A Perspective on Veterinary Forensic Pathology and Medicine in the United Kingdom

Abstract

Internationally, forensic medicine and pathology are increasingly recognized as an important aspect of work done by veterinary clinicians and veterinary pathologists. In this article, a forensic veterinary clinician, a forensic veterinary pathologist in private practice, and a forensic veterinary pathologist at a veterinary school discuss the interactions among veterinary clinicians, veterinary pathologists, and law enforcement agencies and how future interactions can be improved. The focus is on the United Kingdom, but many of the principles, challenges, and suggestions are applicable to other jurisdictions. Clinicians and pathologists require forensic training to enable them to apply their veterinary knowledge to suspected cases of animal abuse and to subsequently present their findings and conclusions to a court of law in a concise, professional, and unbiased manner, and some opportunities for such advanced training in the United Kingdom are indicated. It is important that forensic veterinary clinicians and pathologists interact in an unbiased and collegial manner to answer the questions posed by courts of law. Opportunities for improved training, communication, and interaction among forensic veterinarians, forensic scientists, and law enforcement are discussed.

A woman walking her German Shepherd dog in a park one evening was murdered—her dog the only witness. The crime scene investigators needed to know “had the victim’s dog caused any of her injuries?” and “if the dog attacked the perpetrator, what kinds of injuries would be expected? How might the victim’s dog have behaved during the attack and in the aftermath?” These questions were posed to the forensic veterinarian by the Scottish Murder Investigation Team. Upon examining the dog, the veterinarian with expertise in forensic medicine concluded that the patterns of injuries on the victim were not compatible with those made by a dog. The clinician was also able to describe to the investigators the possible behavior of the dog at the time of the crime, toward the victim and the perpetrator. The veterinarian also provided advice for future investigations that involve an animal at a crime scene, including retrieval of evidence. This is only one example of the many scenarios in the United Kingdom where the expertise of a forensic veterinary clinician (FVC) is required. Animals may be victims, evidence, or both in abuse or neglect cases, in crimes against humans, and in situations of aggression or fighting directed at other animals. Suspected illegal or inappropriate medication in sport animals, poisonings, canine attacks on humans or other animals, and examination of deceased animals are other situations where an FVC or forensic veterinary pathologist (FVP) may become involved with an investigation.

Veterinary Forensic Clinicians and Veterinary Forensic Pathologists in the United Kingdom

Presently, there are few training courses or higher qualifications specifically aimed at veterinary clinicians and veterinary pathologists carrying out forensic work. This is changing as awareness of veterinary forensics increases. The British Veterinary Forensic & Law Association (BVFLA) and the British Society of Veterinary Pathology (BSVP) are in the process of developing standards and promoting research and professional development in veterinary forensic sciences. ¹ These professional groups organize seminars and training, and they are often at the forefront of developing protocols for FVC and FVP. Membership to the BVFLA is open to anyone who is interested in veterinary forensic and legal matters and includes veterinary surgeons, lawyers, and others who are interested in dealing with litigation, mediation, arbitration, and advocacy affecting animals. This includes aspects of disease and treatment, animal management, animal welfare, and pertinent legislation.

Most veterinary clinicians involved in forensic medicine are private practitioners, although some forensic investigations are carried out by government veterinarians. The clinician may be involved in a variety of forensic cases involving living or dead livestock or companion animals. In the United Kingdom, veterinary clinicians and pathologists must acquire additional forensic training to attend crime scenes and present their findings in a court of law. Those veterinary surgeons not trained in forensic techniques may be involved in some cases but are rarely invited to a crime scene by law enforcement agencies as experienced FVCs and FVPs are preferred. The appropriate collection, documentation, and interpretation of evidence in suspected animal abuse cases are required to ensure legal and scientific credibility required by the courts. ^{3,4,9 –11,13,14} It is our opinion that this can only be achieved with proper training, appropriate resources, and exchange of information between the FVC and FVP.

In the United Kingdom, an FVC is considered to be any qualified veterinarian undertaking forensic work registered with the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS). An FVP is a qualified veterinarian with additional qualifications in pathology who is involved with forensic investigations. Currently, there is no specialty in veterinary forensics at the RCVS, nor are there specific veterinary forensic qualifications recognized by any professional bodies in the United Kingdom. However, the General Practitioners Certificate in Forensics and Law is an online continuing professional development course recognized by the European School of Veterinary Postgraduate Studies. ⁷ To become certified, candidates must do the following:

Attend the accredited modular training program

Submit 10 case studies of 500 to 1000 words

Complete the online pre- and postmodule assessment

Pass an oral examination and a multiple-choice/short-answer examination

Provide proof of additional study of areas outlined in the syllabus and other topics as assigned. Veterinary pathologists may apply for professional membership to the Royal College of Pathologists, a professional body for human pathologists.

Some veterinarians have completed an MSc degree in forensic sciences through various universities in the United Kingdom. This allows veterinarians to obtain a recognized professional qualification in forensic sciences applicable to their veterinary work. One author (S.G.N.) received an MSc degree in forensic science from the University of Staffordshire by assessment, examination, and dissertation on a part-time and distance learning scheme and has attended various human forensic courses in the United Kingdom.

As in other jurisdictions, a veterinary degree is required before specializing in veterinary pathology. Many veterinary pathologists are employed in academia or diagnostic laboratories, with fewer pathologists being self-employed as in the case of one of the authors (S.W.C.). This author is developing protocols for FVP in the United Kingdom and is currently equipping a mobile pathology unit for use at animal crime scenes. Another coauthor (H.M.M.) obtained qualifications in pathology through academia as a lecturer at the Royal Veterinary College. To the authors’ knowledge, several veterinary pathologists have obtained diplomas in forensic medicine (human), one at the University of Glasgow and the other at the Worshipful Society of Apothecaries of London in the United Kingdom.

There are no specific registries of certified FVCs or FVPs in the United Kingdom, but many are registered on the list of experts of the BVFLA or with an independent registry of expert witnesses, such as the Academy of Experts in London, to which the BVFLA is affiliated. It is the authors’ experience that many of the FVCs and FVPs are members of a variety of human professional associations and often attend human forensic courses for continuing professional development. FVCs are able to join the Chartered Society of Forensic Sciences, which is considered one of the main professional forensic organizations in the United Kingdom for medical forensics. The 2014 Wooler report, ¹⁹ an independent review of the prosecution activity of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, commented that “there is a strong case for addressing this by creating a system of formal accreditation linked to a service level agreement and to common standards in a manner analogous to other forensic providers would be beneficial.”

The Interaction of Veterinary Forensic Clinicians and Pathologists With Law Enforcement Agencies in the United Kingdom

Currently, most animal crime in the United Kingdom is investigated privately by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA), but implementation of recommendations in the Wooler report ¹⁹ may result in changes to the status quo. The function of the FVC and FVP is to assist in the investigation of a suspected crime on behalf of the court. The initial invitation to undertake the investigation may come from the agency working for the prosecution or for the defense. Most are investigations into animal welfare pertaining to the Animal Welfare Act of 2006.

FVPs in the United Kingdom are dependent on the investigating officer from organizations, such as the RSPCA, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), or Wildlife Crime, and on officers in police units for information about the crime scene and any history on the case from the referring veterinary surgeon. This includes results of radiography, blood sample analysis, physical examination, and photographs and videos of the animal when it was alive. All authors of this commentary are concerned about the lack or poor quality of evidence submitted by various types of law enforcement agencies investigating cases of suspected animal abuse. Photographs, if submitted, are often of poor quality and frequently lack a scale. Veterinary pathologists should not be expected to provide an estimate of the postmortem interval without information from the scene such as the environmental conditions (including temperature and humidity), degree of decomposition of the animal, and entomological evidence. In our experience, evidence and cadaver collection and storage techniques are inconsistent and rarely documented. To address this, one of the authors (S.W.C.), a veterinary pathologist, has recently established a mobile forensic unit similar to that operated by the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in the United States to improve the quality and credibility of evidence.

The Role of Veterinary Forensic Clinicians and Their Interaction With Veterinary Forensic Pathologists in the United Kingdom

FVCs usually become involved when agencies such as the RSPCA require a veterinarian to examine an injured, neglected, or abused animal. The responsibilities and functions of a veterinary forensic clinician and pathologist in the clinical setting are reviewed by Newbery and Munro. ¹⁴ The FVC may be invited to assist the prosecutor or defense at any stage in the investigation. When attending a crime scene, the role of the FVC may include assisting with the collection and processing of evidence, directing a medical team, and examination, triage, and treatment of animals. ⁶ Large-scale investigations pose significant challenges as the veterinary clinician is partially responsible for the logistics of the medical team in identifying, processing, examining, treating, and housing the many—possibly hundreds—of animals involved.

Live animals at the crime scene may be healthy, ill, injured, or neglected. It is the first and foremost duty of the clinician to provide medical intervention, even if it is at the expense of loss of forensic evidence. All findings from the examination and interventions for each animal must be thoroughly documented as described in this issue by Touroo and Fitch. ¹⁸

In contrast to the United States, the court in the United Kingdom does not consider an FVC as an expert qualified to perform a full necropsy and establishing the cause of death in forensic cases. However, there are instances where postmortem examinations carried out by clinicians are the only source of such information and may be open to criticism if strict protocols and procedures cannot be seen to have been followed.

Clinicians may need to consult with a veterinary pathologist regarding external examination of the body, as well as collection and storage of evidence such as blood, fluids, toxicological samples, and histopathological samples. The veterinary pathologist is tasked with carrying out a thorough postmortem examination of a deceased animal, collecting evidence, and ordering appropriate ancillary tests. A review of the veterinary forensic postmortem and the role of the veterinary forensic pathologist is provided in the textbook by Munro and Munro ¹² and is discussed in this issue of the journal. ²

An effective liaison between the FVC and FVP is only possible through good communication. This starts from the initial contact between an investigating agency and the clinician. Details of discussions should be documented. The clinician may formulate the investigative procedure with a protocol in place for dealing with live and dead animals and any subsequent samples that may be needed as evidence in the case. This is an ongoing aspect of improving the quality of forensic diligence and credibility. Discussing evidence collection and storage requirements with the pathologist will decrease errors of inappropriate sampling techniques, storage, and labeling prior to receipt by the FVP.

In our experience, it is rare for an FVP and FVC to directly communicate, although it would be helpful in most if not all circumstances. It has been suggested that providing key information could bias the interpretation of postmortem findings; however, providing this information is essential for pathologists to accurately interpret the evidence produced by the postmortem examination. Anecdotally, the authors have heard that some FVCs or the investigating agency (RSPCA, police) feel that having the veterinary pathologist in court complicates matters, as they introduce doubt into cases that would otherwise be clear-cut. Rather than competing, FVCs and FVPs should work more collaboratively and share facilities and expertise. Peer review should be the norm rather than the exception, and our evidence should be demonstrably reliable.

Opportunities for Improvement

Internationally, veterinary clinicians and pathologists are increasingly involved in forensic investigations, and veterinary forensics is a growing field with increasing challenges and opportunities. ^{9 –11,15 –17} New technologies such as telemedicine that is widely used in human medicine could be of great use in sharing information between the forensic veterinary clinician and pathologist during the investigation of the crime scene. Telemedicine is widely used in remote areas, and the principles of this can be applied in veterinary forensics. Images from the scene could be immediately sent to a clinician and pathologist by the attending agency for almost immediate opinion, advice, and feedback. There are a multitude of “apps” available for use on mobile devices, some specifically aimed at forensic use. They need further assessment and vigorous testing in a veterinary context before they can be used in court but may be useful for storage and exchange of data between the FVC and FVP. As with all technology, it must pass the test of calibration and be acceptable to the court, the prosecution, and the defense.

The current situation of veterinary forensic medicine and pathology, as well as many of the roles, responsibilities, challenges, and issues that we face in the United Kingdom, may not differ greatly from our colleagues elsewhere. However, from our perspective, interactions among investigators, FVCs, and FVPs in the United States appear to be more coordinated and functional than in the United Kingdom. ¹⁴ There is likely a common interest by veterinarians from many countries in improving the interaction among forensic veterinarians, other forensic specialists, and the law enforcement community. The International Veterinary Forensic Sciences Association (IVFSA) encourages interdisciplinary cooperation and communication among veterinarians, pathologists, law enforcement officers, barristers, and forensic scientists. The annual meeting of the IVFSA provides a venue where professionals from many countries interested in veterinary forensic sciences can learn from each other and facilitate improvements in veterinary forensics to avoid reinventing the wheel. The advent of online educational programs offering certificates or degree programs in veterinary forensic sciences, such as those offered by University of Florida and the North American Veterinary Community, increases the availability of recognized programs to an international audience.

Formation of a Veterinary Forensic Database has been proposed, ⁹ similar to the National Injuries Database used in the United Kingdom for humans, as this would greatly assist with training and development of veterinary forensics. There is no specific animal crime database in the United Kingdom, but previous cases can be accessed (LexisNexis, Sutton, UK). ⁸

The key to improving veterinary forensic medicine and pathology is education at the undergraduate level and perhaps more urgently as a postgraduate specialty. ^4,5 Overall, however, we recommend a holistic approach and inclusive dialogue among the community of those involved in animal crimes, including investigators and forensic and veterinary specialists, to improve communications and the scientific and legal credibility of the process that ultimately benefits the court and society.