a.
1L).

.L.

1an
. .

 

 

urn, .

$22.... 1 V .. g ‘ ‘

 

1...:1;

   

).-
... “a ‘ .

 

,... .. .9. . , fur"? , . .543 $45

 

 

 

 

THESIS

(Root

 

LIBRARY
Michigan State
University

' ”-

 

 

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

THE EFFECTS OF WEATHERING ON THE PERSISTENCE
OF GUNSHOT RESIDUE ON CLOTHING

presented by

HELEN ANN SCHUMACHER

has been accepted towards fulﬁllment
of the requirements for

Mush degree in WSTICE

 

 

Date 7/10/01

0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN Box to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

 

ﬁlarﬁh

 

W more

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/01 cJCIRC/DatoDuapﬁ-pjs

 

 

THE EFFECTS OF WEATHERING ON THE PERSISTENCE OF GUNSHOT
RESIDUE ON CLOTHING.

By

Helen Ann Schumacher

AN ABSTRACT OF A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulﬁllment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
Department of Criminal Justice
2001

Dr. Jay Siegel

ABSTRACT

THE EFFECTS OF WEATHERING ON THE PERSISTENC OF GUNSHOT
RESIDUES ON CLOTHING

By

Helen Ann Schumacher

Determining the distance at which a weapon has been ﬁred is vital in
reconstructing a crime scene involving a ﬁrearm and target. There are situations when
ﬁrearm examiners have received articles of clothing that have been taken from a victim
found out of doors. The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of various weather
conditions on the persistence of GSR on a clothing sample. Visual and chemical
examinations were carried out on test-ﬁred targets ﬁred from six and twelve inches that
had been exposed to environmental conditions in central Michigan during a ten-week
time period. Detailed daily weather conditions were recorded and related to the results of
the of the visual and chemical examinations on the test-ﬁred targets. The conclusion is
that exposure of gunshot residue targets to different environmental conditions always

leads to a loss of residues that vary depending on the condition.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Thank you to all the examiners in the Firearm and Toolmark Unit at the Michigan
State Crime Laboratory in East Lansing for their support and advice. A special thank you
to Lt. Michael Burritt and Jon Stanton for their assistance in preparing the test ﬁres
essential to the success of this research, and to Dr. Jay Siegel for his support every step of
the way. The author would like to acknowledge and thank Dr. Christopher Maxwell for
his assistance on the statistical analysis of the data. The author would also like to express
her gratitude to Victor Murillo, Shannon Riter and Connie Waddell for assistance in

preparing the manuscript.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................... vii
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................. ix
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................... xv
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1
CHAPTER 1
GENERAL INFORMATION ON MUZZLE-TO-TARGET
DISTANCE DETERMINATIONS ................................................................ 3
Introduction: What is Gunshot Residue? ............................................... 3
Factors Affecting Gunshot Residue Deposition ......................................... 4
Microscopic and Visual Examination of GSR Patterns ................................ 5
Chromophoric Techniques For Recovery of GSR Patterns ........................... 7
Results and Interpretation of GSR Examinations ....................................... 9
CHAPTER 2
THE EXPERIMENT: THE EFFECTS OF WEATHERING ON THE
PERSISTENCE OF A GSR PATTERN ON A CLOTHING SAMPLE ..................... 11
Relevant Research .......................................................................... 11
Experimental Design and Methods ...................................................... 13
CHAPTER 3
RESULTS AND INTERPRETATIONS ......................................................... 19
Step 1 ........................................................................................ 19
Results of the Microscopic and Visual Examinations
of Twenty Targets Fired From Six Inches ..................................... 19
Results of the Microscopic and Visual Examinations
of Twenty Targets Fired From Twelve Inches ................................ 21
Comparison of the Number of Powder Particles Counted
on Targets Fired From Six and Twelve Inches ............................... 24
Results of the Chromophoric Examinations of Targets
Fired From Six and Twelve Inches ............................................. 27
Step 2 ....................................................................................... 31

Comparison of the Microscopic and Visual Observations

From Targets Fired From Six Inches and Placed

Outside For One Week .......................................................... 31
Comparison of the Microscopic and Visual Observations

From Targets Fired From Twelve Inches and Placed

Outside For One Week .......................................................... 33
Relative Loss of GSR on Targets Fired From Six and

iv

Twelve Inches After Being Placed Outside For One Week ................. 35
Results from the Number of Powder Particles Counted on
Targets Fired From Six and Twelve Inches Before and After

Being Placed Outside for One Week ........................................... 36
Results of the Chromophoric Examinations on Targets Fired
From Six and Twelve Inches Collected Aﬁer One Week Outside ......... 38

Persistence of the Microscopic and Visual GSR on Targets

Fired From Six Inches, Placed Outside and Collected Weekly

Over a Five Week Time Period ................................................. 41
Persistence of the Microscopic and Visual Observations on the

Targets Fired From Twelve Inches, Placed Outside and

Collected Weekly Over a Five Week Time Period ........................... 43
Results From the Number of Powder Particles Counted On

Targets Fired From Six and Twelve Inches Before and After

Being Placed Outside and Collected Weekly Over a Five

Week Time Period ................................................................ 46
Persistence of the Nitrite Pattern From Targets Fired From

Six and Twelve Inches, Placed Outside and Collected Weekly

Over a Five Week Time Period ................................................. 47
Persistence of Lead Patterns on Targets Fired From Six and

Twelve Inches, Placed Outside and Collected Weekly Over

a Five Week Time Period ........................................................ 48

Results from Microscopic, Visual and Chromophoric

Examinations of the Blank Cotton Twill Cloths .............................. 50
Step 3 ........................................................................................ 50

Results from the Weather Conditions .......................................... 50

Results from the Statistical Analysis ........................................... 50

Relating the Various Weather Conditions to the Visual and
Chromophoric GSR Patterns and the Statistical Analysis of the Loss of

Powder Particles on Targets Fired From Six and Twelve Inches. . . . . .......52
The Degradation of GSR by Wind .............................................. 53
The Degradation of GSR by Temperature ..................................... 55
The Degradation of GSR by Precipitation ..................................... 57
CHAPTER 4
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ............................................................ 59
CHAPTER 5
SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH ................................................ 63
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Modiﬁed Griess Test — FBI Laboratory Protocol ............................ 65
Appendix B
Sodium Rhodizonate Test ....................................................... 69

Appendix C

Materials Used in This Experiment ............................................ 73
Appendix D

Gunshot Residues Worksheet ................................................... 76
Appendix E

Photographs of Targets Fired From Six Inches Before

and After Being Placed Outside for One Week, the

Nitrite Pattern and the Lead Pattern ............................................ 78
Appendix F

Photographs of Targets Fired From Six Inches Before

and After Being Placed Outside for One Week, the

Nitrite Pattern and the Lead Pattern ............................................. 99
Appendix G
Daily Weather Conditions in Lansing, Michigan from
March 3, 2000 to May 11, 2000 ................................................ 120
LITERATURE CITED ........................................................................... 125
GENERAL REFERENCES ...................................................................... 127

vi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Microscopic and visual observations on targets ﬁred from six inches.
Table 2: Microscopic and visual observations on targets ﬁred ﬁom twelve inches.
Table 3: Powder particles counted on targets ﬁred from six inches.

Table 4: Powder particles counted on targets ﬁred from twelve inches.

Table 5: Microscopic and visual observations of the GSR deposition on targets ﬁred
from six inches before and after being placed outside for one week.

Table 6: Microscopic and visual observations of the GSR deposition on targets ﬁred
from twelve inches before and after being placed outside for one week.

Table 7: Estimated relative loss of visible GSR on targets ﬁred from six inches.
Table 8: Estimated relative loss of visible GSR on targets ﬁred from twelve inches.

Table 9: The number of powder particles counted on targets ﬁred from six inches before
and after being placed outside for one week.

Table 10: The number of powder particles counted on targets ﬁred from twelve inches
before and aﬁer being placed outside for one week.

Table l 1: The approximate diameter and estimated relative loss of nitrite pattern
obtained from targets ﬁred from six inches after being placed outside for one week.

Table 12: The approximate diameter and estimated relative loss of nitrite pattern
obtained from targets ﬁred from twelve inches after being placed outside for one week.

Table 13: A description of the lead residue pattern obtained by the Sodium Rhodizonate
test and estimated lead residue loss on targets ﬁred from six inches.

Table 14: A description of the lead residue pattern obtained by the Sodium Rhodizonate
test and estimated lead residue loss on targets ﬁred from twelve inches.

Table 15: Microscopic and visual observations of the GSR deposition on targets ﬁred

from six inches before and after being placed outside and collected weekly over a ﬁve
week time period.

vii

Table 16: Microscopic and visual observations of the GSR deposition on targets ﬁred
from twelve inches before and after being placed outside and collected weekly over a ﬁve
week time period.

Table 17: Estimated relative loss of visible GSR on targets ﬁred from six inches.
Table 18: Estimated relative loss of visible GSR on targets ﬁred from twelve inches.

Table 19: The number of powder particles counted on targets ﬁred from six inches that
had been placed outside and collected weekly over a ﬁve week time period.

Table 20: The number of powder particles counted on targets ﬁred from twelve inches
that had been placed outside and collected weekly over a ﬁve week time period.

Table 21: The approximate diameter and estimated relative loss of the nitrite pattern
ﬁom targets ﬁred from six inches

Table 22: The approximate diameter and estimated relative loss of the nitrite pattern from
targets ﬁred ﬁ'om twelve inches

Table 23: A description of the lead residue pattern obtained by the Sodium Rhodizonate
test and estimated lead residue loss on targets ﬁred from six inches.

Table 24: A description of the lead residue pattern obtained by the Sodium Rhodizonate
test and estimated lead residue loss on targets ﬁred from twelve inches.

Table 25: The maximum, minimum, and average temperature, precipitation, and average
wind speed in Lansing, Michigan from March 3, 2000 to May 11, 2000.

Table 26: A statistical summary of the results from the Univariate Analysis of Variances
conducted on the number of powder particles counted on the targets ﬁred from six and
twelve inches before and after being placed outside for one week and with each separate
weather condition.

Table 27: Daily weather conditions in Lansing, Michigan from March 3, 2000 to May
1 1, 2000.

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: An example of a GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches. This target is
Test 4.

Figure 2: An example of a GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches. This target
is Test 12.

Figure 3: A comparison of the number of powder particles counted on targets ﬁred from
six and twelve inches.

Figure 4: An example of a nitrite pattern on a piece of desensitized photographic paper
from a target ﬁred from six inches. This is from Test 1.

Figure 5: An example of a nitrite pattern on a piece of desensitized photographic paper
from a target ﬁred from twelve inches. This is from Test 6.

Figure 6: An example of the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches. This target is
Extra 4.

Figure 7: An example of the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches. This
target is Extra 5.

Figure 8: A comparison of the percentage of lost powder particles on targets ﬁred from
six and twelve inches.

Figure 9: A comparison of the percentage of powder particles lost on targets ﬁred from
twelve inches during the ﬁrst and second ﬁve week study.

Figure 10: Comparison of the average wind speed and the percentage of particles lost
ﬁom targets ﬁred from six inches.

Figure 11: Comparison of the average wind speed and the percentage of particles lost
from targets ﬁred from twelve inches.

Figure 12: Comparison of the average temperature and the particles of particles lost on
targets ﬁred from six inches.

Figure 13: Comparison of the average temperature and the percentage of particles lost on
targets ﬁred from twelve inches.

Figure 14: Week 1 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches.

Figure 15: Week 1 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 16: Week 1 - the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 17: Week 1 — the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 18: Week 2 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches.

Figure 19: Week 2 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 20: Week 2 - the nitrite pattern from the target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 21: Week 2 — the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 22: Week 3 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches.

Figure 23: Week 3 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 24: Week 3 — the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 25: Week 3 - the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 26: Week 4 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches.

Figure 27: Week 4 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 28: Week 4 — the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 29: Week 4 — the lead pattern on a target ﬁred ﬁ‘om six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 30: Week 5 - the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches.

Figure 31: Week 5 - the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 32: Week 5 — the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 33: Week 5 — the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 34: Week 6 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches.

Figure 35: Week 6 - the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 36: Week 6 - the nitrite pattern from the target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 37: Week 6 — the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 38: Week 7 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches.

Figure 39: Week 7 - the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 40: Week 7 — the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 41: Week 7 - the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 42: Week 8 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches.

Figure 43: Week 8 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 44: Week 8 — the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 45: Week 8 — the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 46: Week 9 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches.

Figure 47: Week 9 —- the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 48: Week 9 — the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 49: Week 9 — the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 50: Week 10 —- the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches.

Figure 51: Week 10 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 52: Week 10 — the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred ﬁ'om six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 53: Week 10 — the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

Figure 54: Week 1: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

Figure 55: Week 1: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 56: Week 1: the nitrite pattern ﬁom a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 57: Week 1: the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches aﬁer being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 58: Week 2: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

Figure 59: Week 2: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 60: Week 2: the nitrite pattern from the target ﬁred from twelve inches after
being placed outside for one week.

Figure 61: Week 2: the lead pattern on a target ﬁred ﬁom twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 62: Week 3: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

Figure 63: Week 3: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 64: Week 3: the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

xii

Figure 65: Week 3: the lead pattern on a target ﬁred ﬁom twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 66: Week 4: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

Figure 67: Week 4: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 68: Week 4: the nitrite pattern from the target ﬁred from twelve inches after
being placed outside for one week.

Figure 69: Week 4: the lead pattern on a target ﬁred ﬁ'om twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 70: Week 5: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

Figure 71: Week 5: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 72: Week 5: the nitrite pattern ﬁ'om the target ﬁred from twelve inches after
being placed outside for one week.

Figure 73: Week 5: the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 74: Week 6: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

Figure 75: Week 6: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 76: Week 6: the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 77: Week 6: the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 78: Week 7: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

Figure 79: Week 7: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 80: Week 7: the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

xiii

Figure 81: Week 7: the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 82: Week 8: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

Figure 83: Week 8: the GSR pattem on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 84: Week 8: the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

A Figure 85: Week 8: the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 86: Week 9: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

Figure 87: Week 9: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 88: Week 9: the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 89: Week 9: the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 90: Week 10: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

Figure 91: Week 10: the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred ﬁom twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 92: Week 10: the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 93: Week 10: the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

xiv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Gunshot Residue(s) (GSR)
Modiﬁed Griess Test (MGT)

XV

INTRODUCTION

Determining the distance at which a weapon has been ﬁred is vital in
reconstructing a crime scene involving a ﬁrearm and target. Investigators frequently
request frrearrn examiners to execute a muzzle-to-target distance determination on
evidence collected from a crime scene. Often the ﬁrearm examiner studies a victim or the
victim’s clothing for traces of evidence left by the discharge of the ﬁrearm.

The particulate emitted from the muzzle of a ﬁrearm are referred to as gunshot
residues (GSR). GSR consists of metallic particles, metallic compounds, and partially
combusted and unburned powder particles. The detection of speciﬁc gunshot residues by
visual and chemical examinations assists in establishing the distance between the muzzle
of a ﬁrearm and a target.

The purpose of this thesis project was to conduct a practical study to examine the
effects of weathering on the persistence of gunshot residue on a clothing sample. Since
there has been a minimal amount of research done on this topic, this is an exploratory
study examining the effects of all weather conditions. Information obtained from this
study can be utilized to design a project using speciﬁc controlled weather variables.

This study evaluated the effect that wind, temperature and precipitation separately
had on the retrieval of a gunshot residue pattern in muzzle-to-target distance
determinations. The hypothesis is that wind, temperature and precipitation will have a
negative effect on the visual GSR pattern and the retrieval of a GSR pattern through
Chromophoric techniques. Visual and chemical examinations were carried out on test-
ﬁred targets from known distances that had been exposed to environmental conditions in

central Michigan during a ten-week time period. Detailed daily weather conditions were

recorded and related to the results of the visual and chemical examinations on the test-
ﬁred targets.

This study will provide valuable insight into the persistence of speciﬁc gunshot
residues subjected to various weather conditions. The results of this study will beneﬁt
investigators at an out of doors crime scene in determining if weather related loss of
evidence is a concern. Crime laboratory examiners may refer to these results to
strengthen a muzzle-to-target distance determination testimony. Overall, this practical

study can be used to supplement individuals’ knowledge of GSR persistence.

Chapter 1

GENERAL INFORMATION ON MUZZLE-TO-TARGET DISTANCE

DETERMINATIONS

Introduction: What is Gunshot Residue?

In order to understand how to execute muzzle-to-target distance determinations, it
is important to know the sequence of events and by-products formed and expelled when a
ﬁrearm is discharged. In order for a gun to discharge, the ﬁring pin or striker of the
ﬁrearm must strike the primer which is located at the base of the cartridge. The primer
components ignite, sending a ﬂame into the powder chamber. This causes the powder to
ignite, producing gases that generate extremely high pressures, and in turn, propel the
bullet out of the gun’s barrel. A cloud of debris, known as gunshot residue (GSR), exits
the muzzle in a roughly conical pattern. This cloud of debris cools quickly and the
vaporized materials within the cloud condense and are deposited as particulate.

The deposition of gunshot residues on a target is a vital component of a muzzle-
to-target distance determination. GSR contains the products of decomposition of the
propellant, primer, cartridge case, coatings on the cartridge case, projectile, the projectile
coating, primer foils, and contamination of the barrel. GSR consists largely of burned
and unburned propellant, ﬁnely divided particles of metal particulate from the bullet and
microscopic particles of primer residue.

The amount of GSR present on target material is dependent on the distance of

ﬁring. When the muzzle of a gun is discharged while pressed against a target, the powder

gases are unable to disperse into the air. Thus, GSR present may not be readily apparent
on the outer portion of the target, however the path of the bullet through the object must
be examined. If the weapon is ﬁred at a close distance, most of the particles discharged
will be present on the target material. It is important to note that larger particulate, such
as unburned propellant, are able to travel faster and further than smaller particles.
Therefore, at great distances, the ﬁner particles, such as carbonaceous products, are not

present or not as concentrated as at closer ranges.

Factors Affecting Gunshot Residue Deposition

Gunshot residue patterns can differ signiﬁcantly due to various conditions in
which the ﬁrearm was discharged. Ten principle factors have been identiﬁed to either
individually or collectively inﬂuence the pattern imprint on the target surface (Barnes &
Helson, 1974). These factors follow in descending order of importance:

1.) distance

2.) barrel length

3.) propellant burning rate

4.) propellant type (disk, ﬂake, ball, etc.)
5.) caliber (cartridge type)

6.) muzzle-to-target angle

7.) target material

8.) primer (type, size, age, etc.)

9.) propellant charge weight

10.) weapon type (revolver, autopistol, etc).

Before an examination may be initiated, various pieces of information must be
collected. Identifying or locating the weapon and type of ammunition used is vital in
determining the range a shot was ﬁred. GSR patterns from two ﬁrearms of the same
caliber and manufacturer, but differing in barrel length, can have vastly different GSR
patterns. In a longer barrel, the propellant undergoes a more complete combustion
resulting in fewer residues exiting the muzzle. Due to various additives and powder
types in propellant, ammunition manufactured by different companies can produce
different patterns. Therefore, a complete analysis of a GSR pattern requires test ﬁring at
various ranges with the suspected weapon and ammunition. Comparison tests require
that the targets be comprised of the same quantity and type of material as the target at the
crime scene. Ifthe shooting occurred out of doors, knowledge of the weather conditions,
such as wind speed and wind direction, at the time of shooting are also important to

consider.

Microscopic and Visual Examination of GSR Patterns

In a muzzle-to-target distance deterrrrination, the ﬁrst step is a microscopic and
visual examination of the target noting the presence and location of the GSR pattern.
Five distinct patterns are associated with close-range GSR deposition: starburst, blossom
or petal, carbonaceous ﬁlm, particulate, and bullet wipe. With most handguns, a close-
range GSR deposition is classiﬁed as a shot ﬁred at a range of one to twelve inches

(Saferstein, 1988). The distance at which the ﬁrearm was discharged affects whether or

not each pattern except bullet wipe will appear on the target. The following ﬁve
paragraphs explain each pattern in detail.

A starburst pattern appears as a cross-rip design and may be observed on both
skin and clothing. The presence of this pattern indicates that the ﬁrearm was discharged
at contact or near contact with the target. The starburst pattern may not be present if
bulky or loosely woven clothing are the target material.

A blossom or petal pattern appears on the target material as a distinct gray ﬂoral
or petaloid pattern. This pattern consists of carbonaceous and other ﬁne decomposition
products of the propellant. The pattern resembles the overlapping petals of a ﬂower.
This delicate, distinct pattern outlines the boundaries of the target and can be visualized
on a target if the handgun was discharged in a range of one to approximately ten inches
(Nichols, 1998).

A carbonaceous ﬁlm pattern creates a homogenous gray ﬁlm that immediately
surrounds the bullet entry hole. It lacks the ﬂoral design observed in the petal pattern.
This pattern can be visualized on a target if the handgun was discharged in a range
between one to twenty-one inches (Nichols, 1998).

A particulate pattern consists of unburned and partially burned powder grains,
carbonaceous particles, bullet jacket materials, lead shavings, dirt, or other items that
have been ejected from the bore of the ﬁrearm. The presence or absence of the propellant
particles can be extremely important in determining the sequence of events. For
handguns, this pattern can be located on the target at ranges up to 30 inches (Sellier,

1991). Particulate patterns tend to be the most persistent of the patterns, since these

particles have a tendency to adhere more strongly to fabrics or skin. Upon contact, these
hot particles will melt to the surface of the target.

Regardless of distance, a bullet wipe encircles the bullet entry hole as a dark gray
to black ring. During a bullet’s passage through the ﬁrearm bore and air until it strikes
the target, carbon, dirt, bullet lubricant, primer residues, lead, and other materials deposit
on the surface of the bullet. As the bullet enters a target, these items are transferred from

the bullet to the surface around the bullet entry hole.

Chromophoric Techniques for Recovery of GSR Patterns

Since the GSR pattern is a vital part of a muzzle-to-target distance determination,
it is important that a pattern is recovered ﬁom the target material to be compared with
those obtained from test ﬁrings. At times, the gunshot residue pattern may be visible, but
more than likely a Chromophoric technique must be employed to obtain an image of the
pattern. In a Chromophoric test, residues that can not be seen by the unaided human eye
are converted to colored species via speciﬁc chemical reactions. The following
paragraphs describe two techniques applied to suspect GSR patterns to determine if
nitrite and lead compounds are present and to visualize a distribution pattern of these
compounds.

The Modiﬁed Griess Test (MGT) is a chemically-speciﬁc Chromophoric test for
the presence of nitrite compounds. Nitrite residues are formed in GSR by the buming or
partial burning of smokeless powder. The MGT consists of a series of chemical reactions

that result in the conversion of any nitrite compounds present to a bright orange dye (see

Appendix A for materials and procedure). This technique fumishes an image of the
pattern of nitrite residues on a target. This pattern is preserved in a medium that may be
used for later side—by-side comparisons with patterns ﬁred from known distances.
Nitrate particles, such as unburned powder particles, will not be detected by the MGT
unless the particles are coated with burned powder residues. Due to the test’s
nondestructive nature, it is usually the ﬁrst test performed on the target material, since it
will not interfere with subsequent testing.

The MGT test is not speciﬁc for only nitrites generated in the discharge of a
ﬁrearm. Research has uncovered that some brands of disinfectant and deodorizers used
in hospital rooms and emergency rooms contain sodium nitrites which can cause a false
positive reaction in the MGT (Lutz & Templin,1983 ). The presence of these products
may cause a hazy reaction to occur on the actual MGT medium. However, the FBI
reports that it is unlikely that this source of nitrites would skew the results of the
examination.

The Sodium Rhodizonate test is an inexpensive and rapid Chromophoric test used
to detect the presence of lead. A lead pattern present on a target’s surface is primarily
from the combustion of the primer mixture which contains lead styphnate. Lead particles
are also generated from friction caused by a lead bullet/barrel interaction and from
surface erosion on a bullet’s base. The Sodium Rhodizonate test consists of spraying a
speciﬁc sequence of previously-prepared reagent solutions to the surface of a victim’s
garment. (see Appendix B for materials and procedure). The presence of lead is

conﬁrmed by a blue-violet color.

Results and Interpretation of GSR Exarrrinations

Residues noted both visually and through Chromophoric techniques can indicate
the muzzle-to-target distance. After the ﬁrearm examiner has studied the target material
collected from the crime scene both visually and chemically, he/she must compare these
results to test-ﬁred targets obtained from the suspect ﬁrearm and ammunition at known
distances. The patterns obtained are compared for size and density in relation to the
pattern obtained from the victim or garment.

The MGT results are more accurate than the Sodium Rhodizonate test results. In
the MGT, nitrite compounds are generally distributed in a homogenous manner over the
target in a concentric area and are reproducible. Thus, a MGT pattern retrieved from a
victim or a victim’s clothing is extremely useful. By examining side by side comparisons
of the MGT pattern from the victim and the MGT patterns generated from known
distances, the ﬁrearm examiner can provide a bracketed distance from which the ﬁrearm
was discharged from the target.

On the other hand, the distribution of lead is a non-reproducible occurrence
dependent on various uncontrolled and unknown variables, such as a heavily leaded or
dirty barrel. Therefore, a lead pattern cannot be solely used to determine the shooting
distance. Examining the patterns retrieved through test-ﬁred targets at known distances,
a ﬁrearm examiner can provide a minimum and maximum distance from which the
ﬁrearm was discharged.

An important rule for ﬁrearm examiners to follow in muzzle-to-target distance

determinations is that an examination does not consist of noting the absence of speciﬁc

residues. Instead, an examination consists of noting the physical effects and residues
present on the target and using that as a basis for reproduction and comparison. If a GSR
pattern is not found, it does not mean one was not present. A number of other
conclusions could be made:

1) The shots were ﬁred from beyond a maximum distance for deposition of

residues.

2) An object may have been in the path of the bullet at the instant of discharge.

3) Medical personnel or investigators mishandled the evidence.

4) Inclement weather conditions occurred.
Overall, a ﬁrearm examiner must remember many outside inﬂuences may alter a muzzle-

to-target distance determination.

lO

Chapter 2
EXPERIMENT: THE EFFECTS OF WEATHERIN G ON THE PERSISTENCE

OF A GUNSHOT RESIDUE PATTERN ON A CLOTHING SAMPLE

Relevant Research

Few studies on the persistence of gunshot residue patterns on clothing samples
subjected to various environmental conditions have been conducted. In 1988, Haviva
Even, Pinchas Bergrnen, Eliot Springer, and Asne Klein conducted a study evaluating the
effects of water-soaking on ﬁring distance estimations. Their project studied whether
soaking would have a noticeable inﬂuence on gunpowder particles and lead
concentration. Test-ﬁred targets were collected at distances of 25cm, 50cm, and 100cm.
Test-ﬁred targets from each distance were soaked in deionized water for 1, 24, and 48
hours. Circles of 8 and 12 mm radius were cut out around the bullet entrance hole and
subjected to an atomic absorption analysis on both dry and water-soaked targets. Both
dry and water-soaked targets were also subjected to a MGT to determine the number of
gunpowder particles in both internal and external rings, 4.5 cm and 14.5 cm, respectively.
The study’s results revealed a poor reproducibility of powder particles in both dry and
water-soaked targets at various distances, which the authors attributed to the ease of
losing particles from the target. The results from the inﬂuence of water-soaking on the

lead concentration were ambiguous.

ll

In 1989, David A. Lindman published results from a year-long study on the
persistence of gunshot residue patterns subjected to weather conditions. In Lindman’s
study, twelve test-ﬁred targets were hung on the interior portion of a security fence
surrounding his work place, twelve test-ﬁred targets were buried in the ground, and
twelve test-ﬁred targets were buried on the edge of a swamp. Once a month, Lindman
removed one target from each location and processed the cloth using the F BI’s proximity
determination method. The results revealed the number of grains observed in the air
samples reduced with time. The circle within which the grains were located expanded
over time. The buried samples displayed similar visual observations. Unlike the samples
exposed to air, the buried samples did not vary in diameter. On the other hand, the MGT
results indicated that the number of sight speciﬁc reactions dropped after the third month.
Also, the sodium rhodizonate test displayed a reduction of the lead pattern area in the
buried samples.

M. Bonfanti and A. Gallusser of Switzerland studied problems encountered in the
detection of gunshot residues (1995). Their project evaluated the persistence of gunshot
residue on clothing subjected to different climate conditions. In their study, test-ﬁred
targets were left in stagnant water, running water, snow, and the ﬂoor of a forest for
approximately 96 hours. The residues lost on targets subjected to climate conditions
were determined by reference to samples stored under laboratory conditions. The targets
left in stagnant water lost all of the visible gunshot residue, revealed a high loss of
nitrated residues, and failed to reveal any lead residues. The targets placed in running
water also lost any trace of visible gunshot residue, the MGT revealed a small loss in

nitrated residues and the diameter of the circle containing the lead residues decreased.

12

There was a medium loss of visual and nitrated residues and a heavy loss of lead residues
on the target placed on humid soil. There was a low loss of visual and nitrated residues
and the diameter of the circle containing lead residues decreased by half on the targets
placed in snow. Their conclusion was exposure of gunshot residue samples to different
environmental conditions always led to a loss of residues that vary depending on the

conditions.

Experimental Design and Methods

A project was designed that was similar to the three studies previously mentioned
but encompassed an area of GSR retrieval that had not been explored. The general idea
of the study was similar to David Lindman’s study in which test-ﬁred patterns were
placed outside. However, parameters different from Lindman’s were employed in this
study. Test-ﬁred targets were obtained from two different distances, six and twelve
inches, using a 9mm handgun and ammunition. Targets were placed outside and
collected on a weekly basis. The main difference between this study and others
conducted was that the main objective was to relate the loss of GSR to the daily weather
conditions recorded during the period of time the targets were placed outside.

The study took place at the Michigan State Police Lab in East Lansing, MI.
During the latter part of February 2000, preparation was made to start the project. This
included researching the subject, obtaining four boxes of Federal 9mm Luger ammunition
from the same lot (see Appendix C for ammunition details), and labeling 8.5 x 8.5 cotton

twill cloths with appropriate week and ﬁring distance. A 9mm handgun and ammunition

l3

was chosen because this caliber and ammunition are commonly used in crimes committed
in Michigan.

On March 2, 2000, 96 test-ﬁred targets, 48 ﬁred from six inches, and 48 ﬁred
from twelve inches, were obtained. Twenty targets from each distance were used as
laboratory controls to be compared with test-ﬁred patterns placed outside, eighteen
targets from each distance were placed outside and collected after a certain period of
time, and ten targets from each distance were extras to be used if needed.

The test-ﬁred targets were shot by securing a 9 mm Smith & Wesson Model 69
semiautomatic pistol to a bench rest. The bench rest ensured the bullet was discharged at
a 90° angle and that the distance could be accurately controlled. The barrel was not
cleaned between shots. Lieutenant Michael Burritt, Michigan State Police ﬁrearms
examiner, pulled the trigger.

For contrast and easy examination, the target material consisted of 8.5 x 8.5 inch
white cotton twill cloths. The piece of cloth was fastened to a piece of cardboard with
masking tape at the front of a bullet trap. Each test-ﬁred target was stapled to the inside
of a ﬁle folder. The targets were stored at the East Lansing Michigan State Police
Laboratory.

This project was separated into three steps. The ﬁrst step generated a database of
information consisting of the visual and chemical appearances of the GSR patterns for the
test-ﬁred targets ﬁred from six and twelve inches. Forty of the 96 test-ﬁred targets were
used in this step. The test-ﬁred targets were visually examined and a GSR worksheet
(see Appendix D for an example of the worksheet) was ﬁlled out for each target. The

microscopic and visual observations of the GSR deposition on the targets were recorded.

14

The presence of the following patterns were recorded: ripping or tearing, petal or
blossom, carbonaceous ﬁlm, bullet wipe, and particulate. The presence of these patterns
was indicated with a yes or no. Transparent overlays, prepared with concentric circles of
one through eight inch diameter, were used to record the diameter of the petal,
carbonaceous ﬁlm, and particulate patterns. A designation of dark, medium, or light was
given to the density of the carbonaceous ﬁlm pattern.

Next, each target was scanned into Adobe Photoshop, one of the most commonly
used graphic program which produces high quality pictures. For the targets ﬁred from
six inches, a six by six inch box was scanned, while targets ﬁred from twelve inches, a
seven by seven inch box was scanned. These images were imported into Scion Image to
count the number of powder particles. Scion Image is an image processing and analysis
program developed by the National Institute of Health (NIH). Scion Image has the
capability to detect changes in gray scales which enables the program to count the
number of particles. The powder particles counted consisted of both intact disc powder
particles and partially combusted powder particles. For targets ﬁred from six inches, a
four by four inch box was counted and for targets ﬁred from twelve inches, a six by six
inch box was counted. A larger box was counted for the targets ﬁred from twelve inches
because the particulate pattern was distributed further from the bullet entry hole than the
particulate pattern on targets ﬁred from six inches. An average powder particle count and
standard deviation was obtained.

After the number of powder particles was counted, two Chromophoric tests were

performed. Each target was processed using the MGT followed by the Sodium

15

Rhodizonate test. After the Sodium Rhodizonate test, the targets were scanned into
Photoshop.

The second step of the project involved placing the targets outside and recording
the weather conditions. Before the targets were placed outside, a visual examination was
executed and a gunshot residue worksheet was ﬁlled out. Next, each target was scanned
into Photoshop. Then, the powder particles were counted by hand. A transparent overlay
was placed on top of the target and a marker was used to mark each powder particle as it
was counted. The second step was separated into two studies. The ﬁrst study analyzed
various weather conditions effect on the visual GSR pattern and the recovery of a GSR
pattenr on a weekly basis. The second study evaluated the persistence of speciﬁc GSR
patterns placed outside and collected weekly over a ﬁve week time period.

On March 3, 2000, ﬁve targets ﬁred from each distance and one blank cotton twill
cloth were placed outside the Michigan State Police, East Lansing Headquarters. Long
nails were placed into the corners of each target to secure the target to the ground.
Targets were fastened to the ground because it is common for a victim of an out of doors
homicide to be found lying on or close to the ground. Therefore securing the targets to
the ground simulated a victim lying on the ground. A downfall of fastening the targets to
the ground is that in the case of a heavy accumulation of precipitation, there is a
possibility the targets may lie in a puddle of water. This may disturb or destroy GSR that
would not have normally been disturbed or destroyed thus possibly skewing the results.
Since the targets are in direct contact with the soil, another concern was the possibility

that some constituent in the soil may contribute to the results of the examination.

16

On the following Friday, March 10, 2000, one of each distance target was
collected and replaced with other targets ﬁred from six and twelve inches. After the
second week, one of each distance persistence targets was collected along with the
weekly collected targets. At the conclusion of the ﬁfth week, the blank cotton twill cloth
was collected and replaced with another. Also, four of each distance targets were brought
outside to repeat the persistence study. The same collection patterns mentioned above
were followed during the next ﬁve weeks.

The collected targets, including the two blank cotton twill cloths, were visually
and chemically examined. First, each target was examined under a low power
microscope to remove any debris that was not gunshot residue, such as dirt and sand. A
gunshot residue worksheet was ﬁlled out for each exhibit. Next, each target was scanned
into Photoshop and a particle count was obtained. Then, each target was analyzed for the
presence of nitrite and lead compounds executing the MGT followed by the Sodium
Rhodizonate test. The nitrite patterns on the piece of desensitized photographic paper
were labeled and kept for reference. The sodium rhodizonate patterns were scanned into
Photoshop. The relative loss of GSR was recorded for each target using the following
designations: 1) low — less than two ﬁfths of the residues lost; 2) medium — two ﬁfth to
less than three ﬁfths of the residues lost; and 3) high — three ﬁfths or more of the
residues lost. Photographs of the targets before and after being placed outside, a nitrite
pattern and a lead pattern for each target are in Appendices D and E. Images in this
thesis are present in color.

The third and ﬁnal step related the weather conditions recorded during the ten-

week period to the results of the visual and chemical examinations performed on the

17

targets. The following weather conditions were collected daily during the ten-week
period: mean, maximum, and rrrinimum temperature; amount of precipitation; wind
speed; maximum wind speed; and general conditions in the morning, afternoon, and
evening. The weather conditions were recorded from the following website:
http://www.wunderground.com. The statistic program, SPSS, was used to statistically
analyze the loss of powder particles on the targets after being placed outside for one week

to each separate weather condition.

18

Chapter 3

RESULTS AND INTERPRETATIONS

Step 1:
Results of the Microscopic and Visual Examinations of Twenty Targets Fired From Six
Inches

The microscopic and visual observations of the targets ﬁred from six
inches are recorded in Table 1. In general, ahnost all targets displayed a petal pattern out
to a ﬁve inch diameter from the bullet entry hole. Some targets displayed a more distinct
overlapping petal pattern than others. All targets displayed a dark carbonaceous ﬁlm
pattern encircling the bullet entry hole ranging one and a half to two and a half inches in
diameter. The particulate pattern was dense around the bullet entry hole decreasing in
density out to a six inch diameter around the bullet entry hole. All but two of the test-
ﬁred targets displayed dark bullet wipe rings. Figure 1 is an example of the GSR pattern

on a target ﬁred from six inches.

19

Table 1: Microscopic and visual observations on targets ﬁred from six inches.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Test Petal pattern Carbonaceous ﬁlm Bullet Rip/ Particulate
Number (diameter around the (diameter around the Wipe Tear pattern
bullet entry hole) bullet entry hole)
Test 1 Yes; mostly w/in 5” Yes; dark 2%” Yes No Out to
diameter diameter about 6”
Test 2 Yes; mostly w/in 5” Yes; dark 2” diameter Yes No Out to
diameter about 6”
Test 3 Yes; slight petal Yes; dark 2” diameter Yes No Out to
pattern, mostly w/in about 6”
5” diameter
Test 4 Yes; distinct, mostly Yes; dark 2” diameter Yes No Out to
w/in 5 in. diameter about 6”
Test 5 Yes; mostly w/in 5” Yes; dark l‘/2” Yes No Out to
diameter diameter about 6”
Test 6 Yes; mostly w/in 5” Yes; dark 2” diameter Yes No Out to
diameter about 6”
Test 7 Yes; distinct, mostly Yes; dark 11/2” Yes No Out to
w/in 5” diameter diameter about 6”
Test 8 Yes; mostly w/in 5” Yes; dark 2” diameter Yes No Out to
diameter about 6”
Test 9 Yes; mostly w/in 5” Yes; dark 2” diameter Yes No Out to
diameter about 6”
Test 10 Yes; distinct, mostly Yes; dark 2” diameter Yes No Out to
w/in 5” diameter about 6”
Test 11 Yes; mostly w/in 5” Yes; dark 2” diameter Yes No Out to
diameter about 6”
Test 12 Yes; mostly w/in 5” Yes; dark 2%” Yes, No Out to
diameter diameter partial about 6”
Test 13 Yes; distinct, mostly Yes; dark 2” diameter Yes No Out to
w/in 5” diameter about 6”
Test 14 Yes, mostly w/in 5” Yes; dark 2” diameter Yes No Out to
diameter about 6”
Test 15 Yes; mostly w/in 5” Yes; dark 1%” Yes, No Out to
diameter diameter Lartial about 6”
Test 16 Yes; mostly w/in 5” Yes; dark 2” diameter Yes No Out to
diameter about 6”
Test 17 Yes; distinct, mostly Yes; dark 2” diameter Yes No Out to
w/in 5” diameter about 6”
Test 18 Yes; distinct, mostly Yes; dark 2%” Yes No Out to
w/in 5” diameter diameter about 6”
Test 19 Yes; mostly Min 5” Yes; dark 2” diameter Yes No Out to
diameter about 6”
Test 20 Yes; mostly w/in 5” Yes; dark 2” diameter Yes No Out to
diameter about 6”

 

20

 

Results of the Microscopic and Visual Examinations of Twenty Targets Fired From
Twelve Inches.

The microscopic and visual observations for each of the twenty targets ﬁred from
twelve inches are recorded in Table 2. These targets displayed a light petal pattern that is
not as distinct as the overlapping petal pattern on the targets ﬁred from six inches. In
general, a light to medium carbonaceous ﬁlm pattern that covers a two to two and a half
inch diameter area encircling the bullet entry hole was observed. The particulate pattern
was homogenous throughout the surface of each target and was present out to
approximately a seven inch diameter around the bullet entry hole. Each target possessed
a bullet wipe, but seven out of the twenty targets displayed partial bullet wipe rings.

Figure 2 is an example of the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

21

Table 2: Microscopic and visual observations on targets ﬁred from twelve inches.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TEST Petal pattern Carbonaceous film Bullet Rip/ Particulate
# (diameter around the bullet Wipe Tear pattern
entry hole)

Test 1 No Yes; light ﬁhn, irregular 2” Yes, No Out to
diameter faint about 7”

Test 2 No Yes; light ﬁhn, irregular Yes No Out to
2%” diameter about 7”

Test 3 Yes, faint, no Yes; light ﬁlm, irregular 2” Yes No Out to
distinct pattern diameter about 7”

Test 4 Yes; faint, no Yes; medium dense ﬁlm, Yes; No Out to
distinct pattern 2” diameter partial about 7”

Test 5 Yes; faint, no Yes; medium dense ﬁhn, Yes No Out to
distinct pattern 2%“ diameter about 7”

Test 6 No Yes; light ﬁlm, 2” diameter Yes No Out to
about 7”

Test 7 Yes; faint, no Yes; medium dense ﬁlm, Yes No Out to
distinct pattern 2” diameter about 7”

Test 8 Yes; faint, no Yes; light ﬁlm, 2” diameter Yes No Out to
distinct pattern about 7”

Test 9 Yes; faint; no Yes; medium dense ﬁlm Yes, No Out to
distinct pattern 2%” diameter partial about 7”

Test 10 No Yes; light ﬁlm, 2” diameter Yes No Out to
about7”

Test 11 No Yes; light ﬁlm, 2” diameter Yes No Out to
about 7”

Test 12 Yes; faint, no Yes; medium dense ﬁlm, Yes No Out to
distinct pattern 2%” diameter about 7”

Test 13 Yes; faint, no Yes, medium dense ﬁlm, Yes, No Out to
distinctpattem 2” diameter partial about 7”

Test 14 Yes; faint, no Yes, light ﬁlm, 2” diameter Yes, No Out to
distinct pattern partial about 7”

Test 15 Yes; faint, no Yes, light ﬁlm, 2V2” Yes No Out to
distinct pattern diameter about 7”

Test 16 No Yes, light ﬁlm, 2” diameter Yes, No Out to
partial about 7”

Test 17 Yes; faint, no Yes, light ﬁlm, 2%” Yes No Out to
distinct pattern diameter about 7”

Test 18 Yes; faint, no Yes, medium dense ﬁlm, Yes, No Out to
distinct pattern 2%” diameter partial about 7”

Test 19 No Yes; light ﬁlm, 2” diameter Yes No Out to
about7”

Test 20 Yes; faint, no Yes; light ﬁlm 2%” Yes No Out to
distinct pattern diameter about 7”

 

22

 

 

Figure 1: An example ofa GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches. This target is

 

Test4.
.
' J .5
‘ .
. . .
. . -
.' w _ . 2
' ‘ . J": ' ' -: . .
‘ .1.“ _. 1" .
u '. ‘ _
.
. . -.
‘U
I I
l I I
l l
v I n.
. .
.
' I: ' .
_ .
C . t
' ,' _ ,.
I' . . ' u
. 0‘
. _ , _
, .' I ..' . _
. I I l‘ t l l
.
.
. , .

Figure 2: An example of a GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.
This target is Test 12.

23

Comparison of the Number of Powder Particles Counted on Targets Fired From Six and
Twelve Inches

The number of powder particles was counted. The powder particles were hand
counted on a few targets to test the validity of Scion Image. For the most part, the
number of powder particles counted by Scion image was close to the number of powder
particles counted by hand. The largest difference was sixteen powder particles. An
average powder particle count and standard deviation was calculated for the targets ﬁred
from each distance. These ﬁgures and the number of particles counted on each target are
listed in Table 3 and Table 4.

The results from counting the number of powder particles on the targets indicated
that the reproducibility of the powder particles on the targets ﬁred from six and twelve
inches are similar. For the targets ﬁred from six inches, the highest number of powder
particles counted on a target was 693 and the lowest number of powder particles counted
on a target was 515. The average number of powder particles distributed on a target ﬁred
ﬁ'om six inches was 605 with a standard deviation of 46. Regarding targets ﬁred from
twelve inches, the highest number of powder particles counted was 580 and the lowest
number of powder particles counted was 404. The average number of powder particles

distributed on a target ﬁred from twelve inches was 469 with a standard deviation of 47.

24

Table 3: Powder particles counted on

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

targets ﬁred from six inches.
Test Particles Particles
Number Counted Hand
Counted
Test 1 642 638
Test 2 580
Test 3 538
Test 4 595
Test 5 61 3
Test 6 632
Test 7 643
Test 8 569
Test 9 537
Test 1 0 583
Test 1 1 61 5
Test 1 2 579
Test 1 3 660
Test 14 600
Test 15 581
Test 1 6 666 653
Test 1 7 644
Test 1 8 693
Test 1 9 51 5 523
Test 20 61 9
Highest 693
Lowest 51 5
Average 605
Standard 46
Deviation

 

 

 

 

 

25

Table 4: Powder particles counted
on targets ﬁred from twelve inches.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Test Particles Particles
Number Counted Hand
Counted
Test 1 456
Test 2 453
Test 3 488
Test 4 564
Test 5 457
Test 6 467
Test 7 580
Test 8 507
Test 9 510
Test 1 O 423
Test 1 1 427 423
Test 12 459
Test 13 501
Test 14 435
Test 1 5 41 5
Test 16 404
Test 1 7 423 437
Test 1 8 469
Test 19 449
Test 20 491
Highest 580
Lowest 404
Average 469
Standard 47

Deviation

 

 

 

 

 

Powder Particles Counted on Targets
Fired From Six and Twelve Inches

800
600

        

   

      
  
 

 

 

Number of Powder
Particles

   
  

  
 
  
 

 
  

      

   
 

    

400 in.“ IIIIIIIII ""1"; ”I IIIII I I " I
I‘l‘IIIlII IIIII ”MU "“3 lav, [Hm ”I HIlII‘ ”’1 ”HI IIIIleIm IIIIIII'I’iiluIlII + 1 2 TeSt Fired
200 :Hllll I ”I“ M." ‘I ‘llllmm V” illlm IH‘II ”I'm“ ‘9; IIIIIIIMIIIHJHI IIII'IIlIlHijlljuﬁij Ta rgets
1":1 whim, "'IIII' !' 'IN" I " Illjl! “IIIIIUII ll IIIIIIIIIHIIIII I
lIIIIIII,,H,l ‘ ”WP“ ll “mm“, WIIIIIW mIIIIIl‘WI’l', "Illlllm’
O llIIl‘,l ML.“ U' WW ‘ ”Mn” in I“ ”1”“. IMI Willi I

 

 

   

FVNCWCDC)
v-x—

F‘-

Test Target

 

 

 

Figure 3: A comparison of the number of powder particles counted on targets ﬁred from
six and twelve inches.

There is a difference in the number of powder particles distributed on targets ﬁred
from six and twelve inches. A graph of these results appear in Figure 3. The number of
powder particles counted on a target ﬁred from six inches will generally contain more
powder particles than a target ﬁred from twelve inches. According to the results, on
average there are 136 more powder particles on a target ﬁred from six inches compared
to the number of powder particles on a target ﬁred from twelve inches. Statistically,
Univariate Analysis of Variance indicated there was a signiﬁcant difference between the
number of powder particles counted on targets ﬁred from six and twelve inches,

F=62.835; df = l; p = .0001. Overall, the results indicated that it is possible for a target

 

' The statistical analysis was conducted using the powder particle counts on the targets ﬁred from six and
twelve inches before being placed outside for one week.

26

ﬁred from twelve inches to have a powder particle count similar to a target ﬁred from six

inches and vice versa.

Results of the Chromophoric Examinations of Targets Fired From Six and Twelve Inches

The results from the Chromophoric examinations did not display excellent results.
When executing the MGT on the targets ﬁred ﬁ'om six inches, an orange haze
accompanied the nitrite pattern on the piece of desensitized photographic paper. During
one step in the procedure (see Appendix A), a piece of cheese cloth saturated in acetic
acid had to be wrung out before placed on top of the target material. The orange haze
might have been caused by too much acetic acid on the piece of cheese cloth. For the
most part, the general nitrite pattern was visible. There were a few targets ﬁred from six
inches in which the orange haze masked the nitrite pattern. The targets ﬁred ﬁom twelve
inches processed by the MGT displayed better results. For reasons unknown to the
author, the application of the solutions during the Sodium Rhodizonate test failed to
exhibit a complete reaction of the lead residues on the targets. The Sodium Rhodizonate
test was done on extra test-ﬁred targets at a later time. There was a dark reaction on
these targets and the results were recorded.

The nitrite pattern obtained from the MGT was similar to the visual powder
particle pattern on the targets ﬁred from both distances. The nitrite pattern on targets
ﬁred from six inches was dense around the bullet entry hole decreasing in density out to a
six inch diameter around the bullet entry hole. The density of the nitrite pattern from

targets ﬁred from twelve inches was homo genous throughout the surface of each target

27

and was present to approximately a seven inch diameter around the bullet entry hole.
Figure 4 and Figure 5 are examples of the nitrite pattern on a piece of desensitized
photographic paper from targets ﬁred from six and twelve inches.

The results from the Sodium Rhodizonate test supplied more information than the
visual examination. On the targets ﬁred from six inches, there was a dark reaction
around the visible petal pattern and carbonaceous ﬁlm pattern area. A light reaction in
areas that had not displayed a visible pattern also appeared and occurred to approximately
a seven inch diameter from the bullet entry hole. On the targets ﬁred from twelve inches,
there was a dark reaction around the carbonaceous ﬁlm area and a medium to light
reaction around the petal pattern area. Again, a light reaction appeared in areas that had
not displayed a visible pattern. A reaction could be seen out to an eight inch diameter
from the bullet entry hole. Examples of the lead pattern on targets ﬁred from six and

twelve inches can be observed in Figure 6 and Figure 7.

28

     
      

.. - .' . that; "1‘ ‘ 1' . - ‘. I»,
Figure 4: An example of a nitrite pattern on a piece of desensitized p

from a target ﬁred from six inches. This is from Test 1.

   

hotographic paper

 

Figure 5: An example of a nitrite pattern on a piece of desensitized photographic paper
from a target ﬁred from twelve inches. This is from Test 6.

29

   

Figure 6: An example of the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches. This target is
Extra 4.

 

Figure 7: An example of the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches. This
target is Extra 5.

30

STEP 2:
Comparison of the Microscopic and Visual Observations From Targets Fired From Six
Inches and Placed Outside For One Week.

The microscopic and visual observations of the GSR deposition on the targets
ﬁred from six inches were recorded before and after being placed outside for one week.
These observations are listed in Table 5.

The microscopic and visual observations of the targets ﬁred from six inches
before being placed outside were compared to the microscopic and visual observations of
the targets collected aﬁer one week outside. The following observations were made on
the targets collected after one week outside. A petal pattern was not visible on the
targets, with the exception of Week 4 which had a faint, partial petal pattern visible.
While all of the targets lost some of the carbonaceous ﬁlm pattern, the relative loss of
carbonaceous ﬁlm pattern on the targets collected from Weeks 2,3,4,5 and 8 was
estimated to be medium. The carbonaceous ﬁlm pattern on these targets closely
resembled the pattern before being placed outside. On the targets collected from Weeks
1, 6, 7 and 9, there was a relatively high loss of the carbonaceous ﬁlm pattern. The
carbonaceous ﬁlm pattern on these targets did not resemble the pattern before being
placed outside. The carbonaceous ﬁlm pattern was not visible on the target collected
ﬁ'om Week 10. A bullet wipe was visible on all of the targets. There was no additional
ripping or tearing around the bullet entry hole on any of the targets. The relative loss of
particulate pattern on all of the targets was low. On the targets collected from Weeks 7

and 10, the diameter of the particulate pattern decreased by one inch.

31

Table 5: Microscopic and visual observations of the GSR deposition on the targets ﬁred
from six inches before and after being placed outside for one week.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WEEK Petal Pattern Carbonaceous film Bullet Rip/ Particulate
Number (diameter around the (diameter around the bullet Wipe Tear Pattern
bullet entry hole) entry hole)
Week 1 Yes; mostly w/in 5” Yes; dark ﬁlm 1%” Yes No Out to
Before diameter diameter about 6”
After No Faint ﬁlm 11/2” diameter Faint No Out to
about 6”
Week 2 Yes; medium; Yes; dark ﬁlm 1%” Yes No Out to
Before mostly w/in 5” diameter about 6”
diameter
After No Yes, medium dense ﬁlm Yes No Out to
1%” diameter about 6”
Week 3 Yes; mostly w/in 5” Yes; dark ﬁlm 2” Yes No Out to
Before diameter diameter about 6”
After No; dirty target Yes; medium dense ﬁlm Yes No Out to
2” diameter about 6”
Week 4 Yes; distinct, mostly Yes; dark ﬁlm 2” Yes No Out to
Before w/in 5” diameter diameter about 6”
After Faint petal pattern Yes; medium dense ﬁlm Yes No Out to
on top outer ring of 2” diameter, similar to about 6”
pattern before pattern
Week 5 Yes; mostly w/in 5” Yes, dark ﬁlm 2%” Yes No Out to
Before diameter diameter about 6”
After No Yes, light ﬁlm 2%” Yes No Out to
diameter, similar to about 6”
before but light!
Week 6 Yes; distinct, mostly Yes; dark ﬁhn 2%” Yes No Out to
Before w/in 5 in. diameter diameter about 6”
After No Yes; light ﬁhn 2” Yes; No Out to
diameter (some missing) partial about 6”
kind of resembles before
Week 7 Yes; medium, Yes; dark ﬁlm 2” Yes No Out to
Before mostly w/in 5” diameter about 6”
diameter
After No; dirty pattern Yes; faint ﬁlm 2” Yes; No Out to
diameter, kind of partial about 5”
resembles before
Week 8 Yes; distinct, mostly Yes, dark ﬁlm 2” Yes No Out to
Before w/in 5” diameter diameter about 6”
After No Yes; medium dense ﬁhn Yes No Out to
2” diameter, resembles about 6”
before pattern

 

32

 

Table 5 (cont’d).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Week 9 Yes; distinct, mostly Yes, dark ﬁlm 2%” Yes No Out to
Before w/in 5” diameter diameter about 6”
After No Yes; faint ﬁlm 2” Yes No Out to
diameter, partially about 6”
resembles before
Week 10 Yes; medium, Yes; dark ﬁlm 2%” Yes No Out to
Before mostly w/in 5” diameter about 6”
After No Faint Yes; No Out to
partial about 5”

 

Comparison of the Microscopic and Visual Observations From Targets Fired From
Twelve Inches and Place Outside For One Week.

The microscopic and visual observations of GSR deposition on targets ﬁred ﬁ'om
twelve inches were recorded before and after being placed outside for one week. These
observations are listed in Table 6.

The visual and microscopic observations for the targets ﬁred from twelve inches
before being placed outside were compared to the microscopic and visual observations on
the targets collected after one week outside. The following observations were made on
the targets collected after one week outside. A petal pattern was not visible on the
targets. More than half of the carbonaceous ﬁhn pattern was lost on the targets collected
from Weeks 4,5, and 8 while a carbonaceous ﬁlm pattern was not visible on the targets
collected from the other weeks. A bullet wipe was visible on the targets. There was no
additional ripping around the bullet entry hole on any of the targets. There was a
relatively low loss of particulate pattern on the targets collected from Weeks 4 and 8.
However, on targets collected from Weeks 1,2,3,5,6 and 9, a medium relative loss of
particulate pattern was estimated. The targets collected from Weeks 7 and 10 lost over

half of the particulate pattern .

33

 

Table 6: Microscopic and visual observations of the GSR deposition on targets ﬁred

from twelve inches before and after being placed outside for one week.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Week Petal Pattern Carbonaceous film (diameter Bullet Rip/ Particulate
Number around the bullet entry hole) Wipe Tear pattern
Week 1 Yes, faint no Yes, medium ﬁlm 2%” Yes No Out to
Before distinct diameter about 7”
pattern
After No No Yes, No Out to
partial about 6”
Week 2 Faint Yes, light ﬁhn 2” diameter Yes No Out to
Before about 7”
After No No Yes; No Out to
partial about 6”
Week 3 Faint Yes; light ﬁlm 2” diameter Yes; No Out to
Before partial about 7”
After No No Yes; No Out to
partial about 6”
Week 4 Faint Yes; light ﬁhn 2” diameter Yes; No Out to
Before partial about 7”
After No Faint Yes; No Out to
partial about 7”
Week 5 Faint Yes, light ﬁlm 2” diameter Yes; No Out to
Before partial about 7”
After No Faint Yes; No Out to
partial about 6”
Week 6 Yes; light Yes, light ﬁhn 2%” diameter Yes No Out to
Before petal pattern about 7”
After No No Yes No Out to
about 6”
Week 7 Faint Yes; medium dense ﬁlm 2%” Yes; No Out to
Before diameter partial about 7”
After No No Yes; No Out to
partial about 6”
Week 8 Faint Yes; light ﬁlm 2” diameter Yes No Out to
Before about 7”
After No Faint Yes No Out to
about 7”
Week 9 Faint Yes, light ﬁlm 2%” diameter Yes No Out to
Before about 7”
After No (dirty No (dirty target) Yes, No Out to
target) partial about 6”
Week 10 Faint Yes; light ﬁlm 2” diameter Yes, No Out to
Before partial about 7”
After No No Yes, No Out to
partial about 5”

 

 

 

 

 

 

34

 

Relative Loss of Visible GSR on Targets Fired From Six and Twelve Inches After Being
Placed Outside For One Week.

By comparing the deposition of GSR on the targets before and after subjected to
various weather conditions for one week, the relative loss of visible GSR was estimated.
These results are listed in Table 7 and Table 8. In general, there was a low loss of visible
GSR on the targets ﬁred from six inches. The targets ﬁred from twelve inches displayed

a medium loss of visible GSR .

Table 8: Estimated relative loss of
visible GSR on targets ﬁred from

Table 7: Estimated relative loss of
visible GSR on targets ﬁred from

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

35

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

six inches. twelve inches.

Week Relative GSR Week Number Relative GSR
Number Loss Loss
Week 1 Medium Week 1 Medium
Week 2 Low Week 2 Medium
Week 3 Low Week 3 Medium
Week 4 Low Week 4 Medium
Week 5 Low Week 5 Medium
Week 6 Low Week 6 Medium
Week 7 High Week 7 High
Week 8 Low Week 8 Medium
Week 9 Medium Week 9 Medium
Week 10 High Week 10 High

 

 

Results from the Number of Powder Particles Counted on Targets Fired From Six and
Twelve Inches Before and After Being Placed Outside for One Week.

The number of powder particles counted on each target before and after being
placed outside was recorded. The number of powder particles that were lost and the

percentage of particles lost was calculated. The results are listed on Table 9 and Table 10.

Table 9: The number of powder particles counted on targets ﬁred from six inches before
and after being placed outside for one week.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Week Particle Particle Loss of Percentage of

Number Count Count After Particles particles lost
Before

Week 1 613 436 177 28.9
Week 2 662 466 196 29.6
Week 3 586 463 123 21
Week 4 536 439 97 18.1
Week 5 581 444 137 23.6
Week 6 670 484 186 27.8
Week 7 577 383 194 33.6
Week 8 639 500 139 21.8
Week 9 602 426 179 29.9
Week 10 598 368 230 38.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 10: The number of powder particles counted on targets ﬁred from twelve inches
before and after being placed outside for one week.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Week Particle Particle Loss of Percentage of

Number Count Count After Particles particles lost
Before

Week 1 528 357 171 32.4
Week 2 443 320 123 27.8
Week 3 460 330 130 28.3
Week 4 428 326 102 23.8
Week 5 469 359 110 23.5
Week 6 434 334 100 23.1
Week 7 505 229 276 54.7
Week 8 478 414 64 13.4
Week 9 513 409 104 20.3
Week 10 432 252 180 41.7

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

36

The average percentage of powder particles lost was similar for targets ﬁred from
six and twelve inches. The average percentage of powder particles lost for the targets
ﬁred from six inches was 27%. The lowest percentage of powder particles lost was
18.1% on Week 4 and the highest percentage of powder particles lost was 38.5% on
Week 10. The average percentage of powder particles lost for the targets ﬁred from
twelve inches was 29%. The lowest percentage of powder particles lost was 13.4% on
Week 8 and the highest percentage of powder particles lost was 54.7% on Week 10.

A comparison of the percentage of lost powder particles counted on the targets
ﬁred from six and twelve inches appears in the form of a graph in Figure 8. Overall, the
percentage of lost powder particles on the targets ﬁred from six inches corresponded to
the percentage of lost powder particles on the targets ﬁred from twelve inches. There
was a signiﬁcant difference in the percentage of powder particles counted on the targets
collected on Week 7. On these targets, the percentage of powder particles lost on the
target ﬁred from twelve inches was over twenty percent higher than the percentage of

powder particles lost on the target ﬁred from six inches.

 

Percentage of Lost Powder
Particles: Fired from 6 inches vs. 12
inches

 

 

 

m6 Inch
I 12 inch

 

 

 

 

Percentage of
Particles Lost

 

Week Num

Ol‘

 

 

 

Figure 8: A comparison of the percentage of lost powder particles on targets ﬁred from
six and twelve inches.

37

Results of the Chromophoric Examinations on Targets Fired From Six and Twelve Inches
Collected After One Week Outside.

The MGT gave a positive reaction in targets ﬁred from six inches, however,
comparison with nitrite pattems obtained from the test targets indicated a loss of sight
speciﬁc reactions. There was a relatively low loss of nitrite pattern on the targets
collected from Weeks l,2,3,4,5 and 9. Approximately half of the nitrite pattern was lost
on the target collected from Week 8. A signiﬁcant amount of nitrite pattern was lost on
targets processed from Weeks 6,7 and 10. The approximate diameter and estimated
relative loss of the nitrite pattern obtained on each target are listed in Table l 1.

Targets ﬁred from twelve inches, gave a positive MGT reaction. However,
comparison with the nitrite patterns obtained from test targets indicated a loss of sight
speciﬁc reactions. The relative loss of nitrite pattern on targets collected from the Weeks
l,2,3,4 and 5 was low. Approximately half of the nitrite pattern was lost on targets
collected from Weeks 8 and 9. A signiﬁcant amount of nitrite pattern was lost on targets
processed from Weeks 6,7 and 10. The approximate diameter and estimated relative loss

of nitrite pattern obtained from each target are listed in Table 12.

38

Table 11: The approximate diameter
and estimated relative loss of nitrite

pattern obtained from targets ﬁred from
six inches after being placed outside for

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 12: The approximate diameter
and estimated relative loss of nitrite
pattern obtained from targets ﬁred
from twelve inches after being placed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

one week. outside for one week.

Week MGT: Nitrite Relative Week MGT: Nitrite Relative
Number Pattern Loss Number Pattern Loss
Week 1 Out togabout Low Week 1 Out to”about Low
Week 2 Out tg’about Low Week 2 Out tZ”about Low
Week 3 Out tgfbout Low Week 3 Out tc7)”about Low
Week 4 Out tg,about Low Week 4 Out tc7>”about Low
Week 5 Out tg’about Low Week 5 Out tZ’about Low
Week 6 Out tgfbout High Week 6 Out téabout High
Week 7 Out tznabout High Week 7 Out tg’about High
Week 8 Out t:”about Medium Week 8 Out tznabout Medium
Week 9 Out t<6>fbout Low Week 9 Out téabout Medium
Week 10 Out tgfbout High Week 10 Out tg’about High

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Sodium Rhodizonate test yielded positive results on targets ﬁred ﬁ'om six
inches which had remained outside for one week. However, comparison with lead
patterns obtained on test targets indicated a loss of lead residues. There was a relatively
low loss of lead pattern on targets collected ﬁ'om Weeks 1,2,3 and 4. Approximately half
of the lead pattern was lost on Weeks 5,6, 8 and 10. Over half of the lead pattern was lost
on targets from Weeks 7 and 9. The lead pattern on targets that lost half or more of the
lead residues appeared hazy and light. A detailed description of the pattern and estimated

lead pattern loss on each target are listed in Table 13

39

Table 13: A description of the lead pattern obtained by the Sodium Rhodizonate test and

estimated lead residue loss on targets ﬁred from six inches.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Week Petal Pattern (diameter Carbonaceous Film (diameter Relative
Number around the bullet entry around the bullet entry hole) Loss
hole)
Week 1 Yes; mostly w/in 5 in Yes; dark reaction 1% in. Low
diameter, similar to diameter, similar to before
before
Week 2 Yes; faint, similar to Yes, dark reaction 1% in. Low
before, some lost diameter, similar to before
pattern
Week 3 Yes; similar to before, Yes; dark reaction 2 in. Low
some lost diameter around bullet entry
hole, similar to before pattern
Week 4 Yes; similar to before Yes; dark reaction 2 in. Low
pattern, mostly w/in 5 diameter, similar to before
in. diameter pattem(have lots of the light
ﬁlm)
Week 5 Yes; faint; mostly w/in 5 Yes; medium dense reaction 2 Medium
in. diameter, similar to l/2 in. diameter, similar to
before pattern before pattern but light(hazy!)
Week 6 Slight reaction, nothing Yes; medium dense reaction 2 Medium
distinct in. diameter, does not resemble
before pattern
Week 7 No Yes; medium dense reaction High
1‘/z in. diameter, hazy
Week 8 Yes; faint Yes; medium dense reaction 2 Medium
in. diameter, resembles before
pattern
Week 9 Yes; faint Yes, light reaction 2 in., hazy High
Week 10 Yes; faint; partially Yes, medium dense reaction Medium
resembles before 2% in. diameter, hazy

 

 

The results from the Sodium Rhodizonate test on targets ﬁred from twelve inches
exhibited faint reactions. A majority of the targets lost approximately half of the lead
pattern. Targets collected from Weeks 6,7 and 9 lost almost all of the lead pattern
displaying only a faint reactions around the bullet entry hole. A detailed description of

the pattern and estimated lead pattern loss on each target are listed in Table 14.

4O

Table 14: A description of the lead pattern obtained by the Sodium Rhodizonate test and
estimated lead residue loss on targets ﬁred from twelve inches.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Week Petal Pattern Carbonaceous Film (diameter Relative

Number around the bullet entry hole) Loss

Week 1 Faint; partial pattern Yes, light reaction 1‘/2 in. Medium
diameter, lost bottom pattern

Week 2 No Yes, light reaction 2 in. Medium
diameter, resembles before

Week 3 No Yes; light reaction 2 in. Medium
diameter, hazy

Week 4 Paint Yes; light reaction 2 in. Medium
diameter; resembles before, a
little hazy

Week 5 Faint Yes, light reaction 2in. Medium
diameter; hazy

Week 6 No Faint; hazy Very High

Week 7 No Faint Very High

Week 8 Faint Yes; light reaction 2 in. Medium
diameter, hazy

Week 9 No Faint Very High

Week 10 No Yes, light reaction 2 in. Medium
diameter, hazy

 

 

Persistence of the Microsc0pic and Visual GSR on Targets Fired From Six Inches, Placed
Outside and Collected Weekly Over a Five Week Time Period

The microscopic and visual observations of the GSR deposition on the targets
ﬁred from six inches were recorded before and after placed outside and collected weekly
over a ﬁve week time period. These observations are listed in Table 15.

The persistence of the visible GSR deposition on the targets ﬁred from six inches
was examined with the following observations made on the targets that had been placed

outside. The visible petal pattern was not present on the examined targets. There was a

41

high loss of carbonaceous ﬁlm pattern on each target and eventually the carbonaceous

ﬁhn pattern was no longer visible. A bullet wipe was not present after ﬁve weeks. There

was no additional tearing of the targets. At ﬁrst, a relatively low amount of particulate

pattern was lost. After the ﬁfth week, the particulate pattern rapidly decreased in density

and diameter. During the second ﬁve week study, the loss of GSR appeared to degrade

faster than the ﬁrst ﬁve week study.

Table 15: Microscopic and visual observations of the GSR deposition on targets ﬁred
from six inches before and after being placed outside and collected weekly over a ﬁve

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

week time period.
Week Petal Pattern Carbonaceous Film (diameter Bullet Rip/ Particular
Number from the bullet entry hole) Wipe Tear Pattern
Week 2 Yes; medium, Yes; dark ﬁlm 2” diameter Yes No Out to
IP mostly w/in 5” about 6”
Before
After No Yes; faint ﬁlm 1%” diameter, Yes; No Out to
partially resembles before partial about 6”
Week 3 Yes; distinct; Yes; dark ﬁlm 2” diameter Yes No Out to
IP mostly w/in 5” about 6”
Before diameter
After No Yes; faint ﬁlm 1%” diameter, Yes; No Out to
barely resembles before partial about 6”
Week 4 Yes; mostly Yes, dark ﬁlm 2” diameter Yes No Out to
1P w/in 5” about 6”
Before diameter
After No Faint Yes; No Out to
partial about 5”
Week 5 Yes; medium; Yes; dark ﬁlm 2” Yes No Out to
IP mostly w/in 5” about 6”
Before diameter
After No No No No Out to
aboutS”
Week 7 Yes; medium, Yes, medium dense ﬁlm 2V2” Yes No Out to
2P mostly w/in 5” diameter about 6”
Before diameter
After No Faint Yes No Out to
about 6”

 

 

 

 

 

 

42

 

Table 15 (cont’d).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Week 8 Yes; medium, Yes; medium dense ﬁlm 2” Yes No Out to
2P mostly w/in 5” diameter about 6”
Before diameter
After No No Yes; No Out to
partial about 5”
Week 9 Yes; distinct; Yes; dark ﬁhn 2” diameter Yes No Out to
2P mostly w/in 5” about 6”
Before diameter
After No No Yes; No Out to
partial about 5”
Week 10 Yes; mostly Yes, medium dense ﬁlm 2” Yes No Out to
2P w/in 5” diameter about 6”
Before diameter
After No, dirty No No No Out to
pattern about 5”

 

 

Persistence of the Microscopic and Visual Observations on the Targets Fired From
Twelve Inches, Placed Outside and Collected Weekly Over a Five Week Time Period.

The microscopic and visual observations of the GSR deposition on the targets

ﬁred from twelve inches were recorded before and after being placed outside and

collected weekly over a ﬁve week time period. These observations are listed in Table 16.

The persistence of the visual GSR deposition on the targets ﬁred from twelve

inches was examined. The following observations were made on the targets that had

been placed outside. Visible petal and carbonaceous ﬁhn patterns were not present. The

presence of a bullet wipe was faint after ﬁve weeks. There was no additional tearing of

the bullet entry hole. There was a steady loss of particulate pattern as the weeks

progressed. In the second ﬁve week study, the loss of GSR appeared to degrade faster

than the ﬁrst ﬁve week study.

43

 

Table 16: Microscopic and visual observations of the GSR deposition on targets ﬁred
from twelve inches before and after being placed outside and collected weekly over a ﬁve

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

week time period.
Week Petal Pattern Carbonaceous Film (diameter Bullet Rip/ Particular
Number around the bullet entry hole) Wipe Tear Pattern
Week 2 Yes; light, no Yes, medium dense ﬁlm, 2V2” Yes; No Out to
IP distinct diameter partial about 7”
Before pattern
After No No Yes, No Out to
partial about 6”
Week 3 Faint Yes, medium dense ﬁlm, 2%” Yes; No Out to
IP diameter partial about 7”
Before
After No No Yes; No Out to
partial about 6”
Week 4 Faint, no Yes, medium dense ﬁlm, 2” Yes No Out to
IP distinct diameter about 7”
Before pattern
After No No Faint No Out to
about 6”
Week 5 Yes, light Yes, medium dense ﬁhn, 2%” Yes No Out to
IP diameter about 7”
Before
After No No Faint No Out to
about 6”
Week 7 Faint Yes, light ﬁlm 2” diameter Yes No Out to
2P about 7”
Before
After No No Faint No Out to
about 6”
Week 8 Faint Yes; light ﬁlm 2” diameter Yes, No Out to
2P partial about 7”
Before
After No (dirty No (dirty target) Faint No Out to
target) about 6”
Week 9 Faint Yes, light ﬁlm 2%” diameter Yes; No Out to
2P partial about 7”
Before
After No (dirty No (dirty target) Faint No Out to
target) about 6”
Week 10 Faint Yes; light ﬁlm, 2” diameter Yes, No Out to
2P partial about 7”
Before
After No (dirty No (dirty target) Faint No Out to
tggetl about 5”

 

 

 

 

 

 

44

 

 

The relative loss of visible GSR was estimated on each target ﬁred from six and
twelve inches. These results are listed in Table 17 and Table 18. In general, a low loss of
visible GSR was estimated on targets ﬁred from six inches. A couple of the targets’
visible GSR patterns were inconsistent with the other weeks patterns. For example, the
target collected on the second week of the ﬁrst ﬁve week study lost approximately half of
the visible GSR while the following weeks lost less than half of the visible GSR. The
second inconsistency occurred on the target collected from the fourth week of the second
ﬁve week study. This target lost over half of the visible GSR while the following week
lost less than half of the visual GSR. In general, more than half of the visible GSR were

lost on the targets ﬁred from twelve inches. There were no inconsistencies observed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 17: Estimated relative loss of Table 18: Estimated relative loss of

visible GSR on targets ﬁred from six visible GSR on targets ﬁred ﬁom twelve

inches inches.
Week Relative GSR Week Number Relative GSR
Number Loss Loss
Week 2 IP Medium Week 2 IP Low
Week 3 IP Low Week 3 IP Medium
Week 4 IP Low Week 4 IP High
Week 5 IP Low Week 5 IP High
Week 7 2P Low Week 7 2P High
Week 8 2P Low Week 8 2P High
Week 9 2P High Week 9 2P High
Week 10 2P Low Week 10 2P High

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

45

 

Results From the Number of Powder Particles Counted On Targets Fired From Six and
Twelve Inches Before and After Being Placed Outside and Collected Weekly Over a Five
Week Time Period.

The number of powder particles counted on each target before and after being
placed outside was recorded. The number and percentage of powder particles that were
lost was calculated. The results are listed on Table 19 and Table 20.

The persistence of the powder particles on the targets was examined. In general,
the targets steadily lost a number of powder particles the longer that the target was left
outside. Comparing the percentage of powder particles lost on the targets ﬁred from six
inches and twelve inches indicated that the powder particles are more persistent on

targets ﬁred from six inches.

Table 19: The number of powder particles counted on targets ﬁred ﬁ'om six inches that
had been placed outside and collected weekly over a ﬁve week time period.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Week Particle Particle Loss of Percentage
Number Count Before Count After Particles of particles
Lost
W2 IP 601 373 228 38
W3 IP 616 488 128 20.8
W4 IP 567 428 139 24.5
W5 IP 618 363 255 41.3
W7 2P 584 391 193 33
W8 2P 527 316 211 40
W9 2P 636 310 326 51.3
W10 2P 540 325 215 40

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

46

 

Table 20: The number of powder particles counted on targets ﬁred from twelve inches
that had been placed outside and collected weekly over a ﬁve week time period.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Week Particle Particle Loss of Percentage

Number Count Before Count After Particles of particles
Lost
W2 IP 470 342 128 27.2
W3 IP 517 311 206 39.8
W4 IP 503 320 183 36.4
W5 IP 512 231 281 54.9
W7 2P 484 186 298 61.6
W8 2P 473 187 286 60.5
W9 2P 510 183 327 64.1
W10 2P 515 162 353 68.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Persistence of the Nitrite Pattern From Targets Fired From Six and Twelve Inches, Placed
Outside and Collected Weekly Over a Five Week Time Period.

The approximate diameter and estimated relative loss of the nitrite pattern for
targets ﬁred from six and twelve inches are listed in Table 21 and Table 22. Targets ﬁred
from six inches, displayed a relatively low loss of nitrite pattern during the ﬁrst ﬁve week
study. The loss of nitrite pattern during the second ﬁve week study displayed
inconsistent results. Regarding targets ﬁred from twelve inches, approximately half of
the nitrite pattern was lost during the ﬁrst ﬁve week study. In the second ﬁve week
study, however, the nitrite pattern degraded much more quickly. The results from this
study indicate that the nitrite pattern is more persistent on targets ﬁred from six inches

than on targets ﬁred ﬁom twelve inches.

47

Table 22: The approximate diameter
estimated relative loss of the nitrite pattern
ﬁ'om targets ﬁred from twelve inches.

Table 21: The approximate diameter
and estimated relative loss of the nitrite
pattern ﬁom targets ﬁred from six inches.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Week MGT: Relative Week MGT: Relative
Number Nitrite Loss Number Nitrite Loss
Pattern Pattern

Week 2 Out to about Low Week 2 Out to about Medium
1P 6” 1P 7”

Week 3 Out to about Low Week 3 Out to about Medium
1P 6” IP 7”

Week 4 Out to about Low Week 4 Out to about Medium
1P 6” IP 7”

Week 5 Out to about Low Week 5 Out to about Medium
1P 6” IP 7”

Week 7 Out to about High Week 7 Out to about Very

2P 4” 2P 5” high
Week 8 Out to about Medium Week 8 Out to about Very

2P 4” 2P 5” high
Week 9 Out to about Low Week 9 Out to about High

2P 6” 2P 5”

Week 10 Out to about High Week 10 Out to about Very

2P 4” 2P 4” high

 

 

Persistence of Lead Patterns on Targets Fired From Six and Twelve Inches, Place Outside
and Collected Weekly Over a Five Week Time Period.

A detailed description of the lead pattern obtained from the Sodium Rhodizonate
test and estimated lead residues loss for targets ﬁred from six and twelve inches are listed
in Table 23 and Table 24. Loss of lead pattern on targets ﬁred from six inches was low
until the ﬁfth week during the ﬁrst ﬁve week study. During the second ﬁve week study,
over half of the lead pattern was lost after two weeks. Targets ﬁred from twelve inches,
displayed a high loss of lead pattern during both of the ﬁve week studies. The results
from this study indicate that the lead pattern is more persistent on targets ﬁred ﬁ'om six

inches than targets ﬁred from twelve inches.

48

Table 23: A description of the lead residue pattern obtained by the Sodium Rhodizonate

test and estimated lead residue loss on targets ﬁred from six inches.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Week Petal Pattern Carbonaceous Film (diameter Relative
Number around the bullet entry hole) Loss
W2 1P Yes; faint; Yes; medium dense reaction Low
partially l‘/2 in. diameter, hazy
~ resembles before
W3 1P Yes; faint, Yes; medium dense reaction 2 Low
partially in. diameter, hazy
resembles before
W4 1P Yes; partially Yes; medium dense reaction 2 Low
resembles before in. diameter, hazy
W5 1P No Yes; light reaction 1%” in. High
diameter, hazy
W7 2P Faint Yes; light reaction 1% in. High
diameter, hazy
W8 2P No Faint High
W9 2P No No No reaction
W10 2P No Faint High

 

Table 24: A description of the lead residue pattern obtained by the Sodium Rhodizonate
test and estimated lead residue loss on targets ﬁred from twelve inches.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Week Number Petal Pattern Carbonaceous Film (diameter Relative
around the bullet entry hole) Loss
W2 1P Faint Yes, light reaction 2 in. diameter Medium
circle around bullet entry hole,
kind of resembles before
W3 1P No Light reaction, hazy High
W4 1P No Faint reaction No reaction
W5 1P No No No reaction
W7 2P No Faint reaction Very high
W8 2P No No No reaction
W9 2P No No No reaction
W10 2P No Faint reaction Very high

 

 

49

 

 

Results from the Microscopic, Visual and Chromophoric Examinations of the Blank
Cotton Twill Cloths.

The two cotton twill cloths were examined both visually and through
chromophoric techniques for the presence of GSR. There were no visible traces of GSR

on the blank. Neither the MGT nor the Sodium Rhodizonate test gave positive results.

Step 3

Results from the Weather Conditions.

A detailed description of daily weather conditions in Lansing, Michigan from
March 3, 2000 to May 11, 2000 are listed in Appendix F. Table 25 lists the maximum,
minimum, and average temperature, precipitation, average wind speed and average

maximum wind speed for each week.

Results from the Statistical Analysis

In order to access the signiﬁcance of the weather data, Univariate Analysis of
Variances were conducted on the number of powder particles counted on the targets
before and after being placed outside for one week and each separate weather condition.

A summary of the statistical analysis is located in Table 26.

50

Table 25: The maximum, minimum, and average temperature, precipitation, average
maximum wind speed and average wind speed in Lansing, Michigan from March 3, 2000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

to May 11, 2000
Week Max. Min. Temp. Precipitation Max. Wind Wind
Number Temp. Temp. (Ave.) (Inches) Speed Speed
(Ave.) (Ave.)
(mph) fmph)
Week 1 78.8 17.6 45.8 .25” snow 15.62 9.2
3/3/00 —3/9/00
Week 2 60.1 21.2 34 Light snow 17.43 10.3
3/10/00-3/17/00 and misty
Week 3 64.4 15.8 39.7 Misty all 11.51 7.27
3/18/00-3/23/00 week long, no
signiﬁcant
Week 4 59.0 19.4 45.6 Trace 2 days, 17.75 11.63
3/24/00-3/30/00 misty
Week 5 62.6 19.4 44.9 Misty 1 day 19.07 9.97
3/31/00-4/6/00 light snow
Week 6 48.2 19.4 33.1 Light snow 5 14.63 8.6
4/7/00-4/13/00 days
Week 7 71.6 37.4 49.1 Light rain 2 16.11 9.79
4/14/00-4/20/00 days,
thunderstorm
Week 8 62.6 28.4 44.6 1 day light 14.96 8.02
4/21/00-4/27/00 rain
Week 9 79.0 33.8 55.5 1 day light 12.33 7.47
4/28/00-5/4/00 rain
Week 10 75.9 58.3 65.4 Thunderstorm 23.3 11.5
5/5/00-5/1 1/00 1.37”

 

51

 

Table 26: A statistical summary of the results from the Univariate Analysis of Variances

conducted on the number of powder particles counted on the targets ﬁred from six and
twelve inches before and after being placed outside and with each separate weather

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

condition.
Base Wind Max Wind Temperature Precipitation
Model Speed Speed
Distance
Marginal Means
6 " 406.92 423.984 418.167 401.947 418.129
12 " 366.98 349.916 355.733 371.953 350.871
Parameter Est. 39.941 74.069 620434 29.994 67.259
Partial Eta Sq. 0.043 0.144 0.113 0.028 0.184
St. Error 45.956 45.095 43.811 43.875 37.829
Sig.| 0.397 0.12 0.173 0.504 0.097
Pretest
Parameter Est. 0.495 0.246 0.331 0.567 0.284
Partial Eta Sq. 0.142 0.042 0.078 0.201 0.076
St. Error 0.295 0.295 0.289 0.282 0.264
Sig.[ 0.112 0.416 0.261 0.062 0.3
Weather
Parameter Est. -1 5.396 -6.491 -1.9 -76.34
Partial Eta Sq. 0.213 0.201 0.157 0.498
St. Error 7.39 3.238 1 .101 20.495
Sig.| 0.054 0.062 0.104 0.002

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Relating the Various Weather Conditions to the Visual and Chromophoric GSR Patterns
and the Statistical Analysis of the Loss of Powder Particles on Targets Fired From Six
and Twelve Inches

The study’s results indicate that the GSR pattern deposited on an item of clothing
at a close distance that has been subjected to various weather conditions will lose some of

the GSR pattern. The following sections address the degradation of GSR by wind,

precipitation, and temperature on targets ﬁred ﬁom six and twelve inches.

52

The Degradation of GSR by Wind

The results from this study indicate that wind does not drastically effect the loss
of GSR on a target ﬁred from six or twelve inches. This is evident by examining the
visual and chromophoric results ﬁ'om targets collected on Week 4 and Week 10 (see
Appendix D and E). The above mentioned weeks had the windiest weather conditions
with maximum gusts up to 32 miles per hour, however each target displayed signiﬁcant #
differences in the loss of GSR patterns. Less than half of the visible GSR, nitrite patterns ‘

and lead patterns were lost on targets collected from Week 4. Over half of the visible

 

GSR, nitrite patterns, and lead patterns were lost on targets collected from Week 10.
Figure 10 and Figure 11 chart the percentage of particles lost on targets ﬁred from six and
twelve inches and the average wind speed for each week in the study. The targets
collected from Week 4 had a low percentage of particles lost. On the other hand, the
targets collected ﬁ'om Week 10 had a high percentage of powder particles lost. These
results indicate some other factor must have caused the signiﬁcant loss of GSR on the
targets collected from Week 10.

Statistically, the signiﬁcance of the loss of powder particles on targets ﬁred from
six and twelve inches placed outside for one week and the average wind speed and the
average maximum wind speed were different. Univariate Analysis of Variance indicated
a signiﬁcant difference between the average wind speed and the loss of powder particles,
p = 0.054. No signiﬁcant difference was found between the maximum wind speed and

the loss of powder particles, p = 0.062 (see Table 26).

53

 

Average Wind Speed and the
Percentage of Powder Particles Lost
From Targets Fired From Six Inches

 

 

 

 

50
38 +Wind Speed
20 (Average)
10
0 +Percentage of
Powder
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Particles Lost

 

Week Number

 

 

 

Figure 10: Comparison of the average wind speed and the percentage of particles lost
from targets ﬁred from six inches.

 

Average Wind Speed and the
Percentage of Powder Particles
Lost From Targets Fired From
Twelve Inches

l l

 

+W ind Speed
(Average)

+Percentage
of Particles

1 3 5 7 9 L088
Week Number

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 11: Comparison of the average wind speed and the percentage of powder
particles lost ﬁom targets ﬁred from twelve inches.

54

The Degradation of GSR Pattern by Temperature

Examined results of this study, show no direct relationship linking the loss of
GSR to the differences in temperature. This is evident by examining the visual,
chromophoric, and statistical results from the targets (see Appendices D and E and Table
26). Figure 12 and Figure 13 are graphs that chart the percentage of powder particles lost
and the average temperature for each week. Week 10 had the highest average
temperature during the ten week period and the targets collected from that week lost a
signiﬁcant number powder particles. The temperatures during the seventh week averaged
in the high 40’s which was typical to the other weeks average temperatures. The patterns
collected from this week also lost a signiﬁcant number of powder particles. The retrieval
of a GSR pattern through chromophoric techniques were most effected on targets
collected from Weeks 6,7 and 10. The average temperatures during these weeks ranged
ﬁ'om the lowest average weekly temperature, 33.1 degrees Fahrenheit, to the highest
weekly temperature, 65.4 degrees Fahrenheit. These results indicate that some other
factor must have caused the signiﬁcant loss of GSRs on the targets collected from Weeks
6, 7 and 10. Univariate Analysis of Variance revealed no signiﬁcant difference between

the average temperature and the loss of powder particles, p = 0.104 (see Table 26).

55

 

Average Temperature and the
Percentage of Powder Particles Lost
From Targets Fired From Six Inches

 

 

—e— Average
Temperature

+ Percentage
of Particles
Lost

 

 

 

 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910
WeekNumber

 

 

 

Figure 12: Comparison of the average temperature and the percentage of particles lost
on targets ﬁred from six inches.

 

Average Temperature and the Percentage
of Powder Particles Lost From Targets
Fired From Twelve Inches

 

  

+ Average
Temperature

 
 

WWWWM WWW

’ " “" 2 Willi Elli? "1111.111th llnlllll’i llllllllll

. g1 'll-lllllll mwnllllllllllllllll
. . l

40

   

+ Percentage
of Particles
Lost

 
 
 
 

   
 

   

 
 

 

 

 

12 3 4 5 6 7 8 910
WeekNumber

 

 

 

Figure 13: Comparison of the average temperature and the percentage of particles lost
on targets ﬁred ﬁ'om twelve inches.

56

The Degradation of GSR by Precipitation

The results from this study indicate the amount and form of precipitation does
have an effect on the GSR present on targets. Each week’s targets were subjected to
some form of precipitation outside (refer to Table 25 or Appendix G). This study
indicates a small amount of precipitation does not signiﬁcantly effect visual GSR and the
retrieval of a GSR pattern through chromophoric techniques. The results display that
large amounts of rainfall or snow will effect the visual GSR pattern and the retrieval of a
GSR pattern through chromophoric techniques.

A large amount of snow fell during the sixth week. Targets collected from this
week, displayed a medium to low relative loss of visible GSR patterns. On the other
hand, a majority of the nitrite pattern and lead pattern was lost on targets collected from
this week (see Appendix D and E).

On the seventh and tenth weeks, thunderstorms produced a heavy down fall of
rain totaling over one inch accumulation. The visible GSR and retrieval of a GSR pattern
through chromophoric techniques were most effected on targets collected from these
weeks. A distinctly higher percentage of particles were lost on the targets collected from
Weeks 7 and 10. Over half of the nitrite and lead patterns were lost on the targets from
these weeks and the patterns that remained appeared hazy (see Appendix D and E).

Precipitation had a statistically signiﬁcant negative effect on the loss of powder
particles. Univariate Analysis of Variance indicated there was a signiﬁcant difference

between the amount of precipitation and the loss of powder particles, p = 0.002.

57

 

Precipitation accounted for approximately 50% (r2 = 49.8) of the variation in powder
particle loss (see Table 26).

The results from targets collected from Week 9 are inconsistent with results from
the other targets subjected to similar weather conditions. Targets subjected to moderate
precipitation had a low loss of GSR pattern. The targets collected from Week 9 lost a
signiﬁcant amount of nitrite and lead pattern similar to the loss of GSR on the targets
collected from Weeks 6,7 and 10. The author could not account for this inconsistency. l

The results of this study indicate that the loss of the GSRs on the targets ﬁred

from six and twelve inches could be directly related to the quantity of precipitation. This

 

is a plausible result since nitrite particles are water soluble. Therefore, signiﬁcant
amounts of rainfall or snow will dissolve nitrite compounds resulting in a loss of sight
speciﬁc reactions. Lead particles are not water soluble but the patterns are ﬁagile. Thus,
it is plausible that large quantities of water could disturb or wash away lead particles on

targets.

58

Chapter 4

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

This study was designed as an exploratory examination to assess various weather
conditions’ effect on GSR persistence on a clothing sample. The visual and
chromophoric GSR examinations on targets ﬁred from six and twelve inches and placed
outside were related to the weather conditions.

A database of information was collected recording the GSR patterns on targets
ﬁred from six and twelve inches. The database displayed a difference in the GSR
deposition on targets ﬁred from six and twelve inches. Targets ﬁred from six inches
displayed more visible GSR and GSR retrieved through chromophoric techniques than
targets ﬁred from twelve inches. On the targets ﬁred from twelve inches, the GSR
patterns were distributed over a larger area than the targets ﬁred from six inches. Targets
ﬁred from six inches generally had more powder particles. It is possible for a target ﬁred
from twelve inches to have a powder particle count similar to targets ﬁred from six
inches and vice versa. A statistical analysis indicated that the distance from which the
ﬁrearm is discharged does effect the number of powder particles on the target.

The persistence of the GSRs on targets ﬁred ﬁ'om six and twelve inches was
examined by placing ﬁve targets outside and collecting one target weekly over a ﬁve
week time period. The following conclusions were reached. The visible petal pattern
and carbonaceous ﬁlm pattern were fragile and can be easily lost. Nitrite residues were
more persistent than lead residues. This result indicated that the MGT is a more reliable

procedure to execute than the Sodium Rhodizonate test. The particulate pattem appeared

59

 

to be the most persistent pattern. The diameter and the number of powder particles on the
particulate pattern decreased as the weeks progressed. Overall, the visual GSR and GSR
patterns retrieved through chromophoric techniques were more persistent on targets ﬁred
from six inches than ﬁred from twelve inches.

The results ﬁ'om the persistency study agree and disagree with a study
conducted by David Lindman (1989). This study’s results coincide with Lindman’s
conclusion that the number of powder particles decreased the longer the target was I
outside. In Lindman’s study, the circle within which the powder particles were located

expanded over time. The study performed here demonstrated that the circle within which

 

the powder particles were located decreased over time.

The results from this study indicated that the GSR pattern on clothing ﬁred from a
close distance and subjected to weather conditions will lose some of the GSR pattern.
The following conclusions were made. Over half of the GSR pattern was lost on targets
subjected to heavy rainfall or a large accumulation of snow indicating the amount of GSR
pattern loss is dependent on the amount of precipitation. Because of the design of the
experiment, whether the loss of residue is a threshold or linear phenomenon could not be
determined. Statistically, precipitation accounted for approximately 50% of the loss of
powder particles on the targets. An experiment designed on a much larger scale should
be conducted to support this result. All of the results supported the hypothesis that
precipitation would have a negative effect on the visual GSR pattern and the retrieval of a
GSR pattern through chromophoric techniques.

These results agree with the results collected in a study conducted by M. Bonfanti

and A. Gallusser (1995). In the results from their study, targets subjected to large

60

quantities of water lost all visible gunshot residue, revealed a high loss of nitrite residues,
and failed to reveal lead residues. Targets placed in snow displayed a low loss of visual
and nitrite residues and the diameter of the circle containing the lead residues decreased
by half. Both of these results were similar to the results collected from the targets placed
outside and subjected to signiﬁcant amounts of precipitation.

Examining the visual GSR patterns and the GSR patterns retrieved through
chromophoric techniques, wind did not drastically effect the loss of GSR on targets. No
statistically signiﬁcant difference between the loss of powder particles and the average
maximum wind speed was found. There was a statistically signiﬁcant difference between
the loss of powder particles and the average wind speed. The author could not account
for the difference in signiﬁcance between the wind speed and the maximum wind speed
data. An experiment designed on a much larger scale should be conducted to determine
the signiﬁcance of wind and the loss of powder particles. These contradicting results
neither supported nor denied the hypothesis that wind would have a negative effect on the
visual GSR pattern and the retrieval of a GSR pattern through chromOphoric techniques.

Examining the visual GSR patterns and GSR patterns retrieved through
chromophoric techniques, a relationship could not be found between temperature and a
loss of GSR patterns on targets. No statistically signiﬁcant difference between the loss of
powder particles and the maximum temperature was found. These results did not support
the hypothesis that temperature would have a negative effect on the visual GSR pattern
and the retrieval of a GSR pattern through chromophoric techniques.

The results from this study also indicated that generally targets subjected to

weather conditions, not including a large accumulation of precipitation, exhibited a low

61

 

loss of GSR. These targets displayed a low loss of visible GSR, powder particles, nitrite
pattern, and lead pattern. A muzzle-to-target distance determination is possible with

targets collected under these conditions.

62

Chapter 5

SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

Many different research projects could expand upon this study. This study used
one manufacturer and caliber of ﬁrearm, one manufacturer and type of ammunition, and
two different ﬁring distances. A study using different materials and parameters than
previously mentioned could be conducted.

A persistence study for a longer time period could be perused to develop a time
frame for the disappearance of visible GSR or a GSR pattern retrieved through
chromophoric techniques.

A separate study could be conducted that monitors speciﬁc weather conditions.
This study could entail simulating wind, temperature and precipitation and study the
effect that each has on the visible GSR pattern or the retrieval of a GSR pattern.

This study was conducted during the spring in mid-Michigan. Comparing the
results from this study to the results obtained from a study conducted in a different
climate or season would be interesting. Another suggestion is placing the targets in

different locations such as up in a tree, in a ditch, or under debris.

63

 

APPENDICES

 

APPENDIX A

MODIFIED GRIESS TEST — FBI LABORATORY PROTOCOL

65

 

Modified Griess Test — FBI Laboratogy Protocol

Materials

1. Processing of previously desensitized photographic paper —

a.

Prepare a solution of 7.7 grains (0.5 grams) of sulfanilic acid in 100 milliliters of
distilled water.

Prepare a solution of 4.3 grains (0.28 grams) of alpha-naphthol in 100 milliliters
of methanol.

Combine the equal volumes of the above solutions.

Pour the combined solutions into a non-reactive photo processing tray and brieﬂy
dip pre-cut sheets of desensitized photographic paper into the tray. Simply
submerge the sheets completely and remove them.

Set the sheets aside to dry on an uncontaminated surface.

Place the remaining solution in an uncontaminated storage container and seal.
Note: In lieu of desensitized photographic paper, ordinary laboratory ﬁlter paper
may be processed in the same manner for used in the Modiﬁed Griess Test.
Economy may dictate that this alternative be used.

Shelf life for this reagent is known through experience to be at least two months

and probably a great deal longer.

2. Preparation of nitrite test swabs -

a.

Prepare a solution of 9.3 grains (0.6 grams) of sodium nitrite in 100 milliliters of

distilled water

66

 

b. Soak the cotton-tipped ends of a package of six inch swabs (typically, one
hundred/package) in the solution.

c. Set the swabs aside to dry. Store in a sealed container.

3. Preparation of a 15% acetic acid solution —
a. Combine 150 milliliters of glacial acetic acid with 850 milliliters of distilled
water. Remember to gently pour the acid into the water to preclude the potential
spattering of undiluted acid.

b. Store in an appropriate uncontaminated sealed container.

 

Procedure

1. Test the four comers of the emulsion-coated side of the desensitized and chemically
treated photographic paper for sensitivity to nitrite compounds. This is easily
accomplished by saturating a nitrite test swab in a small amount of 15% acetic acid
solution and dabbing the four comers. An orange color should appear at each corner,
conﬁmring such sensitivity before going further. Being able to testify to this
sensitivity in court could be a critical issue.

2. Place the evidence or known-distance test questioned side down on the emulsion-
coated side of the treated photographic paper. Index seams, buttons, button holes,
rips, pockets, suspected bullet holes, tears, cuts, etc., for possible ﬁrture reference in
court by marking with a lead pencil. DO NOT USE INK at this point because it may

transfer back onto the tested item.

67

3. Soak a piece of nitrite-ﬂee cheesecloth in the 15% acetic acid solution (in a large
beaker) and wring it out. Place the cheesecloth on the questioned item or known-
distance test as the third layer of the “sandwich”. Press the “sandwich” with a hot
iron. On many irons the setting for “cotton” is appropriate. (Note that nitrite-
contaminated cheesecloth will cause a generalized orange background coloration.
Although undesirable, this is not a fatal ﬂaw as long as individual point reactions are
still visible against the background.)

4. Discard the cheesecloth and separate the questioned item or known-distance test—

ﬁrings from the photographic paper. Any orange indications on the paper are the

 

result of a chromophoric reaction chemically speciﬁc for the presence of nitrite
residues.

5. Retain any photographic paper showing positive results as a part of the raw data for
inclusion in your notes. When dry, the photographic paper should be marked

appropriately in ink with your symbol and case/ﬁle.

68

APPENDIX B

SODIUM RHODIZONATE TEST

69

Sodium Rhodizonate Test
Materials
1. Preparation of a 15% acetic acid solution* —

a. Combine 150 milliliters of glacial acetic acid with 850 milliliters of distilled
water. Remember to gently to pour the acid into the water to preclude the
potential spattering of undiluted acid.

b. Store in an appropriate uncontaminated sealed container.

2. Preparation of the sodium rhodizonate solution

a. Place a small amount of sodium rhodizonate in a small beaker and add sufﬁcient
water to make a saturated solution approximately the color of strong tea. The
solution is saturated if a slight sediment is noted on the bottom of the beaker after
stirring with a clean glass stirring rod.

b. Make only enough solution for immediate use and do not store the solution. Shelf
life is currently unknown.

3. Preparation of 2.8 pH buffer solution.

a. Dissolve 29.3 grains (1.9 grams) of sodium bitartrate and 23.1 grains (1.5 grams)
of tartaric acid per 100 milliliters of distilled water. This usually requires both
heat and agitation to complete in a reasonable period of time. A combination hot
plate/magnetic stirrer is convenient for this and saves a great deal of time and
effort.

b. Store the solution in an uncontaminated and sealed container. Contaminated
containers and water, or simply containers left open to the air, can allow the

formation of what appear to be microscopic life forms which cloud the solution.

70

 

While these do not interfere with the speciﬁcity or reliability of the test, they do

tend to clog up reagent spraying equipment. Allow such material to settle before

spraying.

4. Preparation of the dilute 5% hydrochloric acid solution.

a.

Combine 5 milliliters of concentrated acid with 95 millimeters of distilled water.
Remember to gently pour the acid into the water to preclude potential spattering

of undiluted acid

Store the solution in an uncontaminated and sealed bottle.

Procedure

1. Direct application to an item of evidence.*

a. Spray the appropriate area of the questioned item with a previously prepared

solution of 15% acetic acid solution.

Spray the appropriate area of the questioned item with a previously prepared
saturated solution of sodium rhodizonate in water.

Spray the same area of the questioned item with the previously prepared tartaric
acid/sodium bitartrate buffer solution. This solution will eliminate the general
yellow background color caused by the sodium rhodizonate, will establish a local
pH of 2.8, and turn any lead and a few other metal which may be present to a pink
color.

Spray the same area with the previously prepared dilute hydrochloric acid
solution. The presence of lead is speciﬁcally determined wherever the previous

pink color fades out and leaves lead. Be very aware of the face that a positive

71

(blue-violet) result may abruptly fade out. Take good notes immediately after

applying the dilute hydrochloric acid solution.

*Michigan State Police Laboratory’s Firearm Section added this step. The step is taken

from a research paper written by Clara E. Schous, Honor Intern, F.B.I. Laboratory,

Washington, DC.

72

APPENDIX C

MATERIALS USED IN THIS EXPERIMENT

73

Firearm Used:
- 9 mm Smith and Wesson Model 469 serial number A852781
Ammunition Used:
- 9 mm Luger ammunition by Federal — Law Enforcement Ammunition
Bullet: 125 grain, jacketed hollow point,

Propellant: disc powder, 5.09 grain powder load

Target Collection Materials:

- 8.5 x 8.5 inch cotton twill cloths

— Zero One bench rest

- Casewell Detroit Armor Company Bullet trap
- File folders

- Masking tape

- Nails, 6 inches long

Visual and Microscopic Examination:

Scion Image download program from NIH web page: www.NIH.gov

Microsoft Adobe Photoshop

Epson ESIZOOC Scanner

— American Optical Stereomicroscope

Chemical Examination:

- Modiﬁed Griess Test: reagent (aqueous sulfanilic acid and alpha-napthol in
methanol), desensitized photographic paper, 15% acetic acid solution, Sears

Kenmore iron, cheese cloth

74

- Sodium Rhodizonate Test: saturated solution of sodium rhodizonate, buffer
solution (sodium bitrate and tartaric acid in distilled water), 5% hydrochloric

acid solution, 15% acetic acid solution, air pump

Statistical Analysis:

- SPSS

75

APPENDIX D

GUNSHOT RESIDUES WORKSHEET

76

GUNSHOT RESIDUE WORKSHEET

 

Specimen:
Distance from target:
Date Set Out:

Date Collected:

 

 

 

MICROSCOPIC EXAMINATION:
Smoke:

 

Bullet wipe:

 

 

Ripping/tearing:

 

Gunpowder/type:

 

Particle Count:

 

 

 

 

CHEMICAL EXAMINATIONS:
Modiﬁed Griess Test

 

 

 

 

Sodium Rhodizonate

 

 

Other Observations:

 

 

 

 

 

77

APPENDIX E

PHOTOGRAPHS OF TARGETS FIRED FROM SIX INCHES BEFORE AND
AFTER BEING PLACED OUTSIDE FOR ONE WEEK, THE NITRITE
PATTERN, AND THE LEAD PATTERN

78

 

Figure 14: Week 1- the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches

 

Figure 15: Week 1 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being place
outside for a week.

79

Figure 16: Week 1 — the nitrite pattern from the target ﬁred at six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Week 1 - 6"
Sodium Rhodizonate

 

Figure 17: Week 1 - the lead pattern on a target ﬁred at six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

 

Figure 18: Week 2 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches.

 

. . ,5 ' .
Figure 19: Week 2 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

81

Figure 20: Week 2 — the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Week 2 — 6"
Sodium Rhodizonate

 

   

.2":- 4
Figure 21: Week 2 — the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

82

 

Figure 22: Week 3 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches.

   

9
. _ 1
“‘e-v
i
. ‘ . v
'M" _ A
‘ 9.“. '
‘ kt. ‘. ...
14 A «A '
, . )
SE a
‘_ 'r ‘l' ._~

Figure 23: Week 3 --"the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed

outside for one week.

83

Figure 24: Week 3 — the nitrite pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Week 4 — 6"
Sodium Rhodizonate

 

Figure 25: Week 3 - the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

 

Figure 26: Week 4 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred ﬁ'om six inches.

 

i" ' . , ,
Figure 27 : Week 4 — the GSR on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed outside
for one week.

85

Figure 28: Week 4 — the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Week 4 - 6"
Sodium Rhodizonate

 

Figure 29: Week 4 - the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
for outside one week.

 

Figure 30: Week 5 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches.

 

87

Figure 31: Week 5 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after placed
outside for one week.

Figure 32: Week 5 - the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for week.

Week 5 - 6" ,
Sodium Rhodizonate

 

88

Figure 33: Week 33 — the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

 

Figure 34: Week 6 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches.
‘3 .

 

Figure 35: Week 6 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

89

Figure 36: Week 6 — the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from six inches after being
outside for one week.

 

Figure 37: Week 6 - the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches alter being placed
outside for one week.

.
~. ,v
.
- . I
.
a
,- .' -

 

 

Figure”: Week7—the GSRpattemonatargetﬁred from six inches aﬁerbeingplaced
outsidefor oneweek.

91

Figure 40: Week 7 — the nitrite pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

 
   

*7 ”3%: .

«I

w
r '

Figure 41: Week 7:11;} lead pattern—on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

 

Figure 42: Week 8 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches.

Week 8 — 6" .-
4/28/00 -

 

'-

Figure 43: Week 8 — the GSR pattern on target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

93

Figure 44: Week 8 — the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

 

I" I in I . .. 452;” .. ‘M»«.u&. $538" 7.3.. ‘3' i ‘
Figure 45: Week 8 — the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

 

94

 

Figure 46: Week 9 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches.

r

Week 9 - stiff“: “31:1”: ' ,_ 1‘

 

 

'...‘.. ,..;....", ’ V I k , '.l .-
Figure 47: Week 9 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
outside for one week.

95

Figure 48: Week 9 — the nitrite pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

 

Figure 49: Week 9 — the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being placed
out side for one week.

 

Figure 51: Week 10 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 52: Week 10 — the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

   

Figure 53: Week 10 - the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from six inches after being
placed outside for one week.

98

APPENDIX F
PHOTOGRAPHS OF TARGETS FIRED FROM TWELVE INCHES BEFORE

AND AFTER BEING PLACED OUTSIDE FOR ONE WEEK, THE NITRITE
PATTERN, AND THE LEAD PATTERN

99

 

Figure 54: Week 1 - the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

Figure 55: Week 1 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Figure 56: Week 1 — the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from twelve inches after
placed outside for one week.

Week 1 — 12" .
Sodium Rhodizonate

 

Figure 57: Week 1 — the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

101

5

Figure 58: Week 2 - the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches:

K

Figure 59: Week 2 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

102

Figure 60: Week 2 — the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Week 2 - 12"
Sodium Rhodizonate

Figure 61: Week 2 — the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

103

Figure 62: Week 3 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

"‘7 -

f .

Figure 63: Week 3 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being

placed outside for one week.

104

Figure 64: Week 3 — the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Week 3 — 12"
Sodium Rhodizonate

o

 

Figure 65: Week 3 - the lead pattern on a target ﬁred ﬁom twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

NS

Figure 66: Week 4 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

9 ,—
!.
..,;

Figure 67 : Week 4 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

106

Figure 68: Week 4 — the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

Week 4. - 12"" .

Sodium Rhodizonate

 

Figure 69: Week 4 - the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

107

Figure 70: Week 5 —- the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

Figure 71: Week 5 Q— the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

108

Figure 72: Week 5 — the nitrite pattern ﬁom a pattern ﬁred from twelve inches after
being placed outside for one week.

Week‘s — 12" ,-
Sodium Rhodizonate

 

Figure 73: Week 5 — the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

109

Figure 74: Week 6 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

3
.,
t. .
2'

I
2'. .“ ti- 1 c

O

*3” ‘3’ .' 33;. '
Figure 75: Week 6 - the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

110

Figure 76: Week 6 — the nitrite pattern ﬁ'om a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

 

placed outside for one week

111

Figure 78: Week 7 — the GSR Pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

   

 

I ;‘
0 . ‘.“
,' 4‘s
‘ "u
.,
- . -. . F
._ . ' i .
. , .
“is: ,r
.I, w
I ',' - . ~
I" . .
.
O

 

Figure 79: Week 7 9th; GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

112

Figure 80: week 7 — the nitrite pattern from a pattern ﬁred ﬁ'om twelve inches after
being placed outside for one week.
nee): v 11,-, 1.2 -~ , .
Sodium .Rh‘odi zonetze

 
 
    
    

”$5”?

..-_I

  

J.

  

, _ $2 ' " . ‘ . . . -
Figure 81: Week 7 - the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

113

."‘ a.

Figure 82: Week 8 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

t/2e/oo‘_

Figure 83: we}? - the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

114

Figure 84: Week 8 — the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

 

Figure 85: Week 8 - the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

115

.
o ' a
. .
. p ' '_ |
e d '
1.. _ . _
. .
r ¢.r,‘ .. .
-. .. -1 _ -
l“ .'
_ .
n . l u
. .
. l u’ I
. .
. ' Q , ' .
..
.

Figure“: Week9—theGSR

   

pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.

. ..

 

Figure 87: Week 9 —-the‘ GSR pattern or; a target ﬁred fro
placed outside for one week.

 
       

.. -. 6 ea“
in twelve inches aﬁer being

116

Figure 88: Week 9 — the nitrite pattern from a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outsideufgr‘one week;

‘uva‘ugu

Figure 89: Week 9 — the lead pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

117

I“: 1' .I

Figure 90: Week 10 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches.
m . I, v ' . I

no ,4 ”I:

 

A.

Figure 91: Week 10 — the GSR pattern on a target ﬁred from twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

118

Figure 92: Week 10 -— the nitrite pattern ﬁom a target ﬁred from twelve inches after
being placed outside for one week.

0

 

Figure 93: Week 10 —— the lead pattern on a target ﬁred ﬁom twelve inches after being
placed outside for one week.

119

APPENDIX G

DAILY WEATHER CONDITIONS IN LANSING, MICHIGAN FROM MARCH 3,
2000 TO MAY 11, 2000

120

Table 27 : Daily weather conditions in Lansing, Michigan ﬁ'om March 3, 2000 to

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

May 11, 2000
Date Mean Max. Min. Precip. Wind Max. Morning Afternoon Night
Temp Temp Temp (In.) speed Wind
(“F) (’F) (“F) (mph) Speed
(mph)
3/3/00 31.4 46.4 17.6 none 4.6 9.21 clear, overcast scattered
sunny clouds
3/4/00 35 53.6 23 none 7.15 16.11 mostly mostly mostly
clear clear cloudy
3/5/00 41.7 57.2 24.8 none 2.42 6.9 clear, clear, clear
sunny sunny
3/6/00 51.2 62.6 33.8 none 10.43 12.66 clear, clear, mostly
sunny sunny cloudy
3/7/00 64 73.9 42.8 none 12.26 23.02 scattered partly clear
clouds cloudy
3/8/00 66.8 78.8 55.4 none 13.17 21.87 clear, overcast mostly
sunny cloudy
3/9/00 51 66.2 37.9 none 15.06 19.56 clear, overcast mostly
sunny cloudy
3/10l00 25.5 28.4 23 .25 8.56 11.51 snow, Overcast overcast
snow cloudy
3/11/00 29.4 32 26.1 none 12.95 17.26 clear, Scattered overcast
sunny clouds
3/12/00 30.1 42.8 21.2 none 9.29 16.11 clear, partly mostly
sunny cloudy cloudy
3/13/00 32.9 42.8 28.4 0.01 9.94 18.41 cloudy, cloudy light cloudy, light
snow light snow snow rain
3/14/00 43 51.8 33.8 trace 9.75 18.41 cloudy, partly partly cloudy
(0.01) misting cloudy,
Ii ht rain
3/15/00 48.1 60.1 42.8 misty 9.03 21.87 cloudy, cloudy scattered
misting clouds
3/16/00 29.2 32 26.6 none 12.59 18.41 overcast overcast partly cloudy
3/17/00 24.8 32 21.2 none 9.36 12.66 partly light snow, mostly
cloudy hazy cloudy
3/18/00 22.5 33.8 15.8 none 6.9 12.66 clear, Clear, clear
sunny sunny
3/19/00 38.7 42.8 32 trace 7.64 10.36 overcast light rain, light rain,
(0% hazy hazy
3/20/00 45 48.2 42.8 trace 11.74 16.11 misty, Misty, misty
(0.01) cloudy cloudy
3/21/00 45.3 53.6 41 trace 6.42 10.36 misty, Overcast overcast
(0.01) hazy
3/22/00 48.6 55.4 42.8 misty 5.2 8.06 misty, Overcast scattered
clouy clouds
3/23/00 53.2 64.4 37.4 misty 3.64 10.36 morning Partly clear
mist, cloudy
cleared

 

 

 

 

 

 

121

 

 

 

 

Table 27: (cont’d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3/24/00 48.5 57.2 44.6 none 7.4 9.21 partly Clear, scattered
cloudy sunny clouds
3/25/00 53.9 57.2 42.8 none 19.43 32.22 mostly Partly partly cloudy
cloudy cloudy,
windy
3/26/00 54.8 59 51.8 none 10.86 14.96 partly Partly partly cloudy
cloudy cloudy
3/27/00 46.3 53.6 39.2 trace 13.12 20.71 light rain, Mostly mostly
(0.01) cloudy cloudy cloudy
3/28/00 41.5 42.8 39.2 trace 9.49 11.51 cloudy Cloudy rainy,
(0.01) cloudy
3/29/00 36.9 44.6 26.6 0.1 13.75 19.56 overcast Overcast mostly
cloudy
3/30/00 37.6 51.8 24.8 none 7.37 16.11 clear, Clear, clear
sunny sunny
3/31/00 39.2 57.9 19.4 none 4.12 16.11 partly scattered partly cloudy
cloudy clouds
(mostly
clear!)
4/1/00 53.5 62.6 44.6 none 10.02 17.26 mostly mostly overcast
clouQ/ cloud)
4/2/00 48.1 53.6 44.6 trace 1.8 5.75 light rain, misty, partly cloudy
(0.01) cloudy cloudy
4/3/00 52.3 57.2 46.4 none 9.72 16.11 cloudy cloudy cloudy
4/4/00 36.1 46.4 26.6 trace 14.44 21.87 cloudy, cloudy, cloudy
(0.01) misty, light snow
windy
light snow
4/5/00 37.8 51.8 21.2 none 10.12 21.87 partly mostly overcast
cloudy cloudy
4/6/00 47.1 53.6 30.2 none 19.56 34.52 overcast mostly clear
cloudy,
windy
4/7/00 35.7 46.4 30.2 trace, 14.33 23.02 mostly light rain, snow
snow cloudy snow
4/8/00 31.5 39.2 28.4 snow 13.86 20.71 snow, partly clear
cloudy cloucy
4/9/00 35.1 48.2 19.4 snow 11.89 23.02 light snow mostly mostly
cloudy cloudy
4/10/00 33.6 37.4 26.6 none 5.62 6.9 clear, clear, overcast
sunny sunny
4/11/00 32.2 35.6 30.2 snow/ 6.77 11.51 light light snow, overcast
sleet snow/ haze
sleet
4/12/00 36.6 44.6 28.4 light 7.04 13.81 light mostly mostly
snow snow, cloudy cloudy
mostly

 

 

 

 

 

122

 

 

cloudy

 

 

 

Table 27 (cont’d).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4/13/00 27 30.2 24.8 none 0.69 3.45 clear, clear, clear
sunny sunny
4/14/00 50.4 64 41 none 9.98 13.81 partly clear, clear
cloudy sunny
4/15/00 61.8 71.6 46.4 none 10.89 17.26 mostly mostly clear
cloudy cloudy
4/16/00 43 48.2 39.2 none 11.81 16.11 overcast overcast overcast
4/17/00 43.1 53.6 37.4 trace 12.56 18.41 light rain, mostly overcast
(0.02) cloudy cloudy
4/18/00 48.3 62.6 39.2 none 5.1 10.36 overcast mostly mostly
cloudy cloudy
4/19/00 48.2 53.6 44.6 trace 4.94 12.66 overcast, overcast, light rain,
mist trace hazy
4/20/00 48.7 53.6 46.4 0.5 13.29 24.17 rain rain, rainy, cloudy
t-storms
4/21/00 41.3 45 39 trace 12.99 23.02 misty light rain light rain,
(0.01) hazy
4/22/00 48.1 62.6 37.4 none 7.55 10.36 clear, clear, clear
sunny sunny
4/23/00 48.9 61 33.8 none 4.7 11.51 partly mostly overcast
cloudy cloudy
4/24/00 49.7 51.9 33.6 none 10.74 20.71 clear, clear, clear
sunny sunny
4/25/00 45.3 57 35.6 none 10.98 18.41 clear, clear, little scattered
sunny windy clouds
4/26/00 37.8 48.2 28.4 none 2.68 8.06 clear, clear, clear
sunny sunny
4/27/00 40.9 62.1 34 none 6.53 12.66 clear, clear, clear
sunny sunny
4/28/00 49.5 66.2 33.8 none 3.27 9.21 clear, partly clear
sunny cloudy
4/29/00 52.7 62.6 37.4 none 6.33 12.66 partly partly partly cloudy
cloudy cloudy
4/30/00 66.9 68 64.4 none 10.82 12.66 partly partly partly cloudy
cloudy cloudy
5/1/00 52.6 57.2 46.4 0.1 6.9 12.66 partly light rain partly cloudy
cloudy
5/2/00 46.2 64.4 37 none 3.96 6.9 clear, clear, clear
sunny sunny
5/3/00 60.5 71.1 48.2 none 10.22 13.81 clear, clear, partly cloudy
sunny sunny
5/4/00 60.4 79 53.6 none 10.8 18.4 mostly mostly mostly
cloudy cloud} cloudy
5/5/00 70 81 58 none 9.7 24 sunny, sunny, clear
clear clear
5/6/00 71 83 58 none 12.1 26 sunny, partly cloudy
clear cloudy

 

 

 

 

 

123

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 27 (cont’d).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5/7/00 64 81 73 trace 11.6 25 partly partly partly cloudy
(0.01) cloudy cloudy
5/8/00 75 83 67 none 13.2 33 partly overcast overcast
cloudy
5/9/00 66 74 58 1.37 10.5 34 cloudy, partly rainy, cloudy
rainy cloudy
5/10/00 55 64 45 0.06 11.8 29 partly partly partly cloudy
cloudy cloudy
5/11/00 57 65 49 trace 11.6 32 cloudy cloudy cloudy
(0.01)

 

 

124

 

LITERATURE CITED

Barnes, RC. and Helson, RH. (1974). An Empirical Study of Gunpowder Residue
Patterns. J oumgl of Forgrgic Science, Q, 448-467.

Bonfanti, M. and Gallusser, A. (1995, April). Problems Encountered in the Detection of
Gunshot Residues. AFT E JourrLal, 27(2), 105-122.

Dillon, J. H. Jr. (1990, July). The Modiﬁed Griess Test: A Chemically Speciﬁc
Chromophoric Test For Nitrite Compounds in Gunshot Residues. AFT B Journal,

22(3 1, 18-25.

Dillon, J. H. Jr. (1990, July). The Sodium Rhodizonate Test: A Chemically Speciﬁc
Chromophoric Test For Lead In Gunshot Residues. AFT E J ourna_l, 22(3), 26-31.

Dillon, J. Jr. (1990, July). A protocol for Gunshot Residue Examinations In Muzzle-to-
Target Distance Determinations. AFTE Journal, 22(3 1, 257-274.

Even, H., Bergman, P., Springer, E. and Klein, A. (1988, March). The Effects of Water-
Soaking on Firing Distance Estirnations. Journgl of Forengic Sciences. 33(2),
3 19-327.

Lindman, DA. (1989, July). The Weathering/Time Factor in GSR/Proximity
Determinations. AFT B Journal. 23(1). 181-183.

Lutz, MC. and Templin, R.H. 0. Some Disinfectants Cause Positive Reaction to Griess
Test. AFT B Journal. 15(4). 35-36.

Nichols, R. (1998, Winter). Expectations Regarding Gunpowder Depositions. AFTE
Journgal, 30(1). 153-160.

Saferstein, R. (Ed.). (1988). Forensic Science Handbook Volume II. Englewood Cliffs,
New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Sellier, K. (1991). Shot Range Determination. Forensic Science Program 6.
Berlin, Heidel: Springer-Verlag.

125

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anonymous (1970). Gunshot Residues and Shot Pattern Tests. FBI Qw Enforcement
Bulletin; 39(9). 7-11 (revised 5/87).

Beij er,R., (1994, July) Experiences with Zincon, A Useful Reagent for Detennination of
Firing Range with Respect to Lead-Free Arnmuntion. Journal of Forensic
Science. 39(4): 981-987.

Dillon, J .H. Jr. (1991, April). The Manufacture of Smokeless Powder. AFTE J ouma_l,
23(2),13-19.

Glattstein,B., Vinokurov,A., Levin, N., Zeichner,A. (2000). Improved Method for
Shooting Distance Estimation. Part 1. Bullet Holes in Clothing Items. Journal of
Forensikc Science. 45(4). 801-806.

Heard, B.J. (1997). Handbook of Firearms and Ballistics: Examining and Interpreting
Forensic Evidence. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

Hueske, BE. (1991). Gunshot Residue Testing of Blood Stained Garments. AFTE
Journal, 26(1), 167 — 172.

Lindman, DA. (1989, July). The Weathering/Time Factor in GSR/Proximity
Determinations. AFT E Jouma_l, 23(1). 181-183.

Lutz, MC. (1987, January). Problems with Sodium Rhodizonate. AFT E Jouma_l, 19(1),
15.

Matty, W. (1991). An Unusual Source of Gunshot Residue Particles. AFT E Journal.
25(2), 225-230.

Owens, M. and George, W.. (1991, October). Gunshot Residue Examinations:
Modiﬁcation in the Application of the Sequence of Chemical Tests. AF TE
Journal 23(4), 63-65.

 

126

Shem, R]. (1993, April).The Vaporization of Bullet Lead by Impact. AFTE J ournal,
27(2), 78-85.

Veitch, G. (1981, April). Experimental Variables GSR Patterns. AFT E Jouma_l, a, 35-
54.

Wrobel, H.A., Miller, J.J., Kijek, M. (1998). Identiﬁcation of Ammunition from
Gunshot Residue and Other Cartridge Related Materials: A Preliminary Model
Using .22 Caliber Reference Ammunition. Journal of Forensic Science. 43(2).
324-328.

127

  
  
 

 

ST

llljllllllllljllllllll

O

M

lllllllllllﬂl