But, motivated by external causes or not?
JPC: There is an increase due to the inability of the people who are emotionally disturbed to solve their problems.
Not derived from the crisis.
JPC: Related to the crisis, because there are many people in crisis who do not kill themselves or kill anyone. It is not an odd phenomenon that is restricted only to the Portuguese, in any part of the world this is normal and has happened so.
This year, after six months, 23 women were murdered because of domestic violence.
JPC: This is a problem that may be exacerbated by the crisis, but I do not think that is because previously there was a trend more or less stabilized with this number. Clearly 23 in this occasion it is too, because if there were years in which 21 cases happened and now we have this number and the year is not over yet, we are in the middle, if everything stays in terms of progression will be much more dead women statistically speaking.
It is a type of crime that is more violent compared to previous years or not?
JPC: I think so. There are many cases; the problem is that there is much talk of it, because there is only a crime after the person has been convicted. Before trial the individual is presumed innocent, so the official numbers of this kind of crime that the media reports are obtained by direct knowledge, many of them do not appear in these statistics, because people were not convicted or adjudicated. But in two or three years when all go to trial, we will check that the numbers are much higher than what is currently conveys by the media.
It is also a kind of violence that exists in most Latin countries or not?
JPC: The way to solve emotional problems also is related to our nature, but exacerbated by the crisis. If you compare the numbers of homicide for 10 or 15 years ago were much lower than those that occur now.
You said more than once that there are not inconclusive autopsies, even these require more time, but is able to reach a conclusion.
JPC: What I said and I repeat that resorting to all potential criminal investigation in an autopsy practically there is no inconclusive reports. Most occur because not everything is done what could have been done. An inconclusive autopsy or another is quite possible, if I poison a person with a poison that only I know, and I made up and there is no possibility of diagnosis, after determining all laboratory results are negative. Therefore, the autopsy has an inconclusive result, but it is an exceptional case. As a rule when talking about inconclusive autopsies they happen, because it is not understood everything that should be done. I usually give the example of a room full of people and ask how many people are here? Nobody knows is an inconclusive response, but if before we count all the people inside, it will be conclusive.
Then you can get one death certificate in forensic terms without a body, based on the remaining evidence?
JPC: Yes, I mean, there is this possibility in certain cases, for one reason, because the medical examiner report is not only cutting the body. The cutting of the body is the third part of a forensic autopsy. There are four parts, the first of which is information. What is this information? It is what it said, what consist, what the media reports, the rumors, all this has to be analyzed scientifically. Then we have the second part consisting of the examination of the area, the scene of the crime, all traces, all material substance that can translate gestures, attitudes or behavior of certain people. Edmund Plockard said paraphrasing Professor Alexandre Lacasand because he was the author of the phrase; a site survey done well represented ¾ parts of medical examiner autopsy. Directly related to your question that is your answer here. If ¾ of the autopsy is practically made largely and then we still have to add the information. And just for the information I'll solve a case in seconds, for example, the information I have is that Rosie killed her son, ascertains that she had no children and the case is solved only with this data. The third part is often just to confirm, or not, what we had calculated with the remains at the site. After cutting the body, not just the body itself that matters, it's also what got dressed and naked outside and inside. The appearance of the skin is essential, provides immense information, internally also we observed if the organs, but if in the skin is found a hole in the case of a shot, if a person was dressed, all evidence of the outbreak of the gunpowder shot are in the clothing. The medical examiner autopsy is done? No way, I said that there are 4 parts. The fourth consists of laboratory exams without limits that benefit from all the technology of the various sciences, physics, chemistry, computer science and statistics. If we look with greater depth to the analysis of one, two, three and four we cannot practically have a possible inconclusive autopsy, but it is necessary to do all this.
Regarding technical and medical forensic medicine, thanks to these TV series like CSI have noticed a greater appetite for the course or not?
JPC: No doubt. All the people looking for courses related to forensic medicine were very motivated by CSI, or Bones and still other series like that. Science is better known and more detailed and people have the idea that everything is as easy as it appears there on television, but it is not. The programs are very interesting, despite all the inconsistencies that exist there, and the first is when we see the researcher as well coiffed and dressed up, with no dust, and we even can say the same of the investigators, with clean collars and well dressed, but I know it has to be well, if you see an actress all disheveled and nut, immediately you changed the channel and that is not what matters, what matters is that we continue to watch the screen. Another curious aspect is that crime does not exist already everything is prepared to solve it so, it is a television series, it is not all reality is fiction, though early episodes were based on real cases.
Then the students continue to appear in the courses because of the series.
JPC: Yes, I am a professor of criminology, forensic psychology and forensic toxicology and usually when you ask students why they came to this course, the standard answer is because of CSI, and then you need to call them to reality. The series such as this are important to the extent that force us to walk to the impossible, but before we have to go through the steps of what is possible and I say this against many other colleagues who consider these series as something harmful. I do not think so it's very positive.
In professional terms, there were one or more cases that constituted a challenge?
JPC: Well, the most difficult cases are always the easiest and vice versa.
To what extent?
JPC: When will we have a priori difficult case there is a tendency to do everything possible and impossible, but if the case is seemingly easy you may not do it. It is best to do as I consider all difficult cases, because that way nothing escapes, no exception.
