Objects of Crime: Bodies, Embodiment and Forensic Pathology
| Published date | 01 October 2020 |
| Author | Imogen Jones |
| Date | 01 October 2020 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0964663919897957 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Objects of Crime: Bodies,
Embodiment and
Forensic Pathology
Imogen Jones
University of Leeds, UK
Abstract
When a death takes place in suspicious circumstances, the body transitions from being
somebody to an object which is of legal as well as social value. A key investigatory
process is that of the forensic autopsy, carried out by a Home Office Registered Forensic
Pathologist (HORFP). This article draws upon empirical data from research involving
HORFPs to examine their identity and the meaning they assign to the deceased body. I
argue that HORFP’s understanding of the value of the deceased body constantly shifts
due to the multifaceted nature of their role. I explain this by drawing upon a legal
embodiment framework. The HORFPs have to balance a legal context which demands
objective ‘facts’ and formal labels with emotionally difficult cases and the impact of
their work on the bereaved. I challenge the dichotomy between dualism and embodi-
ment, arguing that there is not an oppositional choice between ‘science’ and recognition
of the symbolic value of the corpse, but rather that these views can coexist while serving
different functions that are central to a HORFP’s role.
Keywords
Autopsy, bodies, coroners, death, embodiment, homicide, medicine, pathology
Introduction
When a death takes place in suspicious circumstances, the State takes control of the
body, its treatment and when it can be disposed of. The body transitions from being
somebody to an object which is of legal, evidential, social and sometimes political value
Corresponding author:
Imogen Jones, School of Law, University of Leeds, Liberty Building, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK.
Email: i.jones2@leeds.ac.uk
Social & Legal Studies
2020, Vol. 29(5) 679–698
ªThe Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0964663919897957
journals.sagepub.com/home/sls
(Achter, 2016). Once the police attend the crime scene ‘the victim has ceased to be a
person who can be cared for and has instead become an exhibit that can be wrapped,
insulated and sequestered’ (Rock, 1998: 63). A key investigatory process is that of the
forensic autopsy, carried out by a Home Office Registered Forensic Pathologist
(HORFP). HORFPs are consultant doctors with specialist training in forensic methods.
The post-mortem assists in any criminal investigation, as well as addressing questions
which concern the coroner (as set out in s. 1 Coroners and Justice Act 2009). Forensic
pathologists are particularly important because of the impact that their actions can have
on the legal, societal and emotional consequences of a suspicious death. Yet despite the
significance of their role, analysis of the work of forensic pathologists is largely absent
from the bioethical, legal and criminological literature. This article begins to address that
gap as well as highlighting the intersection between these fields and death studies.
I draw upon empirical data from my research involving HORFPs to examine their
identity and the meaning they assign to the deceased body. I find evidence of nuanced
attitudes and working practices among HORFPs. Their understanding of the value of
the deceased body constantly shifts due to the multifaceted nature of their role. I
explain this by drawing upon legal embodiment. Embodiment theory demands that
we do not separate mind and body but instead recognise that ‘bodies are not just
instrumentally valuable but are a constitutive part of who we are’ (Fox and Thomson,
2017: 519). This includes recognising the social context in which bodies are under-
stood and defined, as well as the centrality of relationships in mediating our bodies.
While an embodiment approach can challenge and deepen unders tanding of medico-
legal decisions involving the living, I would argue that embodiment is also useful in
deconstructing the orthodoxy that the corpse is an ‘incontrove rtible biological reality’
(Hallam et al., 1999: 64). The body is part of a life story, symbolising the experiences
of, and relationships with, the deceased. An embodiment approach allows us to capture
these important understandings and relationships with deceased bodies and provides a
relational account of the deceased body.
While the body is symbolically important f or grieving people, I argue that legal
processes give additional meaning to the body, leading me to the lens of legal embodi-
ment. At a basic level, suspicious death triggers an extensive legal process in the form of
a criminal investigation, but the impact of law is deeper than this. We can see this
through the way that the actions of HORFPs are regulated by legal processes. Initially,
the police will decide if a death is suspicious, which determines whether a body is sent
for a forensic autopsy. The coroner retains jurisdiction over the body and HORFPs must
interact with coroners’ officers as well as regulations regarding the storage and disposal
of human tissue. Moreover, HORFPs are often required to give evidence during legal
proceedings. In this arena, they are not only challenged by lawyers but the labels that are
attached to their findings take on formal legal meanings. As such, HORFPs are not
simply doctors but are office holders who have an epistemological function. Bodies are
therefore constructed through authoritative discourse of which HORFPs are part – here
both law and the HORFP’s embodiment. Their lived experiences are informed by, and
inform, law.
I explore how the webs of science, law and social pressure under which the HORFPs’
role exists combine with deceased human remains. I challenge the dichotomy between
680 Social & Legal Studies 29(5)
To continue reading
Request your trial