Olay ve Olay Yeri Rekonstrüksiyonu

Grassberger M, Verhoff MA. Klinisch-forensische Fotodokumentation. Klinisch-forensische Medizin, Springer, Vienna, 2013, pp. 127–138

Luhmann T, Robson S, Kyle S, Boehm J. Close-Range Photogrammetry and 3D Imaging. 2nd edition. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, 2014.

Buck U, Naether S, Ra¨ss B, Jackowski C, Thali MJ. Accident or homicide – Virtual crime scene reconstruction using 3D methods. Forensic Science International, 2013; 225: 75–84

Michienzi R, Meier S, Ebert LC, Martinez RM, Sieberth T. Comparison of forensic photo-documentation to a photogrammetric solution using the multi-camera system “Botscan”. Forensic Science International, 2018; 288: 46–52

Jackson ARW, Jackson JM. The Crime Scene. In Forensic Science, 4 th edition, Pearson Education, Harlow, United Kingdom, 2017: 18-64

Buck U, Albertini N, Naether S, Thali MJ. 3D documentation of footwear impressions and tyre tracks in snow with high resolution optical surface scanning. Forensic Science International, 2007; 171: 157–164

Thalia MJ, Brauna M, Dirnhofer R. Optical 3D surface digitizing in forensic medicine: 3D documentation of skin and bone injuries. Forensic Science International, 2003; 137: 203–208

Parmar P. Reconstruction of crime – A review. IAIM, 2015; 2(10): 49-53.

Chisum WJ, Crime Reconstruction. In The Forensic Laboratory Handbook: Procedures and Practice. eds: Ashraf Mozayani, Carla Noziglia. Humana Press, New Jersey, 2006: 63-77

Lee H, ed. Crime Scene Investigation. Taoyuan, Taiwan: Central Police University Press, 1994: 1

Saukko P, Knight B. Knight’s Forensic Pathology. CRC Press, e book, 2016: 249

Ogle Jr RR. Crime Scene Investigation and Reconstruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2004: 251–252

Heintz ME. The Digital Divide and Courtroom Technology: Can David Keep up With Goliath? Federal Communications Law Journal, 2002; 54:567-589

Schofield D. Playing with evidence: Using video games in the courtroom. Entertainment Computing, 2011; 2: 47–58

Schofield D. Technology corner visualising forensic data: Evidence guidelines (Part 2). Journal of Digital Forensics, Security and Law, 2013; 8(2):93-114

Marcotte P. Animated Evidence: Delta 191 Crash Re-Created Through Computer Simulations at Trial, Journal of the American Bar Association, 1989; 75: 52-57

Horten, M. Graphic Evidence. Solicitors Journal 1994:1289

Noond J, Schofield D, March J, Evison M. Visualising the scene: computer graphics and evidence presentation. Science and Justice, 2002; 42(2), 89-95

Özdemir, Ç, Yorulmaz C, Sözüer A, Çoruh L. “Bir olgu nedeniyle çapraz sorgu” 8. Adli Bilimler Kongresi, Kocaeli, 2008.

Doğan MB, Doğan B, Yükseloğlu M, Koca Y, Yorulmaz AC. Trafik Kazasında Olay Yerinin Rekonstruksiyonu: 3D Grafik Animasyonu, 13. Adli Bilimler Kongresi, Bodrum, 2016: 199

Yükseloğlu, M., Koca, Y., Doğan, M.B., Yükseloğlu, E. H., Yorulmaz, A.C., Ateşli Silah ile Yaralanmada Olay Yerinin Rekonstruksiyonu: Olgu Sunumu, 13. Adli Bilimler Kongresi, Bodrum, 2016: 200

Burns D.C. When used in the criminal legal process forensic science shows a bias in favour of the prosecution. Discuss. Science and Justice, 2001; 41(4): 271-277

Schofield D, Goodwin L, Using Graphical Technology to Present Evidence. In Mason S (ed.) Electronic Evidence: Disclosure, Discovery and Admissibility. LexisNexis, London, 2007: 101–121

Burton A, Schofield D, Goodwin L. Gates of Global Perception: Forensic Graphics for Evidence Presentation, Proceedings of ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, Singapore, November 6th-12th 2005: 103-111

Schofield D. Animating Evidence: Computer Game Technology in the Courtroom. Journal of Information Law and Technology 2009: 12 (1)

(https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/jilt/2009_1/schofield)

Rubin CB. A Paperless Trial, Litigation Magazine, 1993; 19(3)

Kuehn PF. Maximizing Your Persuasiveness: Effective Computer Generated Exhibits. DCBA Brief: Journal of the DuPage County Bar Association, 1999

(https://www.dcba.org/mpage/vol121099art4)

Devine DJ, Clayton LD, Dunford BB, Seying R, Pryce J. Jury Decision Making, 45 Years of Empirical Research on Deliberating Groups. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 2001; 7(3): 622–727

Seltzer RF. Evidence and Exhibits at Trial, 387 PLI/Lit 371, 1990.

Cobo R. An Approach to Demonstrative Exhibits, 3 PLI/Lit 359, 1990.

Krieger R. Sophisticated Computer Graphics Come of Age and Evidence Will Never Be the Same. Journal of the American Bar Association, 1992.

Jones IS, Muir DW, Groo SW. Computer Animation – Admissibility in the Courtroom, Accident Reconstruction: Technology and Animation. Society of Automotive Engineers, 1991; 143-151 (https://doi.org/10.4271/910366)

Thomsen AH, Jurik AG, Uhrenholt L, Vesterby A. An alternative approach to computerized tomography in forensic pathology. Forensic Science International, 2009;183: 87–90

Villa C, Olsen KB, Hansen SH. Virtual animation of victim-specific 3D models obtained from CT scans for forensic reconstructions: Living and dead subjects. Forensic Science International, 2017; 278: e27–e33

Maiese A, Gitto L, De Matteis A, Panebianco V, Bolino G. Postmortem computed tomography: Useful or unnecessary in gunshot wounds deaths? Two case reports. Legal Medicine, 2014; 16: 357–363

Sano R, Hirawasa S, Kobayashi S, Shimada T, Awata S, Takei H, Otake H, Takahashi K, Takahashi Y, Kominato Y. Use of postmortem computed tomography to reveal an intraoral gunshot injuries in a charred body. Legal Medicine, 2011; 13: 286–288

Usui A, Kawasumi Y, Hosokai Y, Kozakai M, Saito H, Funayama M. Usefulness and limitations of postmortem computed tomography in forensic analysis of gunshot injuries: Three case reports. Legal Medicine, 2016; 18: 98–103

Buck U, Naether S, Braun M, Bolliger S, Friederich H, Jackowski C, Aghayev E, Christe A, Vock P, Dirnhofer R, Thali MJ. Application of 3D documentation and geometric reconstruction methods in traffic accident analysis: With high resolution surface scanning, radiological MSCT/MRI scanning and real data based animation. Forensic Science International, 2007; 170: 20–28

Errickson D, Thompson TJU, Rankin BWJ. The application of 3D visualization of osteological trauma for the courtroom:A critical review. Journal of Forensic Radiology and Imaging 2014; 2: 132–137

Sidler M, Jackowski C, Dirnhofer R, Vock P, Thali M. Use of multislice computed tomography in disaster victim identification—Advantages and limitations. Forensic Science International, 2007; 169: 118–128.

Marques J, Musse J, Caetano C, Corte-Real F, Corte-Real AT. Analysis of bite marks in foodstuffs by computed tomography (Cone Beam CT) - 3D Reconstruction. Journal of Forensic Odonto-Stomatology, 2013; 31(1):1-7

Grimes WD. Classifying the Elements in a Scientific Animation. Accident Reconstruction: Technology and animation. Society of Automotive Engineers; 1994: 397–404 (https://doi.org/10.4271/940919)

March J, Schofield D, Evison M, Woodford N. Three-Dimensional Computer Visualization of Forensic Pathology Data. Am J Forensic Med Pathol, 2004;25: 60–70

Goodwin L. The admissibility of computer-generated evidence in US and UK courts. University of Nottingham Internal 2nd Year PhD report, 2002.

Anurag Sahu, Nitin Singh Mandla, Gaikwad Yogesh. Advantages of Computer Generated Evidence: Forensic Animation in Indian Judiciary System. Indian Journal of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, 2014; 8(1):136-139