Search

In examining deaths resulting from gunshot wounds, it is important to describe the wound pathway created by the projectile. Forensic pathologists must identify all entrance and exit wounds and account for all projectiles. Occasionally, confusion arises as to whether a skin defect represents an entrance wound or not, an exit wound, or some other type of wound. Herein, we propose the descriptor "bullet track skin defect" as a formal description for a superficial skin defect created along the pathway of a projectile within the body. Specifically, we define the "bullet track skin defect" as a partial‐ or full‐thickness skin defect produced by a projectile traveling beneath the skin in a relatively tangential fashion as part of a wound pathway within the body. It is somewhat analogous to a traditional graze or superficial tangential wound, wherein the projectile traveling outside the body strikes the skin tangentially from above, without entering the body. However, the projectile is already traveling within the body with the bullet track skin defect, disrupting the skin tangentially from below rather than from above, without exiting the body. Although these defects are not a common presentation of gunshot wounds, they are certainly not rare. With this case series, we suggest that such defects may be referred to as "bullet track skin defects." Alternative language that can substitute for "bullet track skin defects" includes "bullet track skin wounds" or "bullet track cutaneous defects." [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Researchers use a variety of target materials, and sometimes combinations of materials, in their archaeological experiments to examine thrust‐spear or projectile penetration, impact angle, durability, and other issues involving prehistoric hunting weaponry. This variety of target materials is beneficial to archaeological science in several ways, but it may also hinder the comparison of results because many of these target materials do not necessarily share similar physical properties. Here, we assess the penetration properties of four different target materials—store‐bought meat, clay, and two types of gelatin—via static penetration tests of a modern broadhead‐tipped arrow and a stone‐tipped projectile attached to an Instron Universal Materials Tester. Our analyses of load‐deflection curves, peak load, and work energy demonstrate how the four target materials are similar in some ways but different in others, which suggests that researchers may strategically employ one or several depending on the question asked or hypothesis tested. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]