American Sherlock: Murder, Forensics, and the Birth of American CSI

The revered character of Sherlock Holmes has fascinated generations as the epitomization of superhuman intellect with an unerring ability to solve the most critical and befuddling puzzles. Holmes has become so ingrained in our western culture and his influence is still so deeply felt that he is often imagined to be more than mere fiction. In her recent biography, American Sherlock: Murder, Forensics and the Birth of American CSI, Kate Winkler Dawson draws attention to a real man whose life and achievements bear an uncanny resemblance to the Conan Doyle icon. Edward Oscar Heinrich’s legacy as America’s foremost forensic scientist has had a lingering influence on the current practice of criminal investigation and expert testimony. Heinrich was also akin to the Holmesian character with the somewhat condescending and aloof manner often seen in exemplary individuals. Over the course of 40 years (beginning in the troubling time of the 1920’s) Heinrich pioneered methods in fingerprint analysis, blood spatter analysis, ballistics and even criminal/victim profiling. He acted as an independent witness in many trials and was generally viewed as the foremost voice in a burgeoning field. One of the cases the scientist worked on was the “Fatty” Arbuckle case, which was avidly followed by the tabloid press and contributed to Heinrich’s reputation. His deductive methods were a result of his incredible, perhaps even pathological, ability to organize and dissect the minutest of details. In her profile, Dawson provides examples of selected cases that showcase his work and were groundbreaking in terms of the methodology he invented and employed. The author also includes a description of Heinrich’s many idiosyncrasies and foibles that at times caused him professional conflict and distress in his personal life. She writes about how he was constantly frustrated in his attempts to be completely accepted and understood, especially by skeptics of his novel techniques. Heinrich eventually came to adapt his presentations to juries in a way that they could absorb his more technical explanations, instead of being overly swayed by “softer” evidence like character witnesses and emotional persuasion. It is apparent that Dawson learned a lesson from Heinrich’s efforts in this regard. By integrating vivid case descriptions, photos, and biographical and psychological information she takes what could have been a sterile portrayal and transforms it into a fascinating depiction of a remarkable, real-life Sherlock Holmes.