific studies and objective methods of analysis are significant limitations in bite mark analysis. When providing opinion on the identity of the biter, the general recommendation is to use unique features or uncommon irregularities. However, even where only common dental irregularities are seen, a reasonably valid opinion could still be provided using a holistic and deductive approach, if there is sufficient concordance among multiple irregularities with no inconsistencies.
How to Cite: Gunawardena, S.A. and Weeratna, J.B., 2021. Fabricated bite mark in a case of assault. Sri Lanka Journal of Forensic Medicine, Science & Law, 12(1), pp.24–28. DOI:
Published on 25 May 2021.
Peer Reviewed


  • PDF (EN)

    comments powered by Disqus