[Morphologic studies in criminal justice--requirements and reality].

A critical analysis is given of the investigation and examination of fatalities for the public prosecution office and for the courts. Rationalistic simplifications in legal quarters, changes in legal procedures and bureaucracy have had negative effects on the field of forensic medicine. It is questionable whether forensic science today can fulfil the scientific demands with regard to a complete and thorough explanation of the cause of death. The reduced interest in expert opinions concerning the pattern of injuries that can help in the reconstruction of the act or in judging the intention and guilt of the perpetrator is a striking and alarming development in criminal justice. Medical examinations in the somatic field are no longer used enough in forensic cases; with regard to the administration of justice, the role of the forensic expert is limited to the postmortem findings and the cause of death. On the other hand, there is increased interest in the expert opinion of psychologists, psychiatrists and specialists in the field of drugs and alcohol. The fact that the number of autopsies and histological as well as toxicological examinations ordered by the public prosecutor is rather small has serious and negative implications for establishing the truth. Such orders are merely dependent on the circumstance of death and the situation in which the body was found. However, the external circumstances can be misleading or they can be manipulated. That is why some crimes are not revealed. In the Federal Republic of Germany, if there is no suspicion of external violence permission is granted for corpses to be buried without the cause of death being clarified by autopsy. However, the fact that the opinions of forensic specialists differ regarding this development in the administration of justice must also be criticized. There is an increasing tendency for investigations to be carried out only if they are ordered by the prosecutor and for questions to be answered only if they are asked officially. Even our colleagues are influenced too much by external circumstances and consider an autopsy unnecessary if the cause of death seems to be clear (for instance in cases of hanging, drowning or bleeding to death). Second autopsies have shown that the thoroughness and the quality of the first autopsy often leave much to be desired. It is, for instance, unforgivable if organs are described without being examined. Special interest is afforded to the necessity for the significance of histological examinations.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)