This book is divided into ten sections, Reading The Bones, The Teeth etc. In each section the writer gives a brief history of that specific area of forensic science and then uses real cases to illustrate the developments made.

The writer uses a wide variety of cases, there are famous ones such as Lindy Chamberlain whose conviction was only overturned after DNA and blood spatter analysis of her daughter's jacket, and the use of forensic dentistry to identify victims of the Bali bombing. There are also weird ones such as the one armed man who committed suicide by shooting himself twice with a crossbow.

There are also cases that will make your blood boil, such as the man who is cleared of murdering his girlfriend's 23 month old daughter because so much of the evidence was not allowed to be presented to the jury on the grounds that it might prejudice them against the accused. This wonderful example of a human being - in his version of events left this child in the bath while he went outside to smoke, he heard screaming from the bathroom and when he came back in the child had turned on the hot water tap and was sitting underneath it. Using the shower he ran cold water over the girl for a few minutes then took her out of the bath and proceeded to dry her, at which point her skin started peeling off. The accused and the child's mother decided that instead of seeking medical help for the girl they would treat her with burn cream and paracetamol, the accused was sent to the chemist to buy these things but first he had to go and by marajuana. About seven that evening paramedics were called to the house as the girl had difficulty breathing but there was nothing they could do. Forensic examination of the childs body revealed that the burns could not have happened the way the accused said so but that they were deliberately inflicted, there were also bruises on the childs buttocks which the accused admitted he had inflicted by gently smacking the child with a brush. At trial it was decided that the prosecuter could not ask the experts if the burns could have been caused accidently, as a no answer might prejudice the jury also they would not be told about his detour to buy drugs again they might hold that against him - can't imagine why they would do that. At the end of the trial the jury were directed to find him not guilty, however even if he couldn't have been found guilty of murder based on the evidence that was allowed surely he could have been found guilty of neglect.

Overall this is a really good read, very informative and well presented.