目的 探索剪切痕迹形态特征与造痕工具刃口形态结构之间的关系,建立一套根据现场剪切断头种类与细节特征推断造痕工具种类的方法。方法 选用10个品牌24种钳、剪工具共76把,采用直剪的方式,分别剪切紫铜丝、铝丝、铅丝、贯通地线、铁路线缆,比较观察剪切断头的侧面形态、峰角大小、立顶高度、立顶形态以及坡面反映出的刃侧加工花纹特征等,总结分析痕迹特征与造痕工具结构之间的内在关联性。结果 不同刃口形态的工具剪切断头侧面形态有较明显区别,工具刃侧不同的加工花纹会在断头坡面上有不同的特征反映,不同种类工具的刃顶厚度、刃顶形态、咬合角对剪切断头立顶高度、立顶形态及断头峰角大小有影响。结论 综合利用剪切断头侧面形、立顶高度、立顶形态、峰角大小、断头坡面上的工具刃侧加工花纹印压痕迹,同时结合现场具体环境可以有效提高工具种类推断结果的准确度与可靠性。
Abstract
Objective To explore the relationship between cut marks’ characteristics and blade shapes of the tools that produce the marks, so as to establish an accurate and practical method to infer the type of tools based on macroscopical and microscopic manifestations of the cut marks. Methods 76 pliers and scissors from 10 brands of 24 specifications were selected to vertically shear the wires of copper, aluminum or steel, plus the cable that is specific for running through ground or railway communication. The comparison was made on the cut marks at their profiles, pinnacled angles, heights and forms of the top planes, as well as the enantiomorphous impressions of processed lines (or patterns) from different tools. Consequently, the intrinsic relevance was systematically and overall summarized between the cut marks and involved tools. Results There are obvious differences in the profiles of various broken ends cut by those tools bearing diverse blade edges. Both pinnacled angles and top planes of the cut marks are related to the blades’ specific processed lines (or patterns). And the impact was observed from the different tools of various blade-edges’ thickness/form and the occluding angles to the cut marks at their broken ends’ diameters (maximum opening distances) and patterns as well as the size of the pinnacled angles. In a word, all those characteristics (so far as observable and measurable) can be used to infer the types of tools. Conclusion In comprehensive utilization of the cut marks at their broken ends’ profiles, pinnacled angles, sizes, forms and the impressions of the blades’ processed lines (patterns), the types of tools can be accurately and reliably inferred with overall consideration of the concrete field conditions.
关键词
工具痕迹 /
钳剪痕迹 /
刃口形态 /
剪切断头
{{custom_keyword}} /
Key words
tool mark evidence /
cut mark /
blade occlusion /
cut broken end
{{custom_keyword}} /
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1] 于小勇,董必强,刘光宙. 液压钢筋钳钳剪痕迹的识别[J]. 刑事技术,2012(1):60-62.
[2] 魏育新,徐少辉,赵林森. 钢丝钳剪切痕迹研究[J]. 中国人民公安大学学报(自然科学版),2015(3):5-10.
[3] 敖琪,谭铁君. 断线钳剪切痕迹特征的实验研究[J]. 刑事技术,2000(6):15-16.
[4] 刘代富,张书杰,梁定武,等.不同类型线缆剪剪切痕迹的区别[J]. 刑事技术,2004(1):18-20.
[5] 魏晓峰. 钳具加工花纹对钳剪线条痕迹的影响[J]. 刑事技术,2009(4):57-59.
[6] 刘岩,王明直. 利用铣纹痕迹数量和角度判断钢丝钳剪切位置[J]. 刑事技术,2011(6):38-40.
[7] 郭勇. 钢丝钳不同剪切方式留痕规律的研究[J]. 四川警察学院学报,2010(2):50-57.
[8] 刘裕庞,孙佳龙. 断线钳和手持式液压钳剪切痕迹研究[J]. 广东公安科技,2016(1):27-30.
[9] 夏小玲,刘伟平. 液压断线钳与普通断线钳剪切痕迹的检验及应用[J]. 中国司法鉴定,2010(5):52-55.
[10] 王震,张书杰,赵相,等. 凹型鹰嘴断线剪与钢丝剪的痕迹特征比较研究[J]. 警察技术,2010(6):36-38.
[11] 崔军,杨宇波,王泳辉,等. 利用剪切痕迹特征推断剪切工具 [J]. 刑事技术,2015,40(4):272-274.
[12] 张书杰. 工具痕迹学[M]. 北京:中国人民公安大学出版社,2007:148-149.
{{custom_fnGroup.title_cn}}
脚注
{{custom_fn.content}}
基金
公安部重点研究计划项目(No.2014JSYJA020)
{{custom_fund}}