Chemiluminescencee forensic use of chemiluminescence and luminol

How to deceive Gilbert Grissom

H. Nieweg1

Table of contents1 Introduction 1.1 On forensic science . . . . . . . . 4 1.2 On chemiluminescence . . . . . . . . 6

2 On luminol 2.1 Reaction mechanism . . . . . . . . 7 2.2 Reaction with catalyst substance . . . . . . . 8 2.3 Other reactions with luminol . . . . . . . 8 2.4 Forensic use of chemiluminescence and luminol . . . . . 9 2.5 Boundaries of luminol . . . . . . . . 9

3 Research questions and hypotheses 3.1 Research questions . . . . . . . . 10 3.2 Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . 11 3.2.1 Hypotheses to experiment 1 . . . . . . 11 3.2.1 Hypotheses to experiment 2 . . . . . . 11 3.2.1 Hypotheses to experiment 3 . . . . . . 11

4 Materials and methods 4.1 Materials . . . . . . . . . 12 4.2 Preparation . . . . . . . . . 12 4.2.1 Spray A, the ‘luminol spray” . . . . . . 12 4.2.2 Spray B or C, the soda spray . . . . . . 12 4.2.3 Copper sulfate solution . . . . . . . 13 4.3 Methods . . . . . . . . . 13

5 Results 5.1 Results of individual tests . . . . . . . 15 5.1.1 Experiment one . . . . . . . . 16 5.1.2 Experiment two . . . . . . . 17 5.1.3 Experiment one . . . . . . . . 18

6 Analysis and conclusions 6.1 Conclusions of each individual test . . . . . . 19 6.1.1 Conclusions of experiment one . . . . . . 19 6.1.2 Conclusions of experiment two . . . . . . 19 6.1.3 Conclusions of experiment three . . . . . 20 6.2 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . 21

7 Discussion 7.1 Documentation headaches . . . . . . . 22 7.1.1 Vernier setup one . . . . . . . 22 7.1.2 High-speed camera . . . . . . . 24 7.1.3 e Free University and Vernier setup two . . . . 26

8 Sources and acknowledgements 8.1 Sources of information . . . . . . . . 27 8.2 Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . 28

Appendix First article published on the use of luminol in a forensic manner: Die chemiluminescenz des Hamins, en Hilfsmittel zur Auffindung und Erkennung forensisch wichtiger Blutspuren. Dr. W. Specht

2

A bullet runs through it, part 2CSI: Crime Scene Investigation

[At a community meeting, in a church]

Grissom: Hello. My name is Doctor Gil Grissom. I'm the night shi supervisor of the Las Vegas

Police Department's crime lab. I'm not a police officer, I'm a scientist.

Shooter's brother (interrupting): You work for the cops, that makes you a cop. You're not on

our side.

Grissom: Actually I'm a forensics expert. My job is to collect physical evidence from a crime

scene to determine who did what to whom and how did they do it. I've been asked to come here

today by the Mayor and Sheriff Berdic to present our analysis of the evidence in this case to

your community.

Shooter's mom: Why here? Why should we believe your evidence?

Grissom: Physical evidence cannot be wrong, it doesn't lie. It's not in$uenced by emotion or

prejudice, it's not confused by the excitement of the moment. I'm here [(looks up)] in God's

house to explain to you the truth about exactly what happened the other day.

3

1.1 On forensic scienceForensic Science, or forensics, is the combination of a number of sciences in order to serve the legal system. e term and idea behind forensics has existed since Roman times. Our word ‘forensics’ was derived from the Latin ‘forensis’, which meant as much as before the forum. Back then the two parties of a con"ict, the accuser and the accused, had to present their case in front of the forum. e individual with the best presentation usually, the best forensic skill, would win the case. is practice is still visible in modern day courtrooms and the reason some individuals feel the need to hire high priced advocates. While in America almost every self-respecting police force has a Crime Scene Investigation unit, the Netherlands has its own national forensic unit in the Dutch Forensic Institute (DFI). Here scientists work on, for example, DNA analysis of crime scenes, but also travel the country to process scenes on location. e DFI does exactly what the #ctional character of Gilbert Grissom said in the quote on the previous page. It collects physical evidence to support the police in investigating crimes, and, to determine who did what to whom and how they did it. e DFI isn’t only investigating crimes, scientists are also busy investigating new techniques and equipment to advance the #eld of forensic science. Additionally, the DFI is part of the ENFSI, a large european network of forensic laboratories. is network was founded in 1995 and is now a group of over 50 forensic centers in 30 countries. One of the main goals of the ENFSI is improving the quality of forensic research worldwide. e most prominent activity of the ENFSI is the exchange is standardization of forensic practices. In 16 workgroups, divided in areas of expertise, researchers exchange knowledge and experience and write “Best practice” manuals. In addition to this these groups routinely organize conferences and workshops.

4

chemistry |ˈkeməstrē| (abbr.: chem.)noun ( pl. -tries)Chemistry is the branch of science that deals with the identi&cation of the substances of which matter is composed; the investigation of their properties and the ways in which they interact, combine, and change; and the use of these processes to form new substances.

5

1.2 On chemiluminescenceChemistry is the study of the interaction between substances, the processes and new substances formed. Most of the interactions we study take place in test-tubes and laboratories, with people in white coats looking at glasswork and computer screens. However, such interactions also happen all around us. Even in our bodies chemistry is ever present. A large number of these reactions only cause changes to the substances involved. If one adds enough of A to a sufficient amount of B, then C is created right before your eyes.It gets more interesting when energy becomes a factor in this process and A and B result in not only the creation of C’s new atoms, but also the vibration of C’s atoms. e vibration is caused by energy released in the reaction. Because these molecules vibrate, they release their energy in the form of heat. When all the energy is burned, the molecules stop vibrating and the substance will eventually cool down.It is even more interesting when the molecules do not release their chemical energy in the form of heat, but in the form of light instead. is is where chemiluminescence occurs. In the reaction, a molecule is excited and slowly returns to a ground state while releasing light or, in its turn, exciting a second particle that can produce light. e best example of chemiluminescence in every day life can be found in glow sticks. ese plastic sticks contain a chemical, which is usually hydrogen peroxide, and a small vial containing a second chemical, which is in most cases an ester. e stick will glow when the vial is broken and the components are released. We have all seen this effect during school parties where the DJ will throw glowing sticks into the audience. e various colors seen in # gure 1 can be attributed to the "uorescent dye used. Chemiluminescence is not only used in test tubes and during dance events, it is also used by #re"ies. e male # re"y uses adenosine triphosphate (ATP) in reaction with a luciferin substrate and the enzyme luciferase to create an illumination utilized for attracting a mate. is is referred to as bioluminescence. One of the most interesting phenomena in chemiluminsence and bioluminescence is a luminol hydrogen reaction. Here, 5-amino-2,3-dihydro-1,4-phthalazinedione reacts with hydrogen and produces, amongst other products, energy in the form of light. However, the reaction of the compounds is so limited that the amount of light produced is almost negligible and the total reaction can take up to 24 hours. is makes the of luminol with hydrogen unusable for most purposes, including glow sticks. e reaction is speeded up considerably when a catalyst is added to the compound. is catalyst can, for example, be iron ions (Fe2+ / Fe3+) or the copper ion Cu2+. e reaction will speed up dramatically if you add any of these catalysts. e 24 hour reaction time will be shortened to a few minutes or even a few seconds. During this short and reasonably aggressive reaction, a relatively large quantity of light will be produced, enough to be easily visible by human eyes. is helps in making luminol more useable for other purposes, but still makes it difficult to use a reaction of luminol with hydrogen in glow sticks. ese luminol and hydrogen sticks would only light up for a few minutes, at best!

6

Figure 1.1

Chapter 2

On luminol

2.1 Reaction mechanismA reaction of luminol with hydrogen peroxide happens as seen in #gure 2.1, or more detailed in #gure 2.2.

Luminol reacts with the hydrogen peroxide producing energy and 3-aminophthalate. A commonly assumed mechanism of this reaction is described below and clearly visible in #gure 2.2. - Strong base removes nitrogen protons leaving a negative charge- Oxygen creates a cyclic addition to the carbonyl carbons- Nitrogen gas and energy are released by the reaction

7

Figure 2.2

Figure 2.1

A speci#c feature of luminol is its chemiluminescency, resulting in the energy being generated in the form of light instead of heat. is reaction occurs at such a slow pace that it is barely detectable under normal circumstances, and this light is invisible to the human eye in most environments. When luminol and hydrogen react in a setting as above, the reaction can last from 24 hours up to a number of days.

2.2 Reaction with catalyst substanceSince a reaction this slow is not particularly useful in most cases, scientists have looked into the matter further, and discovered that luminol reacts a lot faster when a catalyst is added (#gure 2.3). e catalysts we are focusing on are the iron ions (Fe2+ and Fe3+), since these can be found in blood. When we add one of these catalysts to the reaction, it may take less than a minute instead of multiple days. An example of a luminol reaction with the Cu2+ catalyst can be seen in #gure 2.4. e half-life is estimated to be eight or nine seconds, and with the shortened time-span, the reaction also becomes more intense. Light is now clearly visible and can easily be measured with the appropriate equipment. e amount of catalyst needed is minimal compared to the amount of luminol used. One p.p.m. is enough. Another important aspect of this reaction is the fact that it is extremely easy to determine when the compounds are actually reacting. It is safe to conclude that there is no reaction present when there is no visible light and vice versa.

Figure 2.4

2.3 Other reactions with luminolLuminol was #rst synthesized (created) in 1853 in the form of 5-amino-2,3-dihydro-1,4-phthalazine-dione. Later, in 1928, H.O. Albrecht #rst described a luminol reaction with an oxidant, hydrogen peroxide. Since then reactions with luminol have been used in many different areas, from biology to medicine. Walter Specht (1907 - 1977) proposed to use luminol for blood detection at crime scenes in 1937,1 at the University Institute for Legal Medicine in Jena, Germany. Before that it had only been used by copper miners to aid them in #nding copper in mine walls.

8 1 Article is provided in appendix.

2.4 Forensic use of chemiluminescence and luminole mechanism described above applies when luminol is used to detect blood. Iron ions used are taken from hemoglobin and react similarly to an in-vitro setting. Forensic scientists apply luminol using spray bottles in a solution with soda, distilled water and hydrogen peroxide. e soda is added to the spray to destroy the cell membranes of cells, thereby releasing the iron ions more easily. At a crime scene, most CSI units process a scene with luminol in the following order:

1) Spray walls to illuminate (high velocity) spray patterns and determine what kind of patterns were created, which can be used to determine the modus operandi.

2) Spray ceiling to highlight cast-off patterns.3) Spray "oors to highlight drag marks, shoe prints, blood drops or other blood patterns.

2.5 Boundaries of luminolWhile luminol is in most situations an asset to a crime scene investigator, there are some drawbacks that can render it relatively useless. If not used correctly, it can detect traces of blood, but it can also destroy DNA. If that happens, one has found blood that is not in any way usable as evidence. Another problem is that luminol doesn’t use blood and only blood as a catalyst. It can also utilize anything that has iron ions, such as copper or a number of other metals. is feature may make it difficult to use luminol to detect blood on metal surfaces. Due to this cross contamination, scientists have to resort to other ways to detect blood evidence at some crime scenes. is article is subtitled ’How to deceive Gilbert Grissom’. erefore, the purpose of this investigation is to put these drawbacks into practice and try to establish a way to render luminol useless in gathering blood evidence at a crime scene. Having seen the known disadvantages to luminol, one can say that it must be possible to make luminol unusable, but the question remains, what is the easiest and most plausible way of accomplishing this?

9

Chapter 3

Research questions and hypotheses3.1 Main research questionIs it possible to hide blood evidence from luminol and if so, what is the best and most efficient way to accomplish this?ree experiments will be carried out in order to provide an adequate answer.

Experiment 1• e soda in the spray used by criminologists releases the Fe2+ and Fe3+. e possibilities to bind

this catalyst to another substance will be examined. In this experiment soda will not only be used to dismantle the membranes of red blood cells, but also as a substance involved in the reaction.

Experiment 2• CSI: Crime Scene Investigation claims in episode #ve of the third season that using ordinary

household bleach can destroy blood evidence and make luminol useless. A test will be carried out to determine whether this claim is correct or purely #ctional.

Experiment 3• ere is another catalyst for luminol, Cu2+ ions. A test will be conducted to see whether

covering the area with this catalyst creates an even glow, masking the presence and the location of blood traces.

10

3.2 Hypotheses

3.2.1 Hypotheses to experiment 1It is possible to hide the blood from luminol by removing Fe2+ and Fe3+. If one removes the catalyst, there will be no catalyzed reaction between the luminol spray and blood. Luminol does not react noticeably without a catalyst, and with removal of the catalyst, the blood has been effectively hidden from the forensic scientist.eoretically, it is possible to remove the catalyzing iron ions using soda. e soda will break down cell membranes and release the ions, while at the same time binding itself to them. With effective cleaning utilizing soda, one should be able to clean up blood evidence to the point where it has little to no effective catalytic potential.

3.2.2 Hypotheses to experiment 2In the example given by CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, household bleach is used to clean a surface, which in their case was a carpeted golf club case. One may suspect that the strong oxidative qualities of bleach can react with luminol and thereby hide any present blood evidence. It has been shown by numerous respected investigators that bleach reacts with the standard luminol spray; however, very little research into different levels of brightness has been conducted. It can be assumed that the difference between a luminol reaction with iron ions from hemoglobin will produce the same amount of light as a luminol reaction utilizing bleach as a catalyst. is would be due to the highly reactive nature of bleach.

3.2.3 Hypotheses to experiment 3ere is another catalyst for luminol, Cu2+ ions. When a solution with this substance is applied evenly over the once blood-covered area, it will generate an even glow when sprayed with luminol. Because of this it will effectively hide the location and presence of any existing blood traces.A reaction could be potentially brighter than a reaction with Fe2+ and Fe3+, because there is more Cu available and it is easily accessible since no cell membranes need to be destroyed. If this occurs, a reaction only utilizing the Cu2+ will not cause a problem, because the blood-covered region will glow just as bright as the surroundings, still hiding the blood evidence.

11

Chapter 4

Materials and methods4.1 MaterialsSoda (Na2CO3) 15.0 gA 3% solution of H2O2 180 mlLuminol (C8H7N3O2 , 3-aminophthalhydrazide, 97%) 0.2 g

Bleach (NaOCl)Copper sulfate (CuSO4)

BloodDistilled water

WallpaperDarkened room

Standard chemistry glasswork:A medium sized Erlenmeyer to mix the components for each sprayStirrerSpray bottle

4.2 Preparationree sprays were prepared: A, B and C. Spray A, amongst others, contained luminol, while B and C were randomized. One contained distilled water and the other contained ten grams of soda and an equal amount of distilled water. e investigator was blinded as to which was which by a colleague, who was not involved in the remainder of the study.

4.2.1 Spray A, the ‘luminol spray’e ‘luminol spray’ used by forensic scientists contains luminol, soda, hydrogen peroxide and distilled water.

Preparation: A quantity of 0.2 grams of luminol was mixed with 10.0 grams of soda, 180 ml of distilled water and 180 ml of 3% hydrogen peroxide. When the process was completed, the solution was poured into a spray bottle.

4.2.2 Spray B or C, the soda spray

Preparation: A volume of 100 ml of distilled water was mixed with 5.0 grams of soda and poured into a spray bottle.

4.2.3 Spray B or C, the distilled water spray Preparation: A quantity of 100 ml of distilled water was poured into a spray bottle.

12

4.2.3 Copper sulfate solution Preparation: A standard educational solution of copper sulfate was used in the volume of 25 ml.

4.3 Methodsree experiments were carried out on a total of thirteen separate but identical pieces of wallpaper. Two of these ten tests were done to exclude false positive #ndings, one on a surface with visible blood and the other on a surface that had not been in contact with blood. ese latter two tests were not repeated before every subsequent test. e other surfaces had been in contact with blood and had been cleaned to the point that there was no longer any blood visible to the naked eye, but leaving plenty of trace amounts for luminol. Experiment two was to be a double blind investigation in which the researcher did not know which bottle contained which substance. Later the identities of both sprays were made known to the researcher.

Experiment 1

Surface Surface preparation Action

1 none sprayed with luminol spray

2 visible blood stains sprayed with luminol spray

3 cleaned blood stains sprayed with B and cleaned with distilled water afterwards; procedure repeated multiple timesluminol sprayed

4 cleaned blood stains sprayed with C and cleaned with distilled water afterwards; procedure repeated multiple timesluminol sprayed

Experiment 2

Surface Surface preparation Action

1 none sprayed with luminol spray

2 visible blood stains sprayed with luminol spray

3 cleaned blood stains on two thirds of the surface

after cleaning, divided in three clearly marked partstwo wiped multiple times with ordinary household bleach, only one of the two contained cleaned bloodluminol spray applied

4 cleaned blood stains sprayed with luminol spray

5 bleach applied and cleaned with distilled water

sprayed with luminol spray

13

Experiment 3

Surface Surface preparation Action

1 none spray with luminol spray

2 with visible blood stains spray with luminol spray

3 cleaned blood stains cleaned with a solution of copper sulfate, then sprayed with luminol spray

4 wiped with copper sulfate solution

sprayed with luminol spray

14

Chapter 5

Results5.1 Results of individual testsA description of each test and results.Note: Light production values were classi&ed by visual con&rmation.

Light intensity Description

not present no light visible

-- barely any visible light

- little visible light

-/+ reasonable amount of visible light

+ clearly visible light

++ bright light noticeable

15

5.1.1 Experiment one:

Surface Surface preparation Action

1 none sprayed with luminol spray

2 visible blood stains sprayed with luminol spray

3 cleaned blood stains sprayed with B and cleaned with distilled water afterwards; procedure repeated multiple timesluminol sprayed

4 cleaned blood stains sprayed with C and cleaned with distilled water afterwards; procedure repeated multiple timesluminol sprayed

Surface Results

1 no reactionlight production: not present

2 clearly visible reaction, following blood patternlight production: +

3 reaction barely visiblewhen reacting color of produced light was white and light was very equally spread on surface, no blood patterns visible anymorelight production: --

4 reaction clearly visiblewhen reacting color of reaction was blue no blood patterns visible, surface appeared “smeared”light production: +

All these reactions had a similar duration. ere were no differences noticeable between bleach and blood covered areas. Photos of each surface are provided in appendix A.

16

5.1.2 Experiment two

Surface Surface preparation Action

1 none sprayed with luminol spray

2 visible blood stains sprayed with luminol spray

3 cleaned blood stains on two thirds of the surface

after cleaning, divided in three clearly marked partstwo wiped multiple times with ordinary household bleach, only one of the two contained cleaned bloodluminol spray applied

4 bleach applied and cleaned with distilled water

sprayed with luminol spray

Surface Results

1 no reactionlight production: not present

2 clearly visible reaction, following blood pattern light production: +

3 clearly visible, equally spread reactionno differences between blood covered, bleach covered and blood cleaned with bleach areaslight production: +

4 clearly visible reaction, equally glowing over surface, not following blood pattern light production: -/+

5 clearly visible, bright reaction equal glow over entire area where bleach was appliedlight production: ++

Tests on surfaces one and two were not repeated aer experiment one. ese were included in the results of experiment two because they are relevant here as well as in experiment one.

17

5.1.3 Experiment three

Surface Surface preparation Action

1 none spray with luminol spray

2 with visible blood stains spray with luminol spray

3 cleaned blood stains cleaned with a solution of copper sulfate, then sprayed with luminol spray

4 wiped with copper sulfate solution

sprayed with luminol spray

Surface Results

1 no reactionlight production: not present

2 clearly visible reaction, following blood patternlight production: +

3 very fast, very bright reactionno evidence of blood visible, no blood patterns visible patterns of applied copper sulfate clearly visiblelight production: ++

4 very fast, very bright reaction patterns in which copper sulfate was applied clearly visible light production: ++

Tests on surfaces one and two were not repeated, but are listed because of their continued relevancy.

18

Chapter 6

Analysis and conclusions6.1 Conclusions of each individual test

6.1.1 Conclusions of experiment one

Surface one:Because the test was negative, it is concluded that the used luminol solution does not result in false positive reactions with our surfaces.

Surface two:Because the test was positive, the conclusion can be drawn that the luminol solution works correctly and reacts to blood.

Surface three:Because the test was barely positive, one can conclude that randomized spray B, later revealed to be the one containing sodium, bound well with the blood traces. Although the iron ions were not completely removed, the visibility of the blood traces was very limited and easily confused with any other contamination, irrelevant to a crime scene. It is concluded that one can effectively hide blood evidence with a simple soda spray.

Surface four:It was later revealed to the researcher that surface four was tested with a spray containing only distilled water. is corresponds with the positive results. Although smeared and diluted, blood was clearly visible in the reaction.

6.1.2 Conclusions of experiment two

Surface one:Because the test was negative, it is concluded that the luminol solution that was used does not result in false positive reactions with our surfaces.

Surface two:Because the test was positive, the conclusion can be drawn that the luminol solution works correctly and reacts to blood.

Surface three:e surface was divided into three areas: one with cleaned blood stains, one with cleaned blood stains then further cleaned with bleach and one blood-free area cleaned with bleach. All surfaces reacted positive and the duration of the reaction was about the same. It is hereby concluded that CSI: Crime Scene Investigation’s theory applies and works. Blood evidence can be effectively hidden using ordinary household bleach.

Surface four:Because bleach reacts to luminol in a similar way to blood, we can conclude the results seen on surface three are conclusive and caused by a reaction with bleach and blood.

19

6.1.3 Conclusions of experiment three

Surface one:Because the test was negative, it is concluded that the used luminol solution does not result in false positive reactions with our surfaces.

Surface two:Because the test was positive, the conclusion can be drawn that the luminol solution works correctly and reacts to blood.

Surface three:Because of the extremely short and intense reaction with the copper sulfate smeared surface, the researcher concluded that the luminol did not react with blood. Instead, it reacted with copper sulfate. Hereby copper sulfate has been proven to effectively hide blood traces, but a forensics expert would probably scratch his or her head a few times wondering why luminol reacted in such an odd way.

Surface four:A reaction very similar to the reaction in experiment three occurred. erefore, one can safely assume that luminol did not react with blood in on surface three.

20

6.2 ConclusionIs it possible to hide blood evidence from luminol and if so, what is the best and most efficient way to accomplish this? e question above was the main research question, and we now have an answer. Yes. It is easily achieved to hide blood evidence from luminol. All three theories tested have shown to be effective, but the soda solution has clear advantages above the others. is was the best and most efficient way to cover up blood evidence. It is easily acquired at any supermarket, prepared and is usable on almost every surface, unlike bleach.

So, next time one #nds oneself in the sudden need to deceive a forensic scientist, soda is de#nitely the way to go.

21

Chapter 7

Discussion7.1 Documentation headaches

7.1.1 Vernier setup onee original idea was to utilize the school’s 0..10 Lux light sensitivity meter from CMA connected to a Vernier interface to quantify the result of each test. is meter can detect light from one to ten Lux and consists of a small electronic part, a #beroptic cable and a connection cable that was plugged into the Vernier interface. e interface was connected to an Apple MacBook Pro, which ran

soware to analyze the signal registered by the meter. is allows the researcher to log light production against time. A diagram of this setup is visible in #gure 7.1.

Unfortunately this setup did not function due to the lack of sensitivity of the meter. It could not be determined whether or not the #beroptic cable of the device was damaged or whether the device was just not usable in the setting that this investigation required. An image of the setting is provided in #gure 7.2

22

lux 2.44

Figure 7.1

Vernier

CMA

23

Figure 7.2

7.1.2 High-speed camerae next best option to measuring with a Vernier interface was measuring with a high speed High-De#nition (HD) 720P camera. e camera was placed on a tri-pod and aimed at the surface and a HD recording was made of every experiment accompanied by verbal commentary. e test image was later analyzed in Adobe Photoshop CS4 to determine the luminosity of reacting areas.

Unfortunately there were too many disturbances, static and noise in the recording to obtain an accurate impression of the true luminosity of a surface. Additionally, the copper sulfate reaction occurred so quickly that the camera was unable to adjust fast enough to record the event accurately.

24

25 Figure 7.3

7.1.3 e Free University and Vernier setup twoe Free University’s Physics Department was gracious enough to provide two higher sensitivity light sensors that would work with the Vernier interface described in 7.1.1. One of the devices measured in W/m2 , the other in Lux.

Unfortunately, the Lux sensor was not recognized by our Vernier equipment and a legacy CMA interface could not #nd the right calibration settings. e other sensor proved not to be sensitive enough, and values measured from the same light source differed by factor 1000 depending on using our own Vernier or CMA interfaces. ere was no other option but to determine both meters to be unusable, since it was not possible to calibrate the Lux device using the W/m2.

Due to the reasons described in 7.1.1 through 7.1.3, there was not any other option than to gain our results using visual con#rmation.

26

Chapter 8

Sources8.1 Sources of information

Chemistry Department Wiki, Imperial College London, 2006. Luminol [Online] (Updated 5 Dec 2006) Available at: http://www.ch.ic.ac.uk/wiki/index.php/It:Luminol

IanAlbert.com, 2005. Luminol for dummies [Online] (Updated 2005) Available at: http://ian-albert.com/misc/luminol.php

L’Universita Di Torino, 2006. Luminol’s Chemiluminiescence [Online] (Updated 2006) Available at: http://lem.ch.unito.it/didattica/infochimica/2006_Luminolo/frame.html

James S.H., Kish P.E., Sutton P, et al., 2005. Principles of bloodstain pattern analysis: theory and practice.Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Lyle D.P., 2004. Forensics for dummies.Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Publishing, inc.

Enotes, 2008. Specht, Walter (biography) [Online] (Updated 2008) Available at: http://www.enotes.com/forensic-science/specht-walter

Gaffney, J.S. & Marley, N.A., 2002. Historical overview of the development of chemiluminescence detection and its application to air pollutants.Environmental Research Division Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois.Availible at: http://www.ipd.anl.gov/anlpubs/2001/10/40927.pdf Chayko, G.M. & Gulliver E.D., 1999. Forensic evidence in Canada.Aurora, Ontario: Canada Law Book.

García-Campaña, A.M. & Baeyens, W.R.G., 2001. Chemiluminescence in analytical chemistry.Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Quickenden, T.I. & Cooper, P.D., 2000. Increasing the speci#city of the forensic luminol test for blood. Luminescence, 16, pp.251-153.

Specht, W., 1937 Die chemiluminescenz des Hamins, en Hilfsmittel zur Auffindung und Erkennung forensisch wichtiger Blutspuren. Angewandte Chemie, 50 pp. 155-157)

NFI, 2008. Algemene beschrijving ENFSI [Online] (Updated 2008) Available at: http://nederlandsforensischinstituut.nl/

27

8.2 Acknowledgements

Drs. T. de Boer, thanks for the advice and support

Drs. F. Hidden, Steven Weijhe and the Free University, thank you for your time and patience while none of our measuring equipment actually worked and even for inviting me over to the Free University for more sophisticated equipment

Drs. N Totinchi, thanks for preparing the chemicals and helping me along with the investigation

K. A. James, thank you for all your encouragement and your infallible English (charm)

Sara “Sullivan”, thanks for giving me the idea for this project and your endless knowledge of forensic science

28

Appendix

ArticleDie chemiluminescenz des Hamins, en Hilfsmittel zur Auffindung und Erkennung forensisch wichtiger Blutspuren.Dr. W. Specht

29

1 oct, 2008

Uitsluitend voor persoonlijk gebruik / for personal use only

TU Delft LibraryPrometheusplein 1Postbus 982600 MG DelftTel: +31 (0) 15 27 84636Tel: +31 (0) 15 27 85678Fax: +31 (0) 15 27 85706Email: library@tudelft.nlwww.library.tudelft.nl

Aan: CENTRALE KANKER BIBLIOTHEEK NKI/AVL PLESMANLAAN 121

1066 CX AMSTERDAM NEDERLAND

Aanvraag nr: 1425211 Uw referentie(s): A088684512 NKI/AVL BIBLIOTHEEK

Artikelomschrijving: Aantal kopieën: 3 Artikel: DIE CHEMILUMINESENZ DES HAMINS.... Auteur: SPECHT W Titel: ANGEWANDTE CHEMIE Jaar: 1937 Vol. 50 Nr. Pag. 155-157 Plaatsnummer: 400 B