Recent Developments in the Methods of Estimating Shooting Distance

Abstract

A review of developments during the past 10 years in the methods of estimating shooting distance is provided. This review discusses the examination of clothing targets, cadavers, and exhibits that cannot be processed in the laboratory. The methods include visual/microscopic examinations, color tests, and instrumental analysis of the gunshot residue deposits around the bullet entrance holes. The review does not cover shooting distance estimation from shotguns that fired pellet loads.

Full text

Mini-Review
TheScientificWorldJOURNAL (2002) 2, 573–585
ISSN 1537-744X; DOI 10.1100/tsw.2002.140
*Corresponding author. Email: alzit@netvision.net.il
©2002 with author.
573
Recent Developments in the Methods of
Estimating Shooting Distance
Arie Zeichner* and Baruch Glattstein
Division of Identification and Forensic Science, Israel Police National Headquarters,
Jerusalem 91906, Israel
Received November 7, 2001; Revised January 16, 2002; Accepted January 23, 2002; Published March 7,
2002
A review of developments during the past 10 years in the methods of estimating
shooting distance is provided. This review discusses the examination of clothing
targets, cadavers, and exhibits that cannot be processed in the laboratory. The
methods include visual/microscopic examinations, color tests, and instrumental
analysis of the gunshot residue deposits around the bullet entrance holes. The
review does not cover shooting distance estimation from shotguns that fired
pellet loads.
KEY WORDS: shooting distance, firing distance, gunshot residue, GSR, Griess test,
MGT
DOMAINS: forensics, analytical chemistry, microscopy
INTRODUCTION
The range from which a weapon has been fired is an important component in the reconstruction
of firearm-related offenses (murder, suicide, and accident). The firing distance estimation is based
on the examination of the appearance of the bullet entrance hole and the examination of gunshot
residue (GSR) patterns around the hole using various techniques. Although many authors in the
field use the phrase “shooting distance determination”, we prefer to use the term “estimation”
instead of “determination” because of the intrinsic inaccuracy of the examination. The reason for
this is a high variability of the GSR patterns from shot to shot when using the same weapon and
ammunition. By GSR, we mean all the materials emitting from the muzzle during shooting and
accompanying the projectile. These include gunpowder and primer residues as well as metal
particles from the bullet and the cartridge case. In most of the shooting cases in which there is a
need for a firing distance estimation, the victim or the victim’s clothing has to be examined. In
many cases, bullets hit surfaces of various parts of the human body directly without passage
through any intermediate medium. In some instances, other exhibits that happened to be targets of
shooting have to be examined. Such exhibits may be cars, walls, doors, windows, furniture, etc.
Many of them cannot be processed in the laboratory.
In this review, we will report on the recent developments (in about the last 10 years, since
the two comprehensive treatises on the subject were published[1,2]) in the methods of

Zeichner and Glattstein: Estimating Shooting Distance TheScientificWorldJOURNAL (2002) 2, 573-585
574
visual/microscopic, color test, and instrumental analysis of the entrance bullet holes and GSR
patterns around them for shooting distance estimation. A comprehensive list of references on
advances made in the field over the last 3 years can be found elsewhere[3]. We will not deal here
with shooting distance estimation for targets shot by pellet loads from shotguns. In our view,
there were no significant developments recently in this area, which is described comprehensively
elsewhere[1,4,5].
VISUAL AND COLOR TESTS
Clothing Targets
GSR patterns around the entrance bullet holes consist of propellant residues, metallic residues
from bullets (e.g., lead and copper), as well as primer residues. These residues can be detected
visually/microscopically if the target cloth is of a light enough color. However, in most of the
cases, there is a need for color chemical tests or instrumental analysis to assess the GSR patterns
around the entrance bullet holes.
In a series of three articles, Dillon reports[6,7,8] on the modified Griess test (MGT) as a
color test for nitrites and recommends a protocol for GSR
examinations in muzzle-to-target-
distance estimations. In the original procedure reported by Walker[9], Griess reaction is used. In
this test, Griess reagent consisting of sulphanilic acid and α-naphthyl amine in acetic acid
aqueous solution is used. The detection of free nitrite ions is based on the formation of diazonium
ion from sulphanilic acid and nitrite. The diazonium ion couples with α-naphthyl amine to form
an orange azo dye. In the modified test, Dillon proposes to use α-naphthol instead of α-naphthyl
amine (the Walker test) or N-(1-naphthyl)-ethylenediamine dihydrochloride. According to him,
both of the replaced reagents are carcinogenic. However, in the literature on the chemical safety
data[10], N-(1-naphthyl)-ethylenediamine dihydrochloride is not reported as a carcinogen. In fact,
we are using this reagent with sulphanilamide routinely for “our” MGT [11,12,13,14]. MGT does
not refer to one specific, defined test. In fact, it appears that every author who introduces any
modification to the original Griess test calls it MGT. The proposed protocol[8] includes visual,
microscopic, and chemical (lead and nitrites) tests. It recommends first conducting the MGT and
then the sodium rhodizonate test for lead. The reason for this sequence is because the rhodizonate
is applied directly on the target. Dillon contends that particulate lead is a random nonreproducible
phenomenon, whereas the presence of vaporous lead is quite significant in that it is found
principally at wounds from closer ranges.
Glattstein et al. reported on an improved method of determining shooting distance estimation
from clothing[12]. The novel part of the method includes transferring total nitrite (nitrite ions and
unburned smokeless powder residues) from the target to an adhesive lifter. After the transfer, lead
and copper deposits around the bullet entrance hole are partially extracted consecutively to the
Benchkote (Whatman) filter papers moistened with diluted acetic acid and ammonia solutions,
respectively. Their patterns are visualized by rhodizonate (lead) and rubeanic acid (copper). The
MGT is carried out after alkaline hydrolysis of the smokeless powder residues on the adhesive
lifter. The purpose of lifting gunpowder residues from the shot cloth target is to eliminate
interference caused by conducting MGT directly on the target, with or without the hydrolysis
step. It was found that almost a complete transfer of gunpowder residues to the adhesive lifter
was obtained, and the vaporous lead and copper are not transferred to the adhesive lifter. The
widely used MGT detects only free nitrite ions formed from the combustion of smokeless
powder. The unburned smokeless powder particles cannot be detected by this method. Alkaline
hydrolysis prior to the MGT has been proposed to increase the sensitivity of the test for
gunpowder residues[15]. The purpose of the alkaline hydrolysis is to cause disproportionation of
the unburned nitrocellulose and nitroglycerine (the main components of the smokeless powder) to

Zeichner and Glattstein: Estimating Shooting Distance TheScientificWorldJOURNAL (2002) 2, 573-585
575
FIGURE 1. A test shot on a white cotton cloth; ammunition 9-mm Winchester super-X FMJ, distance 50 cm. A color photograph of
the target after application of MGT: (left) without the hydrolysis prior to MGT, (right) with the hydrolysis prior to MGT.
carbonyl compounds and free nitrite ion, thus increasing the available amount of nitrite ions for
MGT. The importance of the hydrolysis step in the gunpowder residue visualization is
demonstrated in Fig. 1. As can be seen in this type of ammunition (Winchester Super-X), the
difference in patterns obtained with and without hydrolysis is very great. Thus, in such cases, it is
very important to carry out this step prior to the MGT. However, not all ammunition types
demonstrate such a difference. Before starting the estimation of the shooting distance, it is desirable
to determine that the hole is a bullet entrance hole. This can be done by applying methods for
chemical visualization of lead (rhodizonate) and copper (rubeanic acid) at the perimeter of the hole.
However, it was observed that the color tests do not give positive results in all shooting cases,
although it was known that a lead bullet or a full metal jacket (FMJ, brass) bullet was used.
In recent years, several ammunition companies have introduced lead-free ammunition. This
technology uses lead-free primers and totally metal-jacketed (TMJ) bullets. The lead bullet core is
encased in a metal alloy jacket, thus no lead is exposed at the base where hot gases can vaporize
lead (as in conventional full jacketed or lead bullets). In such cases, because lead is not a
component of the GSRs, lead patterns cannot be detected for firing distance determination. The
Zincon reagent that gives a blue-colored complex with elements zinc and titanium was proposed
for firing distance estimation in the case of lead-free ammunitions that have zinc and titanium in
the primer[16]. As a side reaction, copper, which among other metals comes from the projectiles
or cartridge cases, also forms a blue-colored complex with the reagent.
A modified sheet-printing method for the detection of lead patterns was reported by
Stahling[17]. Instead of using cellulose hydrate foil, a plastic-based photographic paper was used
as a substrate for transfer of metallic gunshot elements from cloth.
Alakija et al.[18] studied the damage to various cotton clothing targets from different
firearms as a function of shooting distance. They found, for example, that .22-caliber pistols
always produced “stellate” (“cruciform”) tears at tight contact and loose contact ranges;
nonstellate defects were produced by this pistol at ranges of 2 cm or greater. Stellate defects were
not produced by any studied firearm at ranges greater than 8 cm.

Zeichner and Glattstein: Estimating Shooting Distance TheScientificWorldJOURNAL (2002) 2, 573-585
576
FIGURE 2. The effect of machine washing on the total nitrite visualization on a white cotton cloth; ammunition 9-mm parabellum
GFL FMJ, 25-cm shooting distance. Black and white photograph of the target: (left) the target without washing, (right) after washing.
Persistence of GSR on Clothing
Several studies dealt with possible effects of various factors on clothing items after shooting with
regards to the shooting distance estimation[8,19,20,21,22,23]. Most of these found that
mechanical handling of clothing or soaking them in blood, still water, or running water
considerably decreases the amount of GSR around the bullet entrance holes. Thus Emonet et
al.[22] report that the medical manipulations of clothing lead to an increase of the loss of visible
and nitrated GSR of about 30 to 40%. Even et al.[19], on the other hand, did not find a significant
effect of soaking in still water on the obtained GSR patterns. Also L. Haag[20] found that a static
extraction procedure utilizing a 12- to 24-h immersion in an aqueous blood-removal solution does
not alter significantly the GSR patterns on the shot cloth targets. In casework, sometimes requests
are received to estimate shooting distance from clothing items that underwent machine washing.
Vinokurov et al.[23] conducted a study to assess the effect of machine washing or brushing of
clothing items on GSR patterns (gunpowder residues and lead and copper deposits) around bullet
entrance holes. Results show that those treatments decrease considerably (machine washing more
than brushing) the amount and density of GSR. However, for close shooting distances, not all of
the GSR deposits are removed. Remaining patterns can be visualized by specific color reactions
and used for shooting distance estimation. Figs. 2 and 3 illustrate some of the results. This study
shows that the absence of GSR patterns around the bullet entrance hole is a clear indication that
shooting was not at close range.
Exhibits that Cannot be Processed in the Laboratory
In our experience, casework mostly involves examining exhibits for shooting distance estimation
that are the victims’ clothing. Sometimes, however, we are asked to determine shooting distance

Zeichner and Glattstein: Estimating Shooting Distance TheScientificWorldJOURNAL (2002) 2, 573-585
577
FIGURE 3. The effect of brushing on the total nitrite visualization on a white polyester cloth. Same ammunition and distance as in
Fig. 2. Black and white photograph of the target: (left) the target without brushing.
from exhibits that cannot be processed in the laboratory, such as cars, walls, doors, windows, or
furniture (made of wood, plastic, leather or fabric).
Glattstein et al.[13] examined the feasibility of the method developed for clothing[12]
(described above) for additional materials: galvanized steel, glass, plywood, and high-pressure
laminated plastic sheets of melamine and phenolic materials (Formica). It was found for all tested
target materials and shooting distances that the amounts and densities of the discharge residues
detected visually (without any treatment) were considerably smaller than those obtained after
chemical treatments. This effect was particularly pronounced in the case of glass, where
blackening could hardly be observed even from contact shooting ranges. Total nitrite patterns
visualized on the lifters applied on the various targets were similar to those
obtained on the lifters
from the cotton cloth at relatively short shooting distances, i.e., up to about 25 cm. The patterns
were similar in terms of the amount of particles and their density around the entrance bullet hole.
Fig. 4 demonstrates this result on plywood and on glass. As shooting distances become greater,
the number and density of nitrite spots on the lifters from all the tested materials targets decrease
considerably in comparison to the lifters from the cotton cloth for the same distance, the plywood
target being the most similar. Based on the obtained results in this study, the recommended
method for determining shooting distance estimation from the objects that cannot be processed in
the laboratory is as follows:
1. Application of the adhesive lifter to the target.
2. Visualization of the lead deposits on the target by the rhodizonate test. It is recommended
to photograph the lead pattern because of the instability of the color.
3. Visualization of the copper deposits on the target by the rubeanic test.
4. Visualization of the total nitrite on the lifter in the laboratory.

Zeichner and Glattstein: Estimating Shooting Distance TheScientificWorldJOURNAL (2002) 2, 573-585
578
FIGURE 4. Black and white photograph of the visualized total nitrite patterns on the adhesive lifters applied to various target
materials after shooting (ammunition 9-mm parabellum FMJ, distance 25 cm). (a) White cotton cloth. (b) Plywood. (c) Glass.

Zeichner and Glattstein: Estimating Shooting Distance TheScientificWorldJOURNAL (2002) 2, 573-585
579
FIGURE 4c.
To improve the accuracy of the shooting distance estimation, test firings should be carried out
using target materials as similar as possible to the materials of the examined evidence. If there is
no possibility of conducting test firing at a material similar to the evidence, then test firings
should be carried out on cotton cloth. In such a case, the visualized pattern of the total nitrite will
be sufficient to demonstrate that the shooting distance on the evidence was equal to or below the
shooting distance at which similar visualized patterns of the total nitrite are obtained on the cotton
cloth
.
Human Body as a Target
In many shooting cases, bullets hit surfaces of various parts of the human body (mostly the head)
directly, without passage through any intermediate medium. For the purpose of assessing the
shooting distance, most of the forensic literature describes only visual/microscopic methods for
examination of the appearance of the wound and discharge particle patterns around it[1,4,24].
Shooting distances on human body surfaces can be divided roughly into four ranges: contact,
near contact range, intermediate range, and distant range[1,4]. In contact wounds, the muzzle of
the weapon is held against the surface of the body at the time of discharge. The appearance of
tearing, scorching, soot, or the imprint of the muzzle characterizes contact wounds. In near
contact wounds, the muzzle of the weapon is not in contact with the skin, being held a short
distance away (a few centimeters). At near contact range, a wide zone of powder soot overlaying
seared blackened skin surrounds the entrance wound. An intermediate range gunshot wound is
one in which the muzzle of the weapon is held away from the body at the time of discharge, yet is
sufficiently close so that gunpowder grains expelled from the muzzle along with the bullet
produce “powder tattooing” of the skin. Microscopic examination is conducted to verify the

Zeichner and Glattstein: Estimating Shooting Distance TheScientificWorldJOURNAL (2002) 2, 573-585
580
presence of partially burned or unburned gunpowder particles. In the distant range, no damage
effects or discharge particle patterns are observed around the gunshot wound.
Although sodium rhodizonate and rubeanic acid reagents were proposed for the visualization
of lead and copper patterns around the gunshot wounds[25,26], in practice, the authors are not
aware of any chemical tests that are conducted for the estimation of shooting distance on
cadavers.
As in cases of clothing and other objects, many problems can be encountered when the
assessment of shooting distance on cadavers is based merely on visual and microscopic
examinations. The typical problems are[1,4,24]:
1. When small-caliber ammunition (short .22 or .32 Smith & Wesson) is used, the
typical features of contact gunshot wounds may be absent.
2. Gunpowder tattooing may not be produced on the skin in hairy parts of a body, and
gunpowder particles will be hardly discernible.
3. Whenever shots were inflicted through glass panes, glass particles may produce
visual patterns that can be similar to the gunpowder tattooing around a gunshot
wound[3,6].
4. The discoloration characteristic of a decomposed body can be similar to the color of
soot. Furthermore, it may also mask tattoo marks.
5. In rare instances, insects may produce patterns that resemble gunpowder tattooing on
cadavers.
An additional unique problem pertaining only to the human body is that there is no possibility of
conducting test firing on the same material as in the case of other exhibits. The proposed solution
for test firings was to use various simulant materials. Recommendations for those materials were
based on the studies comparing those materials to the skin of some animals, like rabbits or
pigs[27]. The conclusions of this work were that blotter paper is an acceptable skin simulant at
ranges less than 18 in. Beyond this distance, the patterns on the blotter paper were smaller than
those on the rabbits, meaning that the blotter paper was less sensitive. In a quite exceptional
study, M. Haag and Wolberg conducted experiments on various simulant materials in comparison
to live human skin[28]. The comparison was based on various visual and microscopic
characteristics (without chemical treatment) of the GSR on the targets. A specially designed
experimental setup made it possible to expose part of an arm to the residues. Kevlar vests were
laid over each side of the arm to protect the remaining portions of the arm from the residues,
allowing for additional shots on fresh skin. The study was carried out at ranges of 2 to 4 ft. They
found that the simulants that most closely represent the human skin are fresh pig skin, twill jean
cloth, Whatman #1 blotter paper, and Whatman #10 Benchkote. Fresh pig skin was the most
accurate overall simulant tested, while the twill jean and blotter paper were more accurate from 2
to 3 ft, and the Benchkote was more accurate at 3 to 4 ft.
Glattstein et al.[14] examined the feasibility of applying adhesive lifters to the entrance
bullet wound on human body surfaces to visualize the total nitrite patterns, as was reported for
clothing and other exhibits above[12,13]. Figs. 5, 6, 7, and 8 demonstrate two cases in which it
was impossible to observe visually/microscopically gunpowder residues around bullet entrance
holes in the cadavers; however, total nitrite patterns were visualized on the adhesive lifters. In the
case of a decomposed body (Fig. 5), a gunshot wound was found in the neck. Due to the blackish
discoloration of the skin, the presence of soot or gunpowder tattooing could not be observed.
However, the visualized total nitrite pattern of about 5 cm in diameter (Fig. 6) indicated a close-
range shot. In the second case (Fig. 7), an entrance gunshot wound was found to the left parietal
of the cadaver. No gunpowder particles were observed visually on hair before shaving, and no

Zeichner and Glattstein: Estimating Shooting Distance TheScientificWorldJOURNAL (2002) 2, 573-585
581
FIGURE 5. The head of a decomposed corpse; the arrow indicates the gunshot wound.
FIGURE 6. Black and white photograph of the visualized total nitrite pattern on the adhesive lifter applied to the gunshot wound of
Fig. 5. The location of the bullet entrance hole is marked with a circle.

Zeichner and Glattstein: Estimating Shooting Distance TheScientificWorldJOURNAL (2002) 2, 573-585
582
FIGURE 7. Gunshot wound at the head after shaving.
gunpowder tattooing was observed after shaving. The total nitrite pattern (Fig. 8) that was
visualized on the adhesive lifter (that was applied before shaving) indicated a close-shot range.
Stahling and Karlsson reported a similar method for lifting and visualizing gunpowder residues
from skin[29].
INSTRUMENTAL METHODS
X-ray fluorescence (XRF), atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS), and neutron activation
analysis (NAA) are the instrumental methods used by some laboratories to estimate the range of
shooting[2].
In recent years, with the advent of the micro-XRF technology and its increasing use in
forensic science for the elemental analysis of trace evidence, some of the laboratories examined
its feasibility for shooting distance estimation[30,31]. Flynn et al.[30] evaluated the technique
(Kevex Omicron micro-XRF) for the elemental analysis of GSR. They found that micro-XRF can
detect GSR particles on the target substrate if the shooting distance is less than 30 cm. At greater
distances, they could not detect GSR particles by this technique around the bullet wipe.
Charpentier and Desrochers[31] used a similar instrument to analyze GSR from lead-free
ammunition in which the lead in the primer was replaced with strontium and the bullet was plated

Zeichner and Glattstein: Estimating Shooting Distance TheScientificWorldJOURNAL (2002) 2, 573-585
583
FIGURE 8. Black and white photograph of the visualized total nitrite pattern on the adhesive lifter applied on the hairy area of the
wound (before shaving) in the Fig. 7. The location of the bullet entrance hole is marked with a circle.
with copper (TMJ). They found that the method allows the detection and quantification of
strontium residues on the target up to a distance of 45 cm.
Brown et al.[32,33] studied the feasibility of an automated image analysis (IA) technique for
shooting distance estimation. In the first study[32], they developed an IA procedure to measure
the amount (number and area) of GSR particles around a gunshot wound. Measurements of GSR
from test firings into goat hide were enhanced by using Alizarin Red S to stain the barium and
lead components. A comparison was made between the amount of GSR detected on the stained
skin sections and backscatter electron micrographs of the same sections. No significant
differences were found between the two. Preliminary results indicated that there was a nonlinear,
decreasing relationship between firing range and the amount of deposited GSR and that there was
significant variation in the amount of GSR from shot to shot for firing ranges up to 20 cm. The
second study[33] using the IA method was conducted on pig skin with a Ruger .22 semiautomatic
rifle with CCI solid point for shooting ranges between contact and 45 cm.
CONCLUSION
Recent developments in the methods of shooting distance estimation were primarily concentrated
on the proposed protocols for combining color tests for metal deposits (mostly lead and copper)
and for gunpowder residues around the bullet entrance holes. Lifting of the gunpowder residues
by an adhesive lifter from the targets and applying the color test (Griess test or its modifications)
on the lifter improves the methodology for clothing and introduces a new methodology for
powder patterns on the human body and on exhibits that cannot be processed in the laboratory.
Applying alkaline hydrolysis of the gunpowder residues before the color test may improve the
results dramatically for some brands of ammunition. Specific color tests and the application of
micro-XRF technique may assist in estimating shooting distances when lead-free ammunition is
used. Fresh pig skin was found to be the most accurate simulant for human skin with regards to
visual/microscopic examinations of the GSR residues.

Zeichner and Glattstein: Estimating Shooting Distance TheScientificWorldJOURNAL (2002) 2, 573-585
584
In spite of those developments, some major inherent problems remain unsolved. Among
these are, first, the maximum shooting distance that may be estimated is limited by the maximum
range of GSR particles reaching the target and, second, the large variation in the amount of GSR
from shot to shot is reflected in poor precision of the methodology. There is also a need to
continue research on the assessment of the most accurate simulant materials for human skin with
regards to all possible tests for shooting distance estimation.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to express their gratitude to A. Chaikovsky for his photography
assistance.
REFERENCES
1. Sellier, K. (1991) Shot Range Determination. Forensic Sci Prog 6. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
2. Lichtenberg, W. (1990) Method for the determination of shooting distance. Forensic Sci. Rev. 2(1), 38–62.
3. Koffman, A., Zeichner, A., Glattstein, B., Kahana, T., and Zadok, E. (2001) Firearms report review paper
1998-2001. 13
th
Interpol Forensic Science Symposium, Lyon, France, Oct. 2001.
4. Di Maio, V.G.M. (1999) Gunshot Wounds: Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics and Forensic
Techniques. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
5. Rowe, W.F. (2000) Firearms, range. In Encyclopedia of Forensic Sciences. Academic Press, New York.
6. Dillon, J.H. (1990) The modified Griess test: a chemically specific chromophoric test for nitrite
compounds in gunshot residues. AFTE J. 22(3), 243–250.
7. Dillon, J.H. (1990) The sodium rhodizonate test: a chemically specific chromophoric test for lead in
gunshot residues. AFTE J. 22(3) 251–256.
8. Dillon, J.H. (1990) A protocol for gunshot examination in muzzle to target distance determination. AFTE
J. 22(3), 257–274.
9. Walker, J.T. (1940) Bullet holes and chemical residues in shooting cases. J. Crim. Law Criminol. 31,
497–521.
10. Aldrich Chemical Company, Inc., Material Safety Data Sheet for N-(1-Naphthyl)ethylenediamine
dihydrochloride, November 2001-January 2002.
11. Zeichner, A. and Glattstein, B. (1986) Improved reagents for firing distance determination. J. Ener. Mat.
4, 187–198.
12. Glattstein, B., Vinokurov, A., Levin, N., and Zeichner, A. (2000) Improved method for shooting distance
estimation. I. Bullet holes in clothing. J. Forensic Sci. 45(4), 801–806.
13. Glattstein, B., Zeichner, A., Vinokurov, A., and Shoshani, E. (2000) Improved method for shooting
distance estimation. II. Bullet holes in objects that cannot be processed in the laboratory. J. Forensic Sci.
45(5), 1000–1008.
14. Glattstein, B., Zeichner, A., Vinokurov, A., Levin, N., Kugel, C., and Hiss, Y. (2000) Improved method
for shooting distance estimation. III. Bullet holes in cadavers. J. Forensic Sci. 45(6), 1243–1249.
15. Ravreby, M. (1985) Determination of firing distance by total nitrite. International Congress on
Techniques for Criminal Identification and Counter Terrorism, Identa-85, Jerusalem, Israel.
16. Beijer, R. (1994) Experience with zincon, a useful reagent for the determination of firing range with
respect to lead free ammunition. J. Forensic Sci. 39(4), 981–987.
17. Stahling, S. (1999) Modified sheet printing method for the detection of lead in shooting distance. J.
Forensic Sci. 44(1), 179–181.
18. Alakija, P., Dowling, G.P., and Gunn, B. (1998) Stellate clothing defects with different firearms,
projectiles, ranges and fabrics. J. Forensic Sci. 43(6), 1148–1152.
19. Even, H., Bergman, P., Springer, E., and Klein, A. (1988) The effects of water-soaking on firing distance
estimations. J. Forensic Sci. 32(3), 319–327.
20. Haag, L.C. (1991) A method for improving the Griess and sodium rhodizonate tests for GSR patterns on
bloody garments. AFTE J. 23(3), 808–815.
21. Bonfanti, M. and Gallusser, A. (1995) Problems encountered in the detection of gunshot residues. AFTE
J. 27(2), 105–122.
22. Emonet, F., Bonfanti, M., and Gallusser, A. (1999) Etude des phenomes physique affectant les residues
de tir et engenders lors de la manipulation des habits par le personnel medical. Can. Soc. Forensic Sci. J.
32(1), 1–13.

Zeichner and Glattstein: Estimating Shooting Distance TheScientificWorldJOURNAL (2002) 2, 573-585
585
23. Vinokurov, A., Zeichner, A., Glattstein, B., Levin, N., Koffman, A., and Rozengaten, A. (2001) Machine
washing or brushing of clothing and the influence on shooting distance estimation. J. Forensic Sci. 46(4),
928–933.
24. Heard, B.J. (1997) Handbook of Firearms and Ballistics: Examining and Interpreting Forensic Evidence.
John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, England.
25. Stone, I.C. and Petty, C.S. (1991) Interpretation of unusual wounds caused by firearm. J. Forensic Sci.
36, 736–740.
26. Molchanov, V.I., Popov, V.L., and Kalmykov, K.N. (1990) Gunshot Wounds and their Forensic
Medicine Examination. Leningrad: “Meditzina,” (in Russian). p. 169.
27. Di Maio, V.J.M., Stone, I.C., and Petty, C.S. (1976) An experimental study of powder tattooing of the
skin. J. Forensic Sci. 21(2), 367.
28. Haag, M. and Wolberg, G. (2000) Scientific examination and comparison of skin simulants for distance
determination. AFTE J. 32(2), 136–142.
29. Stahling, S. and Karlsson, T. (2000) A method for collection of gunshot residues from skin and other
surfaces. J. Forensic Sci. 45(6), 1299–1302.
30. Flynn, J., Stoilovic, M., Lennard, C., Prior, I., and Kobus, H. (1998) Evaluation of X-ray
microfluorescence spectrometry for the elemental analysis of firearm discharge residues. Forensic Sci.
Int. 97, 21–36.
31. Charpentier, B. and Desrochers, C. (2000) Analysis of primer residue from lead free ammunition by x-
ray microfluorescence. J. Forensic Sci. 45(2), 447–452.
32. Brown, H., Cauchi, D.M., Holden, J.L., Wrobel, H., and Cordner, S. (1999) Image analysis of gunshot
residue on entry wounds. I. The technique and preliminary study. Forensic Sci. Int. 100, 163–177.
33. Brown, H., Cauchi, D.M., Holden, J.L., Allen, F.C.L., Cordner, S., and Thatcher, P. (1999) Image
analysis of gunshot residue on entry wounds. II. A statistical estimation of firing range. Forensic Sci. Int.
100, 179–186.
This article should be referenced as follows:
Zeichner, A. and Glattstein, B. (2002) Recent developments in the methods of estimating shooting distance.
TheScientificWorldJOURNAL 2, 573–585.
Handling Editor:
Walter F. Rowe, Principal Editor for Forensics — a domain of TheScientificWorldJOURNAL.