APPLICATION OF DEPTH CAMERA TECHNOLOGY FOR EVIDENCE MEASUREMENT IN PRESUMPTIVE FORENSIC DNA LABORATORY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55766/sujst12237Keywords:
Depth Camera Measurement, Forensic Science, 3D Metrology, Point CloudAbstract
The precision and uncontaminated metric evaluation of evidence at crime scenes is essential for forensic investigations, especially for DNA examinations. The implementation of Time-of-Flight (ToF) depth cameras represents a significant advancement in the field of forensic measurement, addressing limitations of existing metrology techniques. A top-down camera system was utilized to capture point cloud data corresponding to frequently found evidence in crime scenes, such as bottles, glass, knives, scissors, firearms, and tools. An automated algorithm was devised to process the point cloud by isolating the evidence from the substrate and determining its principal dimensions: length, width, and depth. In fact, our analysis depends on the resolution of the depth camera; however, we exclusively utilize the metrics of length and width for presenting the result of the evidence measuring report. A validation study was carried out to examine the utility of depth cameras as compared to measurements obtained through manual methods and two-dimensional imaging technologies. The data suggests that the depth camera equipment reaches an elevated level of accuracy, with relative errors for both length and width measurements observed at 0.23. In addition, it adeptly addresses planar and perspective distortions that are conventionally associated with two-dimensional imaging techniques. This methodological approach signifies a noteworthy advancement in the presumptive investigation and forward to forensic DNA examination processes, thereby enabling accurate documentation of evidence, which in turn enhances the fidelity of the forensic workflow. This implies improved efficiency within the presumptive process for saving time and accuracy in metrology. Therefore, its usability contributes to the prevention of the evidence contamination on presumptive while in the measuring phase.
References
Alketbi, S. K. (2023). The role of DNA in forensic science: A comprehensive review. International Journal of Science and Research Archive, 9(2), 814-829. https://doi.org/10.30574/ijsra.2023.9.2.0624
Badiye, A., Kapoor, N., & Menezes, R. G. (2023). Chain of custody. In StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing.
Balk, C. (2015). Reducing contamination in forensic science. Themis: Research Journal of Justice Studies and Forensic Science, 3(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.31979/themis.2015.0312
Bordbar, B., Zhou, H., & Banerjee, P. P. (2019). 3D object recognition through processing of 2D holograms. Applied Optics, 58(34), G197-G203. https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.58.00G197
Carew, R. M., French, J., & Morgan, R. M. (2021). 3D forensic science: A new field integrating 3D imaging and 3D printing in crime reconstruction. Forensic Science International: Synergy, 3, Article 100205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2021.100205
Cheng, L., Shakor, A., & Shaharudin, R. (2022). Reliability and accuracy of 2D photogrammetry: A comparison with direct measurement. Frontiers in Public Health, 9, Article 813058. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.813058
Forensic Science Regulator. (2023). DNA contamination controls: Incident scenes (FSR-GUI-0016). https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/65362ef6e839fd000d867325/FSR-GUI-0016_DNA_contamination_controls_-_incident_scenes.pdf
Forensic Science Regulator. (2024). DNA contamination controls: Forensic médical examinations (FSR-GUI-0017). https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/dna-contamination-controls-forensic-medical-examinations/dna-contamination-controls-forensic-medical-examinations-accessible
Hansard, M., Lee, S., Choi, O., & Horaud, R. (2012). Time-of-flight cameras: Principles, methods, and applications. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4658-2
Henry, P., Krainin, M., Herbst, E., Ren, X., & Fox, D. (2012). RGB-D mapping: Using Kinect-style depth cameras for dense 3D modeling of indoor environments. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 31(5), 647-663. https://doi.org/10.1177/0278364911434148
Horaud, R., Hansard, M., Evangelidis, G., & Ménier, C. (2016). An overview of depth cameras and range scanners based on time-of-flight technologies. Machine Vision and Applications, 27(7), 10805-1020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00138-016-0784-4
Khoshelham, K., & Oude Elberink, S. (2012). Accuracy and resolution of Kinect depth data for indoor mapping applications. Sensors, 12(2), 1437-1454. https://doi.org/10.3390/s120201437
Kuriyal, S. (2025). Role of physical evidences in crime scene investigation: An analysis. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention, 14(6), 37-43.
Law 101: Legal guide for the forensic expert. Chain of custody. (2023). National Institute of Justice. https://nij.ojp.gov/nij-hosted-online-training-courses/law-101-legal-guide-forensic-expert/pretrial/pretrial-motions/chain-custody
Liu, Y., Burd, H. J., & Acikgoz, S. (2025). Point cloud-based crack detection and measurement in masonry buildings subjected to settlement induced by underground construction. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 162, Article 106600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2025.106600
Park, Y.-J., & Yi, C.-Y. (2024). Time-of-flight distance sensor–based construction equipment activity detection method. Applied Sciences, 14(7), Article 2859. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14072859
Ramsey, M. (2022). Persistence of touch DNA for forensic analysis (Report No. 304991). National Institute of Justice. https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/304991.pdf
Sansoni, G., Trebeschi, M., & Docchio, F. (2009). State-of-the-art and applications of 3D imaging sensors in industry, cultural heritage, medicine, and criminal investigation. Sensors, 9(1), 568-601. https://doi.org/10.3390/s90100568
Seitz, S. M., Curless, B., Diebel, J., Scharstein, D., & Szeliski, R. (2006). A comparison and evaluation of multi-view stereo reconstruction algorithms. 2006 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR’06), 1, 519-528. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2006.19
Sheshtar, F. M., Alhatlani, W. M., Moulden, M., & Kim, J. H. (2025). Comparative analysis of LiDAR and photogrammetry for 3D crime scene reconstruction. Applied Sciences, 15(3), Article 1085. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15031085
Szeliski, R. (2011). Computer vision: Algorithms and applications. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-935-0
Termanini, R. (2023). Biomedical Defense Principles to Counter DNA Deep Hacking. Academic Press.
Van Gastel, M., Wang, W., & Verkruysse, W. (2021). Reducing the effects of parallax in camera-based pulse-oxi8metry. Biomedical Optics Express, 12(5), 2813-2824. https://doi.org/10.1364/BOE.419199
Werukanjana, P., Norapattra, P., & Sa-nga-ngam, P. (2025). Integration of Object Detection in Crime Scene Investigation. Engineering Access, 11(1), 13-23.
Wyatt, D. (2014). Practising crime scene investigation: Trace and contamination in routine work. Policing and Society, 24(4), 443-458. https://doi.org/10.1080/10439463.2013.868460
Xu, D., Xu, T., Zhang, Y., An, D., Wang, X., Wang, Q., Pan, Z., & Yue, Y. (2022). Object identification using time-of-flight depth camera and data fusion. Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics (CLEO), Technical Digest Series, JW3B.173. https://doi.org/10.1364/CLEO_AT.2022.JW3B.173
