Modified Firearm Discharge Residue Analysis utilizing Advanced Analytical Techniques, Complexing Agents, and Quantum Chemical Calculations

The use of gunshot residue (GSR) or firearm discharge residue (FDR) evidence faces some challenges because of instrumental and analytical limitations and the difficulties in evaluating and communicating evidentiary value. For instance, the categorization of GSR based only on elemental analysis of single, spherical particles is becoming insufficient because newer ammunition formulations produce residues with varying particle morphology and composition. Also, one common criticism about GSR practitioners is that their reports focus on the presence or absence of GSR in an item without providing an assessment of the weight of the evidence. Such reports leave the end-used with unanswered questions, such as “Who fired the gun?” Thus, there is a critical need to expand analytical capabilities and enhance the impact of the forensic scientist’s conclusions. To maximize the evidential value of GSR evidence, detection methods exploiting modern advancements in instrumentation must be explored and developed. This collection of work reviews the current literature review and illustrates a trend to investigate emerging methods to enhance IGSR analysis with a wider emphasis on OGSR compounds. Combining IGSR and OGSR components increases the confidence of detecting GSR on a collected sample. Overall, the development of novel analytical methods for GSR detection, the application of ground-breaking statistical methods to interpret GSR evidence using artificial intelligence (neural networks) and likelihood ratios to estimate the weight of the evidence, and the understating of the host-guest chemistry of GSR species is anticipated to provide a needed leap of knowledge in the community

The European Commission\u27s Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Over Corporate Mergers

This article examines the concept and application of the European Merger Regulation as it applies to mergers, acquisitions, and joint ventures external to the European Union (the Union) and the European Economic Area (EEA). More specifically, the article . traces the development of the Merger Regulation and how its application developed into the legal vehicle for the European Commission (the Commission) to administer its authority over the clearance or prohibition of mergers beyond its territorial frontier. Part I addresses the historical concept of extraterritorial jurisdiction under the Merger Regulation. It considers the European Court of Justice\u27s approach to extraterritorial jurisdiction under Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty Establishing the European Community, formerly Articles 85 and 86, and its application to the Merger Regulation. Part II reviews the Commission\u27s assessment of mergers between non-community enterprises. It concentrates on the Commission\u27s analysis of whether a proposed merger is compatible with the European Common Market. Part III considers the measures available to the European Commission to enforce its authority under the Merger Regulation, while Parts IV and V review the sensitive Boeing/McDonnell Douglas and General Electric/Honeywell merger cases, respectively. This article covers the law in effect as of December 31, 2001