Lawyer: murderer stay silent or say something. That's all I have to say your honor. Judge: I am sentencing all people present here to a life sentence for a murder (including myself, oopsie whoopsie).
@@benyji I certainly think that you'll benefit from learning forensic procedures. It might be best to look into if policing modules are available though if you're set on specifically going that route!
+boy638 It was Michael laranda, he just said," Let's say his name is charlie not that his name was charlie". He wears sci show shirts all the time and the way he brushed off the ending was super suspicious.
However, Charlie placed the bloodied wrench on the shelf of the convenience store not his store. Further more if Charlie had hurt himself then the wrench would have been with the body as there would be no way or reason to go searching for the wrench, find Bob's body, and not report it. Also a fingerprint test could dispel the idea of Bob handling the wrench. Not garanteed since even if you get prints you may not get a match. Prints smudge after all. Furthermore, even if by some chance Charlie did find the body and retrieve the wrench but not call the police out of fear he could still face charges. It's a misdemeanor according to this article(at least in Michigan): archive.freep.com/article/20130102/NEWS06/130102065/Failure-to-report-dead-body-becomes-misdemeanor-under-new-Michigan-law
+Kio Kurashi Not only do you have the perfect profile picture to make that comment, but you even seem rather competent in the field of forensics investigation :) Always nice to see someone who probably knows their stuff.
"We have a picture of the building that was robbed" -"Wait! What's that in the window? That's a reflection of a man with sunglasses with in them a reflection of the license plate of the car the getaway car bumped into. Enhance it." "Done." -"Look, those scrape marks are typical , and the paint flakes clearly show a tint of red only used in that one factory in south-east Ukraine. There's no doubt: it was the butler."
My favorite was a moment in one of the CoD games where they traced a Russian killer all the way around the world to a specific favela in Brazil based entirely on one bullet shell. The writers must have just been trying to get to trivia night at the pub but needed to check off that task as "done"
I like that you brought a better understanding to the common misconceptions of the CSI franchise. As a Forensic Science Major there's a lot that's misconstrued because of the the television series.
I want a SciShow Detective Drama series where they actually do it REALISTICALLY, and the selling point is they explain to you how they do it, rather than handwaving it like in TV shows. XD
It was nice to watch an episode that's entirely within my field, I have however 4 points/comments: 1: Although it's true that rigor mortis/livor mortis/algor mortis can be used to approximate the time after death, it is really approximate and subject to rather large variation. Good point about the ambient temperature though. 2: In Europe we use 21 STR loci for DNA analysis so the random match probability is in the tens of billions 3: the Kastle-Mayer test looks for haem as you pointed out, however as also pointed out, it utilises its oxidative properties. The problem is that any oxidising agent would work and hence some of these presumptive tests for blood would give positive results for bleach or broccoli. 4: guilty or not guilty? That's not for the forensic scientist to decide - it's the court's job
regarding nr 3 so what if it gives positive to broccoli or bleach? broccoli is green bleach is bleachy you can smell from miles away. blood is bloody you can zoom in on it and see blod cells easy sheise
The fourth point is true but sadly at least in the U.S. cases that are taken to trial are often determined by the scientists or their reports as most juries take the side of those reporting the science. This is mostly due to scientifically illiterate public and prosecutors
@@someone596 some blood stains can be latent (invisible). And to look in that detail you would need a very high power microscope that no investigator would carry with them. The test is presumptive, so it just gives an indication that I could be blood. Further testing would be done in the lab to give conclusive resutls
never thought I would say this on a Sci show video but please make a part two. Does Charlie get arrested? Did Bob deserve to die? Was there another suspect?
One thing you missed was temporal enhancement. While it is indeed impossible to enhance a single image, because data is missing, you can actually interpret what is within the pixel coverage area by gathering information from other frames. It doesn't work near as well as on the shows, but it is actually part of the basis for "upsampling", when you play a standard-def DVD in a Blu-Ray player or upsampling DVD player. If a detail, for instance, is covered by an entire pixel, it may be covered half in one pixel and half in another in the following frame. Using the data from these two frames, you can deduce more information about that detail, effectively doubling the resolution (maximum when using 2 frames. Can get greater with more frames.) It is almost entirely complex linear algebra, which video processors are specifically designed for. Of course, the problem is that it is situational and an approximation.
You better have a Part 2 on the works. How can I ever live without knowing what really happened to Bob? (Of course, many crimes go unsolved, and families have to go on with the not-knowing; very meta if planned that way)
So there seems to be a bug in this video upload? The video cuts off at 9:23. I wanted to watch the 45 minutes rest of this. Because this is fascinating. And educational. And incredibly annoying in that it''s good enough that only 9 minutes feels unfairly short leaving me wanting way more :(
+noodles6669 I submit to the court, that Bob was a loving father of three beautiful children, he played soccer with his son, and tea time with his youngest daughter. Bob worked for a small engineering firm, where he was a rising star. Bob graduated top of his class and married his college sweetheart. I tell you now that Charlie brutally murdered Bob in a vicious act of revenge. Charlie had the motive, he knew where Bob was and he followed Bob into the alley way.
+Nihil Geist objection in charlies defence bob was a hacker who hacked into the engineerings firm data base and took charlies dream job 3 years has passed and now charlie is a heroin addicte therefore he should be charged for assult UTI not for murder since he clearly was not thinking with his right mind
+saleh al-humaid Charlie is cold blooded murderer! Charlie was the one who wanted to steal the engineering firms information so he could sell it and buy more heroin. Bob has programming skills yes, but he is not a dangerous hacker, Bob was merely a custodian of the firm's database.
Yes! Just yes! I'm a university student and I study forensic science. So just yes. You are right. This dear friends is basically how it works. This video made me so happy.
The most unrealistic thing I've found in CSI-type shows is the notion that the police would ever spend that amount of time, effort, and expensive lab work investigating the deaths of mere average people who are neither rich nor famous.
+Damstraight68 Perhaps he was trying to achieve distance. Can't let anyone know it was from HIS hardware store...surely they'd question him had he not been seen on the camera first. And then he might give it away. Had to pick it up somewhere else.
+Damstraight68 I suspect the convenience store clerk. He could have murdered Bob just before his shift, left the wrench on the shelf, waited for Charlie to come in and asked Charlie to to set something else on the shelf so that it would appear on the security footage that Charlie hid the wrench. Now to find a motive.
+rctcomp Based on the current knowledge, both Charlie and the convenience store clerk are potential suspects. However, Ockham's razor favours the "Charlie is the killer" hypothesis.
+Damstraight68 I'll admit it. There is indeed sound fishy about this scenario. More specifically, why did the killer hide the weapon in Charlie's store?
The amount of excitement when I saw the title was unreal. I am a Forensic science and Chemistry major at west Virginia university, so this video made me do happy.
If what you have is a video camera, you might actually be able to enhance the picture, because you DO have a way to get more pixels: time. Granted, you'd first have to implement motion tracking to match the regions of the different images, but you'd be surprised how much you can get out of a series of blurry images.
+chh321 Perhaps link to some scholarship on the topic, which the writers might include in Part II (or the redux, if this series has been completely written already)?
thebarbes - RUclips A short search gives up this: "Motion Analysis for Image Enhancement: Resolution, Occlusion, and Transparency" by M. Irani and S. Peleg from 2002, for example. But just search for image enhancement using multiple images and you're bound to find more.
yes, and you can even enhance one picture using the fect that in real life most shapes are smooth petapixel.com/2017/11/01/photo-enhancement-starting-get-crazy/
Im finishing on my Forensic Science Bachelor degree and this video is a really nice compilation of knowledge i had to go 4 years to school to learn.New subscriber 👌👌👌
While I'm not usually one to comment on RUclips videos, I feel like I have to tell you guys at SciShow how happy I am to see you do this video. I have my Bachelor's in Forensic Biology with a minor in Chemistry and I can't tell you how often I get my field compared to the TV shows. It kills me whenever I meet someone new and upon talking about our chosen fields, the first place they go to as a reference point is Hollywood. It's even harder to then detail how vastly different things really are without completely losing them midway through. So you all did a great job of keeping your video short enough to not lose a person's attention, interesting enough to not lose their interest with some of the more tedious aspects of forensics, and informational enough to at least begin debunking some of the Hollywood magic surrounding the field of forensics. So I sincerely thank all of you at SciShow for this and every other video you do perpetuating the wonder that is the sciences!
Can we have a part 2 to this pretty please? It's so interesting and as a writer this is really helpful especially when you want to include accurate stuff without too much detail or having to do too much research because of time and other restrictions
WHAT THE HECK I NEED TO KNOW WHO COMMITTED THE MURDER ONE DOES NOT SIMPLY LEAVE US HANGING LIKE THIS FOR THE SAKE OF GAME OF THRONES!!! ...I need a part 2 stat.
As a student who studies Forensic Science at college, i can say that this is amazing to watch as it actually describes the real forensics not all the fake shit you see on TV. Next he should go through how a real crime scene is processed as its beyond complicated and shows like CSI get so unbelievable wrong!
+Brett Cox If so, that depends on what "time resolution" you measure in. If you mean that not every single neuron is always firing, sure, that's correct, but at the resolution used in current PET or fMRI machines, all parts of the brain are at least somewhat, but not equally, active at all times.
THAAANK YOU...Every time I hear "enhance" i want to throw my tv, lol. Fun side note though, if you have two or more different angles of the same thing, you can use those two photos to improve the quality of each...
It's great that somebody finally explains this :P As a 3rd year toxicology student who has to do a lot of work in forensic analysis, it gets tedious when the only people ever ask it ''Is your job like CSI?" *sigh* Great video, once again!
I've seen basically every episode of Forensic Files ever made and thought I had seen basically every episode SciShow ever made and somehow I just stumbled across this episode today. Thank you RUclips Gods.
I remember watching a forensic files and the crime lab used a smaller number of base pairs for a DNA profile but when the DNA was retested many years later, protocol had changed and the guy they convicted didn't actually match, the killer was someone he was related to.
I always feel that any programme that uses the "enhance the picture" line, must think im stupid. I remember one time it was explained by saying that the guy operating the computer was new at the job, and didn't realise that you can't do that, so he just did it anyway. It may have been a Douglas Adams book.
I wish you would have talked about finger prints. Everyone thinks finger prints is a definite way to catch someone. But what they don't tell you 1. dusting for finger prints is REALLY messy. Because of well, dusting for them. A fine powder is dusted over a finger print and it sticks to the oils that the skin as left over. Then they use scotch tape (or any other clear tape) to stick onto the dust and lift the imprint and then put the peice of tape on paper (normally in the opposite color of the dust). Lifting them can be rather tricky to get a readable one, as its very easy to mess them up or when you lift one only part of it is lifted. 2. Reading finger prints is done by humans and is open for human error. When you are checking finger prints, your looking for similarities between the one at the crime scene and at a database. When you match a characteristic between the two its called a point. There is no stranderd for how many points someone needs to find. This means they could look for at little as 5 or 50 points. A study was also done that the more emotionally charged a person was about a crime (Like the murder of children come paired to robbery) they more likely people will try to find points on finger prints to force a match. 3. Not everyone's finger print is in a database.
Criminals are supposed to think that it is possible to enhance a low resolution image taken by a street camera. Desperate and petty criminals are more likely to watch crime shows than to have real knowledge about how crime fighting works.
7:13 the liquid that is sprayed actually exists. It's called luminol, it shows chemical flouroscence, i.e it'll give a neon Blue colouration when it reacts with the iron in the haemoglobin
I've been watching CSI recently and they actually do everything you mentioned pretty accurately, the only difference is that they get body temp from the liver, and also they do some pretty insane zoom and enhancing sometimes
Oh man, this was better than an actual CSI episode...
+TheFilthyCasual
It was good, but let's not over exaggerate here.
+TheFilthyCasual I gotta know if Charlie had an accomplice.
+Anna E Well, for me CSI is terrible and this video was good so I agree with +TheFilthyCasual.
Yes you must do a part two!! I was literally on the edge of my seat lol
+TheFilthyCasual Slamming your fingers in a door is better than an actual CSI episode so that's not much of a compliment :P
Lawyer: murderersaywhat
Charlie: What?
Lawyer: That's all I have to say your honor.
Its big brain time
*iTs biG bRaiN tiMe*
Next ace attorney i swear-
MintIceWolf I was legit *just* thinking that
Lawyer: murderer stay silent or say something. That's all I have to say your honor. Judge: I am sentencing all people present here to a life sentence for a murder (including myself, oopsie whoopsie).
I did a 3 year degree in forensics and now have a Bsc(Hons) in Forensic Science. This video contained nearly a years worth of my courses information!
Hi! I am currently a computer science student, but I want to become a police officer after graduation. Would you recommend forensic science?
@@benyji I certainly think that you'll benefit from learning forensic procedures. It might be best to look into if policing modules are available though if you're set on specifically going that route!
@@benyjigood luck. Have a clean reputation and be clean of everything and your set.
That was smooth delivery on that T-shirt ad mid-way through
WhitepawWolfGaming I know right? I love their marketing strategy throughout all of CrashCourse & scishow. It always cracks me up.
Lol I know.
love this episode! hope there's part 2! Charlie needs to face justice!!!
+TKO593 Charlie is guilty!!!! Charlie bit my finger, and it really hurt.
+boy638 It was Michael laranda, he just said," Let's say his name is charlie not that his name was charlie". He wears sci show shirts all the time and the way he brushed off the ending was super suspicious.
+TKO593 You can also use a wrench to twist their nuts off.
However, Charlie placed the bloodied wrench on the shelf of the convenience store not his store. Further more if Charlie had hurt himself then the wrench would have been with the body as there would be no way or reason to go searching for the wrench, find Bob's body, and not report it. Also a fingerprint test could dispel the idea of Bob handling the wrench. Not garanteed since even if you get prints you may not get a match. Prints smudge after all. Furthermore, even if by some chance Charlie did find the body and retrieve the wrench but not call the police out of fear he could still face charges. It's a misdemeanor according to this article(at least in Michigan): archive.freep.com/article/20130102/NEWS06/130102065/Failure-to-report-dead-body-becomes-misdemeanor-under-new-Michigan-law
+Kio Kurashi
Not only do you have the perfect profile picture to make that comment, but you even seem rather competent in the field of forensics investigation :)
Always nice to see someone who probably knows their stuff.
"We have a picture of the building that was robbed"
-"Wait! What's that in the window? That's a reflection of a man with sunglasses with in them a reflection of the license plate of the car the getaway car bumped into. Enhance it."
"Done."
-"Look, those scrape marks are typical , and the paint flakes clearly show a tint of red only used in that one factory in south-east Ukraine. There's no doubt: it was the butler."
I'm almost positive that this has happened at least once
+Victor Kyrg "Elementary, dear Watson." - *puts on his sun glasses*
V K looks like I Did The Butler
My favorite was a moment in one of the CoD games where they traced a Russian killer all the way around the world to a specific favela in Brazil based entirely on one bullet shell. The writers must have just been trying to get to trivia night at the pub but needed to check off that task as "done"
Zoom and enhance cliche. *DING*
I like that you brought a better understanding to the common misconceptions of the CSI franchise. As a Forensic Science Major there's a lot that's misconstrued because of the the television series.
This should be mandatory viewing for every single crime show writer that plans on involving forensic science in any way.
Should be mandatory viewing for juries.
I want a SciShow Detective Drama series where they actually do it REALISTICALLY, and the selling point is they explain to you how they do it, rather than handwaving it like in TV shows. XD
Forensic files is nice for that. They explain how real murders where solved through forensic science. You might enjoy it as well as I did
@@socrabe How do I get these files in the first place
@@chadzahirshah2588 many are on Netflix but you can find all 14 seasons on youtube
It was nice to watch an episode that's entirely within my field, I have however 4 points/comments:
1: Although it's true that rigor mortis/livor mortis/algor mortis can be used to approximate the time after death, it is really approximate and subject to rather large variation. Good point about the ambient temperature though.
2: In Europe we use 21 STR loci for DNA analysis so the random match probability is in the tens of billions
3: the Kastle-Mayer test looks for haem as you pointed out, however as also pointed out, it utilises its oxidative properties. The problem is that any oxidising agent would work and hence some of these presumptive tests for blood would give positive results for bleach or broccoli.
4: guilty or not guilty? That's not for the forensic scientist to decide - it's the court's job
Pawel Korzeniewski
regarding nr 3 so what if it gives positive to broccoli or bleach? broccoli is green bleach is bleachy you can smell from miles away. blood is bloody you can zoom in on it and see blod cells easy sheise
The fourth point is true but sadly at least in the U.S. cases that are taken to trial are often determined by the scientists or their reports as most juries take the side of those reporting the science. This is mostly due to scientifically illiterate public and prosecutors
@@someone596 some blood stains can be latent (invisible). And to look in that detail you would need a very high power microscope that no investigator would carry with them. The test is presumptive, so it just gives an indication that I could be blood. Further testing would be done in the lab to give conclusive resutls
never thought I would say this on a Sci show video but please make a part two. Does Charlie get arrested? Did Bob deserve to die? Was there another suspect?
Cliffhanger on a youtube video. What an age we live in xD
XD
Xd
I ain't dead. I just wanted that life insurance money.
LEL
WOW
r/beetlejuicing for sure
Shut up Bob
Damn, i read "the real science of foreskins" and now i'm disappointed.
👏👏👏👏😂😂😂😂😂💜
One thing you missed was temporal enhancement. While it is indeed impossible to enhance a single image, because data is missing, you can actually interpret what is within the pixel coverage area by gathering information from other frames. It doesn't work near as well as on the shows, but it is actually part of the basis for "upsampling", when you play a standard-def DVD in a Blu-Ray player or upsampling DVD player.
If a detail, for instance, is covered by an entire pixel, it may be covered half in one pixel and half in another in the following frame. Using the data from these two frames, you can deduce more information about that detail, effectively doubling the resolution (maximum when using 2 frames. Can get greater with more frames.) It is almost entirely complex linear algebra, which video processors are specifically designed for.
Of course, the problem is that it is situational and an approximation.
You better have a Part 2 on the works. How can I ever live without knowing what really happened to Bob? (Of course, many crimes go unsolved, and families have to go on with the not-knowing; very meta if planned that way)
So there seems to be a bug in this video upload? The video cuts off at 9:23. I wanted to watch the 45 minutes rest of this. Because this is fascinating. And educational. And incredibly annoying in that it''s good enough that only 9 minutes feels unfairly short leaving me wanting way more :(
Ever heard of forensic files? It's my favorite show and that's basically what it is!
It’s supposed to be cliffhanger.
@@KnakuanaRka r/whoosh
I wouldn't be surprised if Charlie bit that guys finger.
drink15 congratulations this comment made me laugh 😂
Charlie's guilty I tell you! GUILTY!!!
+noodles6669 CHARLIE IS INNOCENT! HE'S BEEN FRAMED!
+noodles6669 I submit to the court, that Bob was a loving father of three beautiful children, he played soccer with his son, and tea time with his youngest daughter. Bob worked for a small engineering firm, where he was a rising star. Bob graduated top of his class and married his college sweetheart. I tell you now that Charlie brutally murdered Bob in a vicious act of revenge. Charlie had the motive, he knew where Bob was and he followed Bob into the alley way.
+Nihil Geist objection in charlies defence bob was a hacker who hacked into the engineerings firm data base and took charlies dream job 3 years has passed and now charlie is a heroin addicte therefore he should be charged for assult UTI not for murder since he clearly was not thinking with his right mind
+saleh al-humaid Charlie is cold blooded murderer! Charlie was the one who wanted to steal the engineering firms information so he could sell it and buy more heroin. Bob has programming skills yes, but he is not a dangerous hacker, Bob was merely a custodian of the firm's database.
+noodles6669 but this is america innocent until proven guilty
Yes! Just yes! I'm a university student and I study forensic science. So just yes. You are right. This dear friends is basically how it works. This video made me so happy.
The most unrealistic thing I've found in CSI-type shows is the notion that the police would ever spend that amount of time, effort, and expensive lab work investigating the deaths of mere average people who are neither rich nor famous.
Von Neely It is their job, but yeah, they probably don’t have the resources for everything, so they would have to prioritize the important cases.
It's not charlie, he owns a hardware store, a place with tools, but chooses to use one from a local store? Sounds fishy to me.
+Damstraight68 Perhaps he was trying to achieve distance. Can't let anyone know it was from HIS hardware store...surely they'd question him had he not been seen on the camera first. And then he might give it away. Had to pick it up somewhere else.
+Damstraight68 I suspect the convenience store clerk. He could have murdered Bob just before his shift, left the wrench on the shelf, waited for Charlie to come in and asked Charlie to to set something else on the shelf so that it would appear on the security footage that Charlie hid the wrench. Now to find a motive.
+rctcomp Based on the current knowledge, both Charlie and the convenience store clerk are potential suspects. However, Ockham's razor favours the "Charlie is the killer" hypothesis.
It's actually kinda a good idea he can make the trail run cold if he doesn't own the wepon
+Damstraight68 I'll admit it. There is indeed sound fishy about this scenario. More specifically, why did the killer hide the weapon in Charlie's store?
The amount of excitement when I saw the title was unreal. I am a Forensic science and Chemistry major at west Virginia university, so this video made me do happy.
Smoothest T-shirt plug ever.
5:17 ooh you sneaky muffin
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE. We need another episode like this!
as a med tech i love this. you should cover more of our fields. ..its very misunderstood even by other medical people
Please do a second part about Computer Forensics, not many people know it even exists. It is more interesting than human forensics imo
your username.
Zalgo?
This is why I love bones. It’s always seemed so much more real than any other show
If what you have is a video camera, you might actually be able to enhance the picture, because you DO have a way to get more pixels: time. Granted, you'd first have to implement motion tracking to match the regions of the different images, but you'd be surprised how much you can get out of a series of blurry images.
+chh321
I'd watch a video on that!
+chh321 Perhaps link to some scholarship on the topic, which the writers might include in Part II (or the redux, if this series has been completely written already)?
thebarbes - RUclips A short search gives up this: "Motion Analysis for Image Enhancement: Resolution, Occlusion, and Transparency" by M. Irani and S. Peleg from 2002, for example. But just search for image enhancement using multiple images and you're bound to find more.
+thebarbes - RUclips just google "super resolution from multiple images"
yes, and you can even enhance one picture using the fect that in real life most shapes are smooth
petapixel.com/2017/11/01/photo-enhancement-starting-get-crazy/
Im finishing on my Forensic Science Bachelor degree and this video is a really nice compilation of knowledge i had to go 4 years to school to learn.New subscriber 👌👌👌
While I'm not usually one to comment on RUclips videos, I feel like I have to tell you guys at SciShow how happy I am to see you do this video. I have my Bachelor's in Forensic Biology with a minor in Chemistry and I can't tell you how often I get my field compared to the TV shows. It kills me whenever I meet someone new and upon talking about our chosen fields, the first place they go to as a reference point is Hollywood. It's even harder to then detail how vastly different things really are without completely losing them midway through. So you all did a great job of keeping your video short enough to not lose a person's attention, interesting enough to not lose their interest with some of the more tedious aspects of forensics, and informational enough to at least begin debunking some of the Hollywood magic surrounding the field of forensics. So I sincerely thank all of you at SciShow for this and every other video you do perpetuating the wonder that is the sciences!
When I heard faceprint, I imagined a process of inking someone's face and then pressing it against a paper.
I was amused.
I had the same thought because of thumb prints
Can we have a part 2 to this pretty please? It's so interesting and as a writer this is really helpful especially when you want to include accurate stuff without too much detail or having to do too much research because of time and other restrictions
Bob scraped his knee on the wrench and then died of sudden lung cancer
👍
yas
NOT OKAY! you cant do this, We want part 2!
WHAT THE HECK I NEED TO KNOW WHO COMMITTED THE MURDER
ONE DOES NOT SIMPLY LEAVE US HANGING LIKE THIS FOR THE SAKE OF GAME OF THRONES!!!
...I need a part 2 stat.
As a student who studies Forensic Science at college, i can say that this is amazing to watch as it actually describes the real forensics not all the fake shit you see on TV. Next he should go through how a real crime scene is processed as its beyond complicated and shows like CSI get so unbelievable wrong!
Now can we do the same type of debunking for the "you only use % amount of the brain" crap?
u only use -70% of ur brain
+Car Of Doom You use all of your brain, just not all at once.
I watched something about that on Brain Games on NatGeo.
+Brett Cox If so, that depends on what "time resolution" you measure in. If you mean that not every single neuron is always firing, sure, that's correct, but at the resolution used in current PET or fMRI machines, all parts of the brain are at least somewhat, but not equally, active at all times.
Brett Cox it wus jok
Love this! Very accurate. As a college grad trying to get my first job in forensics I would love for you guys to do a crash course forensics.
THAAANK YOU...Every time I hear "enhance" i want to throw my tv, lol. Fun side note though, if you have two or more different angles of the same thing, you can use those two photos to improve the quality of each...
Definitely needs a part 2! Awesome guys!
Damn, best episode in a long time!
His hair tho, why, IM CRYINNN😭😭😭 WHO DID THIS TO YOU 💀💀
I learned so much of this in my forensics class, cool
It's great that somebody finally explains this :P
As a 3rd year toxicology student who has to do a lot of work in forensic analysis, it gets tedious when the only people ever ask it ''Is your job like CSI?" *sigh*
Great video, once again!
Blood spatter analyst? Dexter anyone
To be honest, Dexter is the closest thing to real forensics from what I have seen.
Yes! I really hope I can get into uni so I can become a Blood Spatter Analyst.
I thought I’d become more like Vince lmao
Lsnjvcs jjjjhfsbtdwhtce.Ud. chbnhfenk
(°_°)
Michael is so nice and sweet at explaining murder investigation
Yes Finally!
You've started using Celsius, I'm so proud of you Scishow.
I've seen basically every episode of Forensic Files ever made and thought I had seen basically every episode SciShow ever made and somehow I just stumbled across this episode today. Thank you RUclips Gods.
I want to go into the field of forensic science and this was amazing!
Never been so early to watch a SciShow video before!
Well, I'm gonna make myself comfy and binge watch this :)
I would like a scishow and Mythbusters collab please
that sounds fantastic. yes please.
How so?
Truly awesomely described and represented the summary of forensic science.
--Nitin Tyagi
Ph.D. Forensic Science
Can we say, just for the sake of making an awesome reference, that one of the forensic investigators is named Ema Skye?
+Jake Pillsbury How'd you guess?
+Ema Skye I figured it out... scientifically!
How've you been doing, Ema? I haven't seen you since that case with the poisoned nail polish.
Now I'm gonna look for a bloody wrench in the new game. Thank goodness so many of the victims in these games suffer blunt trauma.
That flawless plug when he was talking about the camera
Pretty sweet episode
I'm pretty sure they stick the thermometer into the liver? That's what I'd read in a Forensics book.
no... it cant be charlie! he was just a good kid, i tell you!
I really enjoy this and hope they make a part 2. Would be neat to nkow what else crime show get right and what they get wrong.
I remember watching a forensic files and the crime lab used a smaller number of base pairs for a DNA profile but when the DNA was retested many years later, protocol had changed and the guy they convicted didn't actually match, the killer was someone he was related to.
This was a really cool episode! It would be interesting to see more like this.
"Found someone dead in an alley in Chicago"
sounds familiar :(
there better be a part 2 for this one !!!
5:58
Hitler is on the bottom row.
Definitely my favourite Scishow episode so far.
Part 2
Thanks dude! This was quiet helpful!
I always feel that any programme that uses the "enhance the picture" line, must think im stupid. I remember one time it was explained by saying that the guy operating the computer was new at the job, and didn't realise that you can't do that, so he just did it anyway. It may have been a Douglas Adams book.
Great episode. I really like the longer format episodes like this one.
All we need is Phoenix Wright to present this to the court, Poor Charlie. XD
I love the fact that you guys stick to science and use the metric system
And what have we learned? Beware of people wearing SciShow shirts!!
This was a great video! It was really helpful for my project.
Part 2!! I need to know if Charlie did it
I wish you would have talked about finger prints. Everyone thinks finger prints is a definite way to catch someone. But what they don't tell you
1. dusting for finger prints is REALLY messy. Because of well, dusting for them. A fine powder is dusted over a finger print and it sticks to the oils that the skin as left over. Then they use scotch tape (or any other clear tape) to stick onto the dust and lift the imprint and then put the peice of tape on paper (normally in the opposite color of the dust). Lifting them can be rather tricky to get a readable one, as its very easy to mess them up or when you lift one only part of it is lifted.
2. Reading finger prints is done by humans and is open for human error. When you are checking finger prints, your looking for similarities between the one at the crime scene and at a database. When you match a characteristic between the two its called a point. There is no stranderd for how many points someone needs to find. This means they could look for at little as 5 or 50 points. A study was also done that the more emotionally charged a person was about a crime (Like the murder of children come paired to robbery) they more likely people will try to find points on finger prints to force a match.
3. Not everyone's finger print is in a database.
Am I the only one who read "foreskin" at first?
This is why I subscribe to SciShow. CSI in real life is far more interesting and logical than on TV. Go Mr White.....Go Science!
Criminals are supposed to think that it is possible to enhance a low resolution image taken by a street camera. Desperate and petty criminals are more likely to watch crime shows than to have real knowledge about how crime fighting works.
Fascinating. I feel inspired to write a narrative.
Sounds like the murderer was a SciShow fan. What role did this Internet science show play in the murder?
PLEASE LET THIS BE A SERIES PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEASE!!!!!!!1
Thanks for using Celsius.
this needs a part 2!
this whole video I was just saying "flash.... flash... oh look flash."
yeah whats up
fascinating! we need a part 2!!
Someone framed Charlie.
We need a part two to this
Ok who’s here from school?
best episode i've seen sooo far!
7:13 the liquid that is sprayed actually exists. It's called luminol, it shows chemical flouroscence, i.e it'll give a neon Blue colouration when it reacts with the iron in the haemoglobin
I'm into crime novels and shows.
This video is short amd informative.
Big fat LIKE!
damnit, i need answers!?! Who killed Charlie??!?!?!
I've been watching CSI recently and they actually do everything you mentioned pretty accurately, the only difference is that they get body temp from the liver, and also they do some pretty insane zoom and enhancing sometimes
Great. Another DFTBA video series: Scientifically Accurate Murder Mysteries. Or are you guys just poking the nerd fighters with a stick?
PART 2 NEEDS TO HAPPEN
Did I hear GAME OF THRONES?
Why the hell? Could he really have stopped just for GOT
i really enjoyed this! as someone who wants to have a career in forensic science, i’m kinda nervous and don’t know much, so this was v helpful!
OBJECTION!
This evidence; it er... clearly contradicts the er... witness' statement?
My new favorite episode!