Going back to the original research question of forensic botany having the ability to reconstruct the dynamics of trauma from high falls, there is a specific case study that provide adequate information to back it up. According to one case study, an elderly man fell down a steep hill of less than ten meters and was found dead at the bottom. Many believed that the fall was what caused his death; however, the autopsy of his remains displayed that the blunt force trauma was not significant enough to be fatal. Instead, there were signs of mitral valve prolapse, along with signs of atherosclerotic and hypertensive heart disease. When looking at the scene itself, investigators proved that there was only one access point to the hill that was within ten meters, and broken branches were consistent with his fall. The scene investigation showed that there was no struggle with another individual, leaving them to believe he lost his balance and stumbled. The use of forensic botany was supported by determining that there were leaves in his hands and clothing, both of the same genus and species, of those at the investigation scene. At the higher access points, there were no plants in the same genus or species (Aquila 2014).
With this gather data, falls from a significant height can be distinguished from falls to the ground. There are several problems that must be addressed to determine the correlation between the fall and trauma – (1) the height from which the victim has fallen, (2) establishing whether there was a push for launch, (3) whether there were objects that were impacted during the fall, (4) the point of impact, and (5) the possibilities of third-party interventions (Aquila, 2014). More often, falls from a greater height tend to have more internal trauma to the organs than external injuries as a result of the sudden deceleration of kinetic energy being transferred into the body. Falls from a medium to lower height tend to have more external traumas from blunt force trauma, along with brushes, scrapes, and abrasions. These falls have a wide range of possible skeletal fractures that follow along with blunt force trauma. Forensic scientists must also consider the reconstruction of dynamics by determining whether the fall was in the zone of loss of balance, the zone of fall, and the zone of impact (Rowbotham, 2018).
In conclusion, forensic botany is not the best use of time when trying to determine the trauma that occurred to the human remains; therefore, was not the satisfactory answer that was in mind. In this case, forensic botany is better used for providing a specific correlation between location, suspects and victims, and the elapsed time since death. In the future, it is crucial to consider a broad variety of geographical locations, as well as to examine and analyze the clothing, not trauma, to connect the fall to the surrounding botanical evidence. The best way to analyze trauma is by looking at the bone directly through forensic anthropology (Aquila, 2014).?
