












































Forensic Anthropology Vol. 5, No. 3: 214–227
DOI: 10.5744/fa.2022.2003a

© 2022 University of Florida Press

Background

In the Parish Cemetery of Penco (CPP, for its initials in Span-
ish), in the region of Biobío, Chile, a landslide of small 
niches (graves) occurred following the 2010 earthquake 
(Gaytán 2010; Guerra & Reyes 2012; Reyes 2011). The burial 
niches contained around 400 individuals in different states 
of decomposition, although the majority were skeletonized.

Of these 400 individuals, approximately 100 were iden-
tified by relatives in the days following the landslide. The 
remaining 300 bodies1 were organized and analyzed by a 
team of volunteer anthropology students and professionals, 
under the parameters of forensic anthropology.2 The other 
component of the disaster3 is represented by the approxi-
mately 203 families who are demanding the identification 

1. The exact number of individuals is 388, of which there are 
duplicated individuals due to the fact that various bodies lost their 
anatomical continuity following the landslide. It was estimated that there 
were around 300 unidentified bodies after cross- checking the cemetery 
administration’s books.

2. Even though the intervention was conducted according to forensic 
standards, it is important to emphasize that there are no judicial 
processes associated with these cases.

3. Defined as “disruption of the functioning of a community (. . .) that 
exceeds the ability of a community or affected society to deal with” 
(Boer et al. 2018:2).

and return of their deceased loved ones. As such, the main 
objective of the intervention was to reestablish the material 
bond between family members and the deceased, through the 
identification of skeletonized corpses, following scientific 
standards of forensic anthropology.

Human identification4 based on skeletal remains is a 
comparative process that developed due to various factors 
(natural disasters, common crimes, among others), which can 
alter or make difficult the recognition of a person’s identity. 
In the human identification project in the CPP, an 
epistemological- methodological type problem emerged in the 
collection and management of antemortem5 and postmortem6 
information, and subsequent comparison, which draws on the 
information provided by the victim’s social circle.7 It is in 
the process of capturing and interpreting the information 
where the proposal of the investigation is situated, denomi-
nated forensic semiology, theoretical- methodological inter-
pretation that facilitates analyzing information provided in 
the antemortem interview. This investigation emphasizes dis-
eases, injuries and afflictions, analyzing 28 cases. The 
research question is: “In what way is the forensic semiology 
approach useful in the process of human identification, 

4. Identity is not specifically defined, but rather refers to the 
condition necessary for a process of knowing the “other” (Vera 2002). 
Understanding what is intended by the concept “identity,” the act of 
identification as such corresponds to establishing said identity 
(Thompson & Black 2007).

5. Social profile of the individual, as illustrated in the narrative of the 
victim’s family members and friends.

6. Biological profile of the individual as revealed in the skeletal 
remains of the presumed victim.

7. Person that suffers harm due to the actions of another person or a 
chance accident.

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Forensic Semiology: An Applied Methodological Perspective on 
Human Identification

Erika Reyes Baezaa,b*

ABSTRACT: To improve practice and increase the quality of human identification processes, this article proposes a methodological 
framework and interview to facilitate the recovery of antemortem information about ailments, illnesses, and injuries, referred to as foren-
sic semiology. The proposal is based on experience working on the intervention at the Parish Cemetery in Penco, Chile.

Twenty- eight cases, which correspond to a total of 61 interviews, were analyzed through a diachronic comparison of content during 
the 2010– 2016 period. The qualitative and quantitative analyses of the semiology interview demonstrate an increase in the quantity and 
quality of supplementary information in the process of human identification based on skeletal remains.

KEYWORDS: forensic semiology, methodology, antemortem interview

aUniversidad de Concepción, Chile
bCementerio Parroquial de Penco, Chile
*Correspondence to: Erika Reyes Baeza, Universidad de Concepción, 

Biobío, Chile 
E- mail: erikareyesbaeza@gmail . com

Received 31 August 2019; Revised 30 July 2020; Accepted 31 July 
2020



Reyes Baeza 215

specifically in the context of the Penco Parish Cemetery in 
Biobío, Chile?”8

Interviews carried out in a first stage between 2010 and 
2013 were analyzed in comparison with interviews conducted 
in 2016 using an approach based in forensic semiology, 
according to interview guidelines. The comparison demon-
strates the role of a strategy contextualized in the collection 
of antemortem information, in addition to methodological 
aspects of the procedure.

Forensic Semiology

There is a constant concern to improve and increase the sci-
entific standards of forensic anthropology, which translates 
into reevaluating the discipline from a theoretical, method-
ological, and technical perspective (Dirkmaat & Cabo 2012). 
To optimize the human identification process and increase 
quality standards (Fleischman et al. 2019), we propose a 
reevaluation of the recovery and analysis of antemortem 
information. As a result, we link clinical semiology9 to the 
interpretation of afflictions, diseases and injuries suffered by 
the unidentified deceased person, from whom antemortem 
information must be collected to reconstruct his or her social 
identity. Physical anthropology studies disease, allowing 
experts to infer the operation of multiple environmental and 
cultural factors from a bone injury (Ramírez 2007). There-
fore, it is possible to consider this kind of modification a dis-
tinguishing feature in the process of identification based on 
skeletal remains (Barreto et al. 2005; Boer et al. 2018).

Highly regarded among interpretive trends (Ramírez 
2007), semiology is a tool that permits one to name a phe-
nomenon based on its (symbolic) meaning. From a clinical 
semiology perspective, Gazitúa (2017) considers it the 
 application of an interview with the patient, where informa-
tion about signs and symptoms of a possible disease are 
gathered, including sociocultural factors that affect this 
understanding.

In addition, semiology refers to the possibility that the 
sick person may not be able to communicate, in which case 
family members or close friends who have information about 
signs and symptoms of the illness will be interviewed. The 
diagnosis will be constructed based on narrative information 
and the physical examination, conditions that are similar to 
an antemortem interview.

8. This originated in the process of the master’s thesis under the 
supervision of Dr. Omar A. Barriga and co- director Mg. Ricardo Gomes, 
in the program “Social Research and Development,” Universidad de 
Concepción, Chile.

9. Clinical semiology is defined as the science that studies signs and 
symptoms of illnesses, in which symptoms are considered subjectivities 
of the illness and signs objective manifestations. Semiology proposes 
arriving at a diagnosis by examining the diverse manifestations that a 
particular illness may cause (Gazitúa 2017).

Despite its contributions, the focus of clinical semiology 
does not adapt fully to the problems that characterize pro-
cesses of human identification. Generally, in such contexts, 
communities have fewer economic resources, are deprived 
of human rights, are indigenous and/or rural populations 
without access to health and education, all of which make 
obtaining dental or biomedical records difficult (Barreto et al. 
2005; Salado n.d.).

In addition, it should be considered that a relative of the 
deceased person participate in the interview to verify a pro-
cess related to illness, injury or ailment, a person who can 
provide important pathological information, beyond express-
ing or communicating the symptomatology and immediate 
social context. This ability to recall illness is mediated by the 
relatives’ memory (EMAF 2016), and given the marginal 
social status of the person (Guglielmucci 2017), it is difficult 
to carry out the identification process.

Therefore, the term forensic semiology is inspired by 
clinical semiology focused on disease processes and interpre-
tations of symptoms and signs. This includes communica-
tive abilities in the medical interview (Gazitúa 2017; 
Rodríguez et al. 2009), the interdisciplinary vision shared 
with anthropology in the formation of the subject’s holistic 
comprehension abilities at the time of the interview, and the 
possession of knowledge linked to processes of suffering and 
disease (Olivero & Barráez 2011).

The ethnographic focus, then, considers the researcher 
the primary instrument, guiding the approach to the field and 
subjects of study, from unknown to identified (Guber 2011). 
This focus becomes useful when dealing with diverse socio-
cultural contexts, in which various tools from the social sci-
ences are required to collect antemortem testimonies (Barreto 
et al. 2005).

Human Identification and Antemortem Information

Processes of human identification are characterized accord-
ing to the causes that lead to the loss of identity. However, 
the most complex cases emerge when the bodies are in an 
advanced state of decomposition or skeletonized.

Forensic anthropology represents the application of 
anthropological knowledge and methodology to medical- 
legal issues, which include detection, recovery and analysis 
of human skeletal remains (Ubelaker 2019). Information 
about the individual, along with antemortem information, 
allows researchers to identify the individual (Ubelaker et al. 
2018).

Humanistic disciplines with expertise in conducting 
interviews collect antemortem information as part of the pre-
liminary investigation (Barreto et al. 2005; Cardoza 2017; 
Guglielmucci 2017; EMAF 2016; Instituto Nacional de 
Medicina Legal y Ciencias Forenses 2016). However, this is 
not always the case (CICR 2014a, 2014b). The collection of 



216 Forensic Semiology

antemortem information should be carried out by qualified 
persons, specifically those trained in the social sciences 
(Barreto et al. 2005; EMAF 2016; Instituto Nacional de 
Medicina Legal y Ciencias Forenses 2016), who construct a 
narrative of the disappeared individual while the person was 
alive, relative to their physical, medical and personal char-
acteristics. This narrative is fundamental to the process of 
identification, given that along with the postmortem infor-
mation (sex, age, stature and individual features of the 
skeleton), the information is analyzed in the search for dis-
appeared persons (Instituto Nacional de Medicina Legal y 
Ciencias Forenses 2016). Therefore, the scientific process of 
identification requires a variety of multidisciplinary tech-
niques which make identification possible by linking the 
body with a pre- existing identity (Guglielmucci 2017).

Assigning an identity to a dead body is a sociocultural 
necessity which comes from the rituality surrounding the 
individual change of state, but which is collectively agreed- 
upon and denominated a “rite of passage” (Van Gennep 
2008). An individual’s death will have effects on her social 
context, beyond carrying varied cultural meanings which 
anthropology can help to comprehend (Cartay 2002; Thomas 
1991).

However, in contexts in which the body of the deceased 
person disappears, the survivors generate new strategies to 
confront the problem of the person’s death given that it is 
impossible to carry out socially established funerary rites 
(Panizo 2011). Beyond the benefit it may bring to the deceased 
individual, these rituals allow her relatives to reintegrate into 
society (Panizo 2011; Pérez 2010; Thomas 1991; Van Gen-
nep 2008).

Forensic Anthropology in Latin America and Chile

During the last thirty years, forensic anthropology has 
become an alternative for the families that have lost their 
loved ones under diverse circumstances (Aranguren & León 
2020). The process of collecting memories of each victim and 
of the community (Cardoza 2017), and the participation of 
forensic experts in the identification of bodies promote the 
restitution of rights, human dignity and the possibility of 
mourning and justice (Huffschmid 2019).

During the 1980s Dr. Clyde Snow, an American anthro-
pologist, was appointed to collaborate in cases of human 
rights violations, supporting the formation of local forensic 
anthropology teams, with Argentina and Chile pioneering 
this effort (Asociación latinoamericana de antropología 
forense [ALAF] 2016). Social anthropologists and archaeol-
ogists formed work teams with the goal of contributing to the 
clarification of truth and justice. Supported by Dr. Snow, they 
worked in complex sociopolitical environments in Latin 
American countries which suffered under violent military 
dictatorships (Dutrénit 2012).

In Chile, forensic anthropology began in response to the 
need to contribute to the search, recovery and identification 
of victims illegally buried in the context of the military dic-
tatorship that governed the country from 1973 to 1990. The 
Forensic Anthropologists Group (GAF, for its initials in 
Spanish) was formed in 1989 (Padilla & Reveco 2004; Bus-
tos & Intriago 2015). The team worked until 1994, when it 
dissolved due to a lack of participants.

Now the work of identifying victims is done by the “Spe-
cial Forensic Identification Unit,” a multidisciplinary body 
created in 2003 and affiliated with the Medical Legal Service 
of Chile. The unit has been focused on investigating cases of 
human rights violations, and over time, it has assumed the 
tasks of “search and recovery, identification of unknown vic-
tims, verification of identity, cause of death, repatriation and 
posthumous paternity” (Garrido & Itriago 2012, p. 37). Addi-
tionally, it has compiled a database of centralized antemor-
tem and postmortem information and maintains contact with 
victims’ families (Bustos & Intriago 2015).

In November 2019, a group of forensic anthropologists 
called the “Chilean Forensic Anthropology and Human 
Rights Team”10 (ECHAF, for its initials in Spanish) was cre-
ated, which proposed forming a non- governmental and non- 
profit body amid the social unrest in the country. They draw 
on their expertise as forensic anthropologists to solve cases 
of human rights violations, as well as contribute to legal pro-
cesses and truth and reparation efforts. Concrete informa-
tion about their work does not exist yet given its recent 
formation.

Methodology

Methodological Assumptions in the Process of Human 
Identification in the Parish Cemetery of Penco (CPP), 
Biobío Region, Chile

This investigation has an argumentative focus, with the 
objective of comprehending and validating a technique, com-
bined with the analysis of qualitative information (Table 1) 
through a diachronic and applied comparison. It arose as a 
proposal around the reevaluation of the technique employed 
in the collection of antemortem information in the context 
of the CPP, and how this information is useful in human iden-
tification processes. The context is characterized as an inter-
vention that bases its results on the use of traditional forensic 
anthropology techniques (Barreto et al. 2005; Cardoza 2017; 
Guglielmucci 2017; Instituto Nacional de Medicina Legal y 
Ciencias Forenses 2016), given the absence of resources to 
implement DNA extraction. As a result, the intervention has 
been carried out in a systematic and orderly way, drawing on 

10. https:// echaf . cl / .



Reyes Baeza 217

all the evidence available about the individual who lost his 
identity, information from the preliminary forensic investi-
gation in addition to postmortem information, which com-
prise the findings of the forensic anthropological analysis of 
the body (ALAF 2016).

In constructing the osteo- biographical profile of the 
deceased person, researchers should consider that not all 
the pathologies in an individual’s life have a direct relation-
ship with the skeletal system, so the individual’s patholog-
ical biography will be limited under this premise (Ortner 
2011). In addition, as was previously mentioned, the con-
struction of the osteopathological profile is carried out by 
relatives and associates of the deceased, a process mediated 
by diverse factors that can diminish and even obviate 

pathological conditions or injuries that the individual suf-
fered during her life.

As a result, Baraybar (2008) proposes the utility of the 
categories EMIC11 y ETIC12 in the gathering of antemortem 
and postmortem information, and subsequent comparison of 
the two kinds of information. At the same time, the Mexican 
Forensic Anthropology Team (EMAF 2016) mentions the 
conduct of a forensic expert as “translating and systematiz-
ing” the information that the families provide (32). Within 
the information provided, based on the physical and 

11. EMIC Category: objective physical features translated into 
categories recognizable by the relatives.

12. ETIC Category: translation of information provided by relatives 
and witnesses into objective categories.

TABLE 1 —Comparison of categorical data from D2 (2010— 2013) and ESF (2016) interview types, and qualitative comparison of information.

D2 Interview D2 interview responses ESF Interview ESF Interview Responses
Result of qualitative 
comparison of information

Characteristic feature of 
deceased (defect)

Permanently maimed finger 
on left hand. Appears as a 
lifted finger, probable nerve 
damage from accident

Specific physical features 
of the deceased

- Misinterpretation of 
traumatic injury as defect

Traumatic injury of the 
deceased

- The deceased showed signs 
of fractures and accidents 
suffered

accident, had problems on 
one finger, which was stiff, 
scar on forehead and on a 
frontal rib (which side not 
recalled) due to a drunken 
fall

Information corresponds to 
analysis categories

Deceased complained of 
pain in spine and bones

- Deceased complained of 
pain or suffering

no Lacking information versus 
“no” response

Deceased person’s life 
activities

soccer (childhood and 
adolescence), boxing 
(18– 19 years) sporadic 
military service (18– 19), 
loading and unloading at 
grocery store (26 years and 
after), tejo club

Primary occupation of 
deceased

various jobs, alcoholism did 
not permit him to maintain 
employment

The activities mentioned 
match. The timeline of 
activities undertaken was 
specified in the second 
interview, along with the 
context in which they were 
carried out.

Other occupations carried 
out by deceased

Military service at 18, 
cutting wood, odd jobs, 
boxer for 4 years starting at 
18, played soccer 
occasionally, dockworker- 
sporadic loading/unloading 
at port

Other activities that may 
have caused tension in the 
body of the deceased

- 

Illnesses suffered by the 
deceased

alcoholism Suffering of deceased from 
important illness

no, alcoholism only Same information

Other medical observations 
about deceased

- 

Other - Surgeries performed on 
deceased

no First interview did not 
include categories, 
information was specified 
in second interview

Deceased had amputations no
Deceased had implants no
Deceased had orthopedic 
prosthesis

no

Date interview conducted March 23, 2010 Date interview conducted June 29, 2016 Information current
Interviewer No information Interviewer Name of interviewer 

obtained
Information specified in 
second interview



218 Forensic Semiology

sociocultural evidence about the individual to be identified 
there are predetermined parameters on which the two should 
agree. This process should be mediated by standardized lan-
guage in both antemortem and postmortem information. In 
the case of the CPP, this means using postmortem interview 
form and a forensic semiology interview, the latter of which 
is described in the following section.

Designing a Forensic Semiology Interview

The interview was designed following the questionnaire on 
antemortem information (version 1.0) prepared by the Inter-
national Committee of the Red Cross (CICR n.d.), which lays 
out the components of antemortem interviews. However, this 
is a generic form for cases in which the bodies have soft tis-
sue and are not skeletonized. The form incorporates consid-
erations about the directionality of the questions to be asked 
by the interviewer, which was adjusted to the format created 
for the intervention in the CPP, and its possible use in other 
contexts of human identification based on skeletal remains.

The interview guide, called “Guide for the collection of 
antemortem information,” consists of a brief introduction that 
describes its purpose, in addition to describing formal aspects 
related to the interview context, information about the inter-
viewee that should be recorded, and technical aspects like 
general observations and audio recording.

During the interview, information is documented about 
the relative or close associate who attends the meeting with 
the researcher, to gather information about the deceased per-
son that they seek to identify. This includes information 
about the context of the interview (location, interviewer, 
date and case sheet); information about the interviewee; 
physical and medical information about the deceased, and 
situations that may have generated stress or reconstruction 
of the skeletal system; a section on clothing and funerary 
objects; perception of the interviewee about the process; and 
technical information about the interview (submission of 
documentation by the family, final observations, missing 
information, recording of the session). The interview is 
semi- structured to generate a pattern of conversation, but 
the ethnographic focus applied by the interviewer emerges 
within each item. Annex 1 includes a guide for the collec-
tion of antemortem information and the interview.

Sample and Processing of Information

The sample corresponds to 61 interviews, of which 32, named 
D2 interviews, include secondary information provided by 
the anthropological intervention team in the CPP, collected 
between March 2010 and January 2013. A second period 
(June– September 2016) includes the use of the forensic semi-
ology interview (ESF, for its initials in Spanish) in 29 inter-
views. The cases considered in the sample were those that 

included D2 interviews and interviews with a forensic semi-
ology focus.

Researchers analyzed a total of 28 cases, and in some 
cases, more than one interview was conducted. The age 
 distribution of the deceased is between 46 and 98 years 
old, among 17 male and 11 female individuals. Because the 
investigations are ongoing, the information is confidential. 
Among the limitations of the sample, it is worth mentioning 
that the number of forensic semiology interviews depends on 
the families’ availability to participate in them. As a result, 
it was not possible to apply the methodological instrument 
to all the interviewed families in the first stages of the 
intervention.

The data analysis was carried out by designing a qualita-
tive thematic grid based on the interview categories D2 and 
ESF, as well as comparing them across time (Table 1). The cat-
egories of analysis correspond to the topics addressed—  ill-
nesses, injuries, ailments and interview context. The 
independent variables correspond to the instruments used (D2- 
ESF). The coding, available in Table 2, shows whether infor-
mation was missing or available, which may or may not 
coincide with the category of analysis as laid out in the 
interview.

“Specified information” refers to an increase in informa-
tion, and “misinterpreted information” indicates an incon-
sistency between the information provided in the interview 
and the category of analysis. An example of misinterpreted 
data is evident in Table 1, where a possible stiffness in the 
finger following an accident is listed as a congenital feature 
because it had been included in the traumatic injury category. 
The qualitative assessment of the information is evident in 
the comparison among percentages of the coded information 
(Table 3). Finally, the chi- squared test is employed to evalu-
ate the dependence among categorical variables according to 
type of interview used, using a p- value of < 0.05.

Results and Analysis

The results of the chi- squared test show the dependence of 
the analyzed variables based on interview employed (either 
the D2 interview or forensic semiology interview) for all 
cases. The analysis and discussion by category according to 
percentage results follow.

 1.   Characteristic feature or specific physical defect/feature:
  A general tendency emerged in the responses during D2 

interviews to leave the analyzed categories without infor-
mation (Table 3). In the interviews using the forensic 
semiology instrument, the interviewers were instructed to 
record all kinds of information, which later could be eval-
uated by the team performing the osteological analysis. 
The distinction is reflected in the category of physical 



Reyes Baeza 219

characteristics, increasing from 37% of cases that record 
information on physical characteristics in D2 interviews, 
to 62.06% of cases in semiology interviews (Table 3).

   In addition, it can be noted that in two D2 interview 
cases, interviewers were able to obtain more in- depth 
information on characteristics, while five ESF inter-
view cases generated more detailed information. It is 
also evident that misinterpreted information does not 
emerge from ESF interviews, while in one D2 interview, 
information was misinterpreted. Table 1 includes an 
example of this regarding a characteristic feature.

 2.   Traumatic injury/showed accident fractures
  The semiology interview considers the possibility of 

accidents, but the D2 interview refers exclusively to 
fractures or traumatic injuries suffered by the individu-
als, an incident that could have produced a detectable 
change to bone. As is observed in Table 3, 37.5% of D2 
interview cases lacked information. There is just one case 
of an ESF interview without information, which 
includes more detail about life histories of the deceased, 
which were recorded and shared by the relative or close 
associate interviewed.

   According to Table 3, D2 interviews make up 50% of 
the cases that record information about the injury or 

traumatic accident variable, and ESF 86.2%. An example 
of a more in- depth record is provided in Table 1, consid-
ering that in the observed category, if traumatic injuries 
are not evident, eventually indications may emerge in 
the bones of the hand or face.

   For the category of specified information, in 12.5 % of 
D2 interview cases more information was provided, in 
comparison with 10.34% of ESF cases, The difference 
can be explained by the time spent in conducting inter-
views, or who may have given the first interview, if it 
was a direct or indirect relative, or other person close to 
the deceased person. For this category, misinterpreted 
cases do not exist.

 3.   Complaint of spinal or bone pain/complaint of pain or 
ailment

  In the ESF, this category is supplemented with ailments 
related to other regions of the body, with the under-
standing that it is preferable to provide options that 
enrich the processes of interpretation and assessment 
of the antemortem narrative given by relatives or close 
friends of the deceased. As Table 3 shows, a high per-
centage of responses without information are given 
in D2 interviews, and ESF produces a higher percent-
age of responses with information (72.42%). It is worth 

TABLE 2— Numerical coding of categories analyzed in D2 antemortem interview and forensic semiology interview (ESF).

D2 Index card ESF Interview Coding comparison

Characteristic feature (defect) Specific physical characteristics 0: no information 
1: information 
2: specified information 
3:  misinterpreted 

information*
Traumatic injury Showed signs of fractures/accidents 0: no information 

1: information 
2: specified information 
3: misinterpreted information

Complaint of pain in spine or bones Complaint of pain or suffering 0: no information 
1: information 
2: specified information 
3: misinterpreted information

Life activities Main occupation of deceased
Other occupations carried out
Other activities that may have caused 
tension in the body of deceased

0: no information 
1: information 
2: specified information  
3: misinterpreted information

Illnesses suffered Suffered from important illness
Other medical observations

0: no information 
1: information 
2: specified information 
3: misinterpreted information

Other Surgeries performed on deceased
Had amputations
Had implants
Had orthopedic prosthesis

0: no information 
1: information 
2: specified information 
3: misinterpreted information

Date Date 0: no information 
1: information

Interviewer Interviewer 0: no information 
1: information

*Misinterpreted information refers to inconsistency of the information provided in the interview and the category of 
analysis.



220 Forensic Semiology

pointing out that responses providing additional infor-
mation emerged in 6.25% of D2 interview cases and 
17.24% of ESF cases. A specified response, as is evi-
dent in case 004 (Table 1), would correspond to a “no” 
response.

 4.   Life activities/main occupation of the deceased, other 
occupations practiced, other activities that cause ten-
sion for the body

  The ESF cases allow family members to provide more 
in- depth information about this variable, considering 
that the skeletal modifications that may exist, would 
complement the construction of the osteo- biography 
along with postmortem information, adopting a holistic 
perspective of the individual. Additionally, considering 
the temporary nature of activities is useful as a comple-
ment to the individual’s life history.

   As Table 3 demonstrates, there are no cases without 
information, which can be explained by the fact that 
usually everyone dedicates time to some activity during 
her life. Regarding the responses, 87.5% of D2 interview 

cases include information, and 51.72% of the forensic 
semiology interviews have information. The difference is 
rooted in the fact that for the ESF, 48.27% of cases reflect 
specified information in comparison with D2 interview 
responses. In this category, more information emerged 
by asking different questions based on the previous 
responses, as is observed in Table 1, which facilitates sup-
plementing and/or exhausting possibilities with the 
interviewee in relation to the activities that may be inter-
preted subsequently by researchers. There is no misinter-
preted information for the life activities variable.

 5.   Illnesses suffered during lifetime/affliction with import-
ant illness, other medical observations

  There is a need to know the subject’s medical diagnoses 
and treatments during his life. During the forensic semi-
ology interview, two questions about this are proposed, 
in contrast to one question in the D2 interview, which 
explore the possibility of interpreting medical observa-
tions, treatments and specific care that the deceased may 
have received.

TABLE 3— Percentual comparison between D2 (2010– 2013) and ESF (2016) interview variables.

Categories Variables

(Frequency) 
Coding response percentage

0 1 2 3*

Characteristic feature/specific physical  
feature

D2 Interview (17) 53.12% (12) 37.5% (2) 6.25% (1) 3.12%

Forensic semiology 
interview

(6) 20.60% (18) 62.06% (5) 6.89% 0

Traumatic injury/showed signs of fractures/
accidents

D2 Interview (12) 37.5% (16) 50% (4) 12.5% 0%

Forensic semiology 
interview

(1) 3.44% (25) 86.2% (3) 10.34% 0%

Complaint of pain in spine or bones/Complaint 
of pain or suffering

D2 Interview (15) 46.87% (15) 46.87% (2) 6.25% 0%

Forensic semiology 
interview

(3) 10.34% (21) 72.41% (5) 17.24% 0%

Life activities/Main occupation of deceased, 
other occupations carried out, other activities 
that may have caused tension in the body of 
deceased

D2 Interview 0% (28) 87.5% (4) 12.5% 0%

Forensic semiology 
interview

0% (15) 51.72% (14) 48.27% 0%

Illnesses suffered/Suffered from important 
illness, other medical observations

D2 Interview (10) 31.25% (10) 31.25% (7) 21.87% (5) 15.62%

Forensic semiology 
interview

(1) 3.44% (23) 79.31% (5) 17.24% 0%

Other/surgeries performed on deceased, had 
amputations, had implants, had orthopedic 
prosthesis

D2 Interview (31) 96.87% (1) 3.12% 0% 0%

Forensic semiology 
interview

(2) 6.89% (26) 89.65% (1) 3.44% 0%

Date D2 Interview (7) 21.8% (25) 78.12%
Forensic semiology 
interview

0% (29) 100%

Interviewer D2 Interview (7) 21.8% (25) 78.12%
Forensic semiology 
interview

0% (29) 100%

* misinterpreted information: refers to inconsistency of the information provided in the interview and the category of analysis.



Reyes Baeza 221

  The question about an “important illness in one’s life-
time” refers to an illness that the individual suffered 
over long periods of time, with the possibility of spread-
ing and affecting the person’s skeletal system. 31.25% of 
responses in D2 interviews included no information 
(Table 3), in contrast to 3.44% of cases in the ESF. For 
the responses that included information, 31.25% pre-
sented information in D2 interviews, in comparison with 
79.31% in the semiology interviews. This highlights the 
in- depth information that the semiology interviews can 
generate regarding possible medical diagnoses and treat-
ments and how they may be interpreted in a process of 
comparison.

   For the analyzed cases, most deceased individuals had 
neither an important illness during their lives nor medi-
cal records, which interviewees may remember. This 
information allows researchers to discard illnesses or 
treatment that may have required medical attention. The 
absence of information is a consequence of the lack of 
methodological standardization in conducting the inter-
view (use of yes– no– unsure responses). One point to 
highlight is the existence of five misinterpreted cases in 
D2 interview responses and a lack of misinterpreted 
information in the ESF.

 6.   Other/surgical operations, amputations, implants, or 
orthopedic prothesis

  Regarding the “other” category in D2 interviews, in the 
ESF relevant categories are broken down to interpret the 
skeletal evidence that could not have been considered in 
earlier responses. Table 3 shows that for this variable 
there is a 96.87% response rate without information, and 
only 3.12% with information, in stark contrast to the 
responses in forensic semiology interviews, which pro-
duce 6.89% of responses without information and 89.65% 
of responses that include information. For cases with 
information, most correspond to a “no” answer, in 
response to the question about whether the individual 
had any of these other medical conditions. As a result, 
this demonstrates the importance of recording informa-
tion that reflects a response to the question asked, given 
that the subject may not have suffered from these condi-
tions, which would allow researchers to discard the pos-
sibility. “No” is a useful response because it serves as a 
methodological contribution in understanding the mean-
ing of the antemortem information about the subject 
being identified.

 7.   Date and interviewer
  This is technical information which allows researchers 

to understand the timeline and who is responsible for 
carrying out the interviews. For the variable “date,” 
according to Table 3, 21.8% of D2 interview cases lack 
information, in contrast to 78.12% of responses with 
information. In the responses given during the forensic 

semiology interviews, 100% of respondents provided a 
date. For the interviewer variable, 21.8% of responses 
during D2 interviews lacked this information, and 100% 
of ESF responses included the name of the interviewer. 
Table 1 shows the recording of the interview date, but this 
is not the case for the interviewer’s name.

In general, the analysis highlights that the categories 
regarding “illnesses, ailments and injuries” represented by 
the questions posed in the D2 interview and later in the ESF, 
refer to a varied range of improvements that may be obtained 
by implementing the methodology proposed in this article. 
Overall, the lack and misinterpretation of information emerge 
as the most frequent responses in the D2 interviews.

This is a product of the voluntary work and experience 
of those who interviewed in the first round, without a pro-
cess coordinator, an issue which will be addressed in the dis-
cussion. The ESF is characterized by providing varied 
options in asking the questions, which can be interpreted 
holistically. For instance, in the case of the questions on 
“traumatic injury/fracture/accidents,” researchers have an 
opportunity to consider part of the life story of the individ-
ual to be identified, which may activate interviewees’ mem-
ories and open up their responses to generating more 
information which the team can interpret.

Similarly, in the category “spinal pain/complaint of pain 
or suffering,” with the perspective of broadening the corpo-
ral range in which the individual may have experienced pain, 
the specified information allows the team to reconstruct the 
individual’s profile. This reconstruction is carried out based 
on the comparison with postmortem information, in which 
there is evidence of enteric changes, bone fissures, recon-
structed fractures, joint articulations with lipping and osteo-
phytes, among others. Considering the age of the sample (46 
to 98 years), it is advisable to adopt a holistic approach to the 
body in this context, integrated with the life history provided 
in families’ testimony.

Regarding technical considerations, the percentage of 
information received in the ESF increased in comparison 
with the D2 interview. An example of this is found in details 
such as including categories of “no,” “yes,” or “unsure,” 
employed in the semiology interview, which increases the 
certainty of each response, when confronting a gap in infor-
mation that is impossible to interpret. As a result, the qual-
ity of each question item allows researchers to consider or 
discard a greater number of variables in the comparison of 
antemortem and postmortem information.

In addition, the unfolding of questions in each analyzed 
category specifies details such as duration of processes, 
which influence the interpretation of illnesses, injuries and 
ailments that may have affected the lives of the deceased 
individuals, given the increase in quantity and quality of 
information.



222 Forensic Semiology

Discussion

At the beginning of the intervention in the Parish Cemetery 
of Penco, the voluntary participation of students and profes-
sionals in training stands out and is reflected in the lack of 
standardization and discipline regarding the quality of the 
analyzed interviews. The process of constructing the osteo- 
biographic narrative should be conducted by professionals in 
the social sciences, qualified and with previous training, con-
sidering the importance of the antemortem information for 
the identification process (Barreto et al. 2005; EMAF 2016; 
Instituto Nacional de Medicina Legal y Ciencias Forenses 
2016).

Additionally, the professional has a responsibility to be 
familiar with the conceptions about illness or ailments that 
interviewees may have (Salado & Ríos 2002). It is not sur-
prising that there are non- responses in the first interviews—  
as well as a lack of in- depth information, considering the 
inexperience of the interviewers. Also, there was no train-
ing on these issues because it was a humanitarian interven-
tion and the goal from the beginning was to respond quickly 
in the face of the disaster.

With the use of the ESF, coordination among members 
of the work team was evident. As the ALAF (2016) and the 
National Medico- legal and Forensic Sciences Institute in 
Colombia suggest, having a coordinator guide the process 
and track standards in antemortem information gathering 
tools is advisable, in addition to developing an instruction 
guide (Annex 1). Also, the coordinators should promote the 
creation and implementation of clear and effective protocols, 
to train new team members, with the goal of assuring the 
quality of the identification process (Fleischman et al. 2019).

Interviews should be conducted based on a consensus 
among team members. If the team is comprised of forensic 
and sociocultural anthropologists, as is the case in the CPP, 
then initial interviews should be carried out by sociocultural 
anthropologists accompanied by forensic anthropologists. 
The latter know the possible interpretations of skeletal 
remains based on family members’ responses, allowing 
researchers to direct and deepen the questions as they are 
being asked.

This suggestion was useful in the reevaluation of the 
antemortem information- gathering instrument in the CPP, 
given that upon revising the categories of analysis in the D2 
interview and the responses, there were features that could 
possibly be observed in the bodies that were not being exam-
ined. This reflects the importance of the development of 
questions in the ESF by category of analysis, increasing the 
interpretive possibilities on the part of the forensic team. The 
recommendation to include a social expert in the gathering 
of antemortem information, ideally a sociocultural anthro-
pologist has to do with the skills that the professional has in 
collecting testimonies (Barreto et al. 2005).

In the context of the CPP, it became necessary to use tra-
ditional forensic anthropology methods (Baraybar 2008; 
Cardoza 2017; Guglielmucci 2017), considering that it was 
impossible to apply molecular tools to corroborate subjects’ 
identities. Querales (2019) mentions that if DNA plays a role 
in facilitating an “accurate and scientific identification,” the 
significance of the process undertaken by relatives transcends 
the limits of the forensic sciences (68).

As a result, considering the need to improve procedures 
and strengthen the scientific character of anthropology 
(ALAF 2016; Dirkmaat & Cabo 2012) to ensure the quality 
of the process of gathering antemortem information, we have 
demonstrated a shortcoming in conducting the interviews. 
Improvements in the instrument and procedure (Fleischman 
et al. 2019) correspond in this case to the interview with a 
forensic semiology perspective. Additionally, an ethical, rig-
orous and attentive interview lends dignity to the process, 
and as a result, to the family.

Considering the diachronic comparison among inter-
views, the analyzed categories depend on the clarity of the 
interviewee’s memory about the deceased individual. As Jelin 
(2002) explains, “the meaning of the past in the present, and 
based on a desired future” (12). In the case of the CPP is the 
intention of the families to recover the identity of their deceased 
relatives. However, the passage of time might change or omit 
details useful to the identification process. Some changes have 
to do with the idealization of the person being identified, 
remembering them without illness, for example, so the inter-
viewer should consider that possible bias in the responses.

In addition, the deceased individuals lost their identities 
due to the natural disaster of the earthquake, which is a trau-
matic event for those being asked to relive the memory 
(Ramos 2017). The problems around identification and how 
to establish a successful process will depend on the limita-
tions of the knowledge and techniques employed (Gug-
lielmucci 2017); as such, attention to both will help produce 
satisfactory results.

The evaluation of the responses provided in the D2 inter-
views leads us to consider the required antemortem infor-
mation, and how to increase the possibilities of obtaining this 
information from relatives of the deceased of the CPP, con-
sidering the time spent and the sensitive nature of the 
responses. The objective of this study was to capture part of 
the argumentation and application of forensic semiology as 
a methodological strategy for the collection of antemortem 
information. Qualitative data generated within the frame-
work of forensic semiology are useful in evaluating and 
supplementing antemortem information instrumental in the 
identification process, and they may be enriched by building 
relationships with the relatives.

Investigating and connecting memories, mediated by the 
questions asked is a highly sensitive process, accompanied 
by tears and smiles from those who remember their loved 



Reyes Baeza 223

ones. For team members, professionals and/or students in 
training who conduct the interviews, this reinforces the social 
and ethical commitment to the community, in addition to 
improving the connection and interpretation of information 
in the identification process, when antemortem and postmor-
tem data are compared.

Drawing on the intervention in the CPP, along with pro-
posing improvements in the practices used in the forensic 
semiology interview, this study promotes the participation of 
families (Reyes et al. 2016) beyond the provision of antemor-
tem information. Aranguren and León (2020) probe the 
relationship between forensic anthropology and the commu-
nity, highlighting the “intersubjective and dialogical” char-
acter (74), a bond that allows a researcher to come into contact 
with the reality of the community and the families, in addi-
tion to being overwhelmed by demands of “who is looking 
for another missing person” (91).

The researchers established this connection with the 
affected families, through meetings and workshops where 
they demonstrated the capacities of anthropology and its 
fields as ideal professions for managing human identification 
processes based on skeletal remains. This article has empha-
sized the importance of the antemortem and postmortem 
profile in the identification process, concluding that if the 
responsibility for the intervention lies with professionals, the 
results should be collectively validated with those affected 
due to the nature of the information that can be recovered 
from the context.

Conclusions

The problem addressed in the CPP is defined along social 
lines by families that seek to reestablish the materiality of the 
funerary ritual with their deceased relatives through the iden-
tification of the bodies. From a scientific and disciplinary 
point of view, the article defines improved practices of foren-
sic anthropology, focusing on strengthening the information 
and quality of the antemortem narrative, as well as strategies 
that may strengthen the theoretical, methodological and tech-
nical corpus of the discipline in the process.

The forensic semiology instrument is designed with a 
focus on the categories of illness, injuries and ailments. The 
methodological review of each question is specified, its scope 
and objectives based on the information received, making it 
possible for the team to translate it into scientific informa-
tion and apply it to the comparison with postmortem infor-
mation. The ethnographic focus and the transcultural 
perception of death form part of the study’s perspective, 
which strengthens the link between the scientific team and 
the families.

The contribution of the forensic semiology interview in 
the context of the CPP dates to the beginning of the human 

identification process, which requires a centralized organi-
zation that makes visible the importance of the information 
that comes from the social context to which the individual 
belonged. In addition, the inclusion of sociocultural anthro-
pologists in the collection of information should be promoted 
and if necessary, the appropriate training for members of 
civil society, students, and professionals in diverse fields, 
depending on the scope of the context. The semiology inter-
view model may not be applicable to the diversity of contexts 
that require human identification, but it is necessary to con-
sider the gathering of antemortem information carefully—  
or its reevaluation—  an idea that points to improving quality 
standards, as was the case with the CPP.

Limitations to the application of the semiology inter-
view originate, in the first place, in the source of informa-
tion embodied in the memory of the families and close 
friends of the person whose identity has been lost. As is 
mentioned in the text, the context of the identity loss, the 
time that passes between the disappearance and interven-
tion, in addition to the significance of the event for the per-
son being interviewed can affect the memory and its 
perception. In the case of the CPP, the families suffered the 
interruption of the “rest” of their loved ones, causing a rup-
ture around the funerary ritual and the physical bond, repre-
sented in the body of the deceased person inside the burial 
niche, which is lost.

A second limitation is due to the lack of preparation in 
the application of the technical instrument, which for the case 
of the intervention in the CPP, was considered during the 
investigation, and not at the beginning. This required gener-
ating requests for interdisciplinary work teams among social 
and forensic experts to comprehend the applicability of the 
questions in the antemortem interview and its subsequent 
interpretation compared with the osteological information. 
Moreover, the team also carried out days of accompaniment 
with the involved family members, where team members 
explained the content of the antemortem interview, encour-
aging them to participate in the identification process and the 
communication of the results, promoting their empowerment 
and participation in the process.

The formulation and inclusion of the forensic semiology 
focus in the CPP context was born from confronting an inves-
tigation with broad social impact which until now has con-
firmed 27 identifications. The search to improve processes 
is a constant challenge for the families and communities 
affected by the loss of identity of their loved ones.

References

Aranguren J, León J. De la pasión por el hueso al dolor de los demás: 
la experiencia de profesionales en antropología forense ante 
la desaparición forzada de personas en Colombia. Sociología 
y tecnociencia 2020;10.1:72– 93.



224 Forensic Semiology

Asociación latinoamericana de antropología forense. Guía latino-
americana de buenas prácticas para la aplicación en antro-
pología forense. Colombia: ALAF; 2016.

Baraybar JP. When DNA is not available, can we still identify peo-
ple? Recommendations for best practice. Journal of Forensic 
Sciences 2008;53:533– 540.

Barreto MI, Bacigalupo C, Centro andino de investigaciones antro-
pológico forenses. La investigación antropológica forense en 
casos de graves violaciones a los derechos humanos: linea-
mientos básicos. Lima: Centro andino de investigaciones 
antropológico forenses; 2005.

Boer H, Blau S, Delabarde T, Hackman L. The role of forensic 
anthropology in disaster victim identification (DVI): Recent 
developments and future prospects. Forensic Sciences 
Research 2018. doi: 10 . 1080 / 20961790 . 2018 . 1480460.

Bustos P, Intriago M. The chilean forensic medical service. In: 
Ubelaker D, ed. The Global Practice of Forensic Science. 
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2015:39– 47.

Cardoza CR. Investigación antropológica forense y memoria en la 
búsqueda de personas desaparecidas en contextos de violaciones 
de derechos humanos en el Perú. Memoria(s) 2017;(1)69– 85.

Cartay R. La muerte. Fermentum 2002;12(34):447– 470.
Comité Internacional de la Cruz Roja (CICR). Cuestionario para 

recolectar datos antemortem de personas desaparecidas 
Versión 1.0. Ginebra: CICR.

Comité Internacional de la Cruz Roja (CICR). Ciencias forenses y 
acción humanitaria. Ginebra: CICR; 2014a.

Comité Internacional de la Cruz Roja (CICR). Acompañar a los 
familiares de las personas desaparecidas. Ginebra: CICR; 
2014b.

Dirkmaat D, Cabo L. Forensic anthropology: Embracing the new 
paradigm. In Dirkmaat D, ed. A Companion to Forensic 
Anthropology. Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell Publishing Ltd; 
2012:3– 40.

Dutrénit S. Los equipos de antropología forense en América Latina: 
coadyuvantes en el camino de la verdad y la justicia. Red Uni-
versitaria sobre Derechos Humanos y Democratización para 
América Latina 2012; 25– 53.

Equipo Mexicano de Antropología Forense (EMAF). La importan-
cia del proceso de investigación forense en casos de desapa-
rición forzada. Taller impartido al comité los otros 
desaparecidos de Iguala, Guerrero. Guerrero: EMAF; 2016.

Fleischman J, Pierce M, Crowder C. Transparency in forensic 
anthropology. In: Fulginiti L, Hartnett- McCann, Galloway A, 
eds. Forensic Anthropology and the United States Judicial 
System. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2019:71– 88.

Garrido C, Itriago M. The “Unidad de Identificación Forense” and 
Human Rights in Chile. Cuadernos do GEEvH. 2012;1(2): 
32– 41.

Gaytan E. Cambios en los vínculos afectivos entre difuntos y deu-
dos en situación de desastre: 27/F 2010 Chile. La emergencia 
invisible. Sociedad Hoy 2010;97– 111.

Gazitúa R. Manual de semiología 2017; Obtenido de http:// public 
acionesmedicina . uc . cl / ManualSemiologia / Default . html.

Guber R. La etnografía. Buenos Aires: Siglo Veintiuno; 2011.
Guerra C, Reyes E. Intervención antropológica en Cementerio Par-

roquial de Penco (Chile). Actas del Tercer Congreso Latino-
americano de Antropología 2012;1– 10.

Guglielmucci A. Identidades fragmentadas: los procesos de iden-
tificación forense en casos de desaparición forzada Avá; 
2017:(30)105– 136.

Huffschmid A. Los (des)bordes de la justicia: agencias y procesos 
forenses a partir de las fosas comunes del presente (mexicano). 
In: Dutrénit S, Nadal O, eds. Pasados recientes, violencias 
actuales. Antropología forense, cuerpos y memorias. Ciudad 
de México: Instituto de investigaciones Dr. José María Luis 
Mora; 2019:31– 67.

Instituto Nacional de Medicina Legal y Ciencias Forenses. 
Estándares forenses mínimos para la búsqueda de personas 
desaparecidas, y la recuperación e identificación de cadá-
veres. Bogotá; 2016.

Jelin E. Los trabajos de la memoria. Madrid: Siglo XXI de España; 
2002.

Olivero R. Barráez C. Importancia de la semiología médica en la 
adquisición de competencias del médico. Salus 2011;31– 36.

Ortner D. What skeletons tell us. The story of human paleopathol-
ogy. Virchow Archive 2011;247– 254.

Padilla E, Reveco I. Memorias del Grupo de Antropología Forense 
y su aporte al campo de los Derechos Humanos en Chile. V 
Congreso chileno de antropología. Colegio de Antropólogos 
de Chile A.G 2004;II:1100– 1108.

Panizo L. Cuerpos desaparecidos: La ubicación ritual de la muerte 
desatendida. In: Hidalgo C. ed. Etnografías de la muerte. Rit-
uales, desapariciones, VIH/SIDA y resignificaciones de la 
vida. Buenos Aires: CICCUS- CLACSO; 2011:17– 39.

Pérez M. El proceso de duelo y la familia 2010:279– 204.
Ramírez J. Nuevos retos en el estudio de la enfermedad desde la 

antropología física. Estudios de antropología biológica 2007; 
(XIII) 863– 883.

Ramos J. (2017). Entre heridas y huellas el dolor crece: memoria 
en procesos de dolor y enfermedad en Ayacucho. +Memoria(s) 
2017;(30)19– 39.

Reyes E. Estudio de rasgos no métricos craneales en el Cemente-
rio Parroquial de Penco: un enfoque comparativo [PhD dis-
sertation]. Chile: Universidad de Concepción; 2011.

Reyes E, Guerra C, Gomes R. Identificación humana y antro-
pología: un aporte metodológico desde la realización de tall-
eres con Familiares. Revista científica forense 2016;173– 190.

Rodríguez T, Blanco M, Parra I. Las habilidades comunicativas, 
entrevista médica, relación médico- paciente. Revista Cubana 
de Medicina Militar 2009;79– 90.

Salado M. Patologías óseas. Museo de Tenerife; 2015. http:// www 
. museosdetenerife . org / assets / downloads / file - 111 - 9fe09d2507 
. pdf.

Salado M, Ríos L. La importancia de la osteopatología en la iden-
tificación de restos óseos humanos. XV simposio de investi-
gaciones arqueológicas en Guatemala 2002;721– 729.

Thomas LV. La muerte. Barcelona: Paidós Ibérica, S.A; 1991.
Thompson T, Black S. Forensic Human Identification. Boca Raton, 

FL: Taylor & Francis; 2007.
Ubelaker D. New directions in forensic anthropology. En: Mar-

tell D. The Future of Forensic Acience. John Wiley & Sons 
Ltd; 2019:1– 18.

Ubelaker D, Shamlou A, Kunkle A. Contribution of forensic 
anthropology to positive identification: A critical review. 
Forensic Sciences Research 2018. doi: 10 . 1080 / 20961790 . 2018 
. 1523704.

Van Gennep A. Los ritos de paso. Madrid: Alianza Editorial; 2008.
Vera JL. Las andanzas del caballero inexistente. Reflexiones en 

torno al cuerpo y la antropología física. México D.F.: Centro 
de estudios filosóficos, políticos y sociales Vicente Lombardo 
Toledano; 2002.



Reyes Baeza 225

ANNEX 1

GUIDE FOR COLLECTING ANTEMORTEM 
INFORMATION, FORENSIC SEMIOLOGY 
PROPOSAL

This guide is designed to accompany the interviewer, who 
oversees registering antemortem information (AM) provided 
by relatives and close associates of the deceased who is to be 
identified.

The “Questionnaire to collect antemortem information 
on disappeared persons version 1.0,” proposed by the Inter-
national Committee of the Red Cross, was used as a source,

It is important to emphasize that the information 
recorded in this interview will constitute antemortem infor-
mation on the deceased, information that will subsequently 
be used in the process of comparison with postmortem infor-
mation (PM). The quality and depth of the responses pro-
vided by the relatives and close friends of the deceased will 
be vitally important for the process of final identification.

Generally, the interview should be conducted by a prin-
cipal interviewer, in a secure environment that allows the 
family or friends to feel comfortable in providing the required 
information.

Instructions for completing the interview

Before starting, it is indispensable complete the information 
about the location where the interview is carried out, the date, 
complete name of the interviewer and interview sheet num-
ber, which constitutes the coded profile of the deceased 
individual.

In the case of repeat interviews (interviews conducted 
for a second time or more), leave the sheet number blank, 
given that it should be completed with the sheet number 
assigned the first time.

Informant and primary contact section: information pro-
vided by the relative or associate of the deceased.

Deceased information section
2.1 General information. In this section, the information 

that can be left incomplete or estimated are the dates of birth 
and/or death. In both cases, indicate that they are possible 
approximations. Record comments.

2.2 Occupation of deceased: main occupation during her 
life, most consistent activity over time, of longest temporal 
duration. In the section “other occupations carried out during 

her life,” emphasize those that involve physical activities, or 
patterns of physical activity.

2.3 Physical description: in the case of estimations of 
weight or height, indicate that they were approximations. 
Record comments.

2.4 Specific physical features. In the section on “char-
acteristic features,” consider congenital or acquired distinc-
tive features, that may have been observable when the 
individual was alive. Examples are limps, deformities, 
absence of limbs or parts of congenital limbs, spinal curva-
ture, among others.

In the section on “pains and ailments,” consider the 
subjective level and interpretation of a possible illness, 
this from the perspective of the relative or associate about 
the experience and symptoms that the individual dis-
cussed socially while he was alive. It is very important to 
describe in a detailed manner that relatives’ impressions 
of the illnesses or suffering, given that these may lead to a 
possible diagnosis in the interpretation of the postmortem 
information in the process of comparing AM and PM 
information.

2.5 Medical history. Consider in the responses that refer 
to illnesses or possible diagnoses, inquire if any other mem-
ber of the family suffers from the same ailment or medical 
problem. Include: name, relationship with the disappeared 
person.

In the section on “fractures/accidents,” consider going 
into more depth on the treatment of injuries, or the descrip-
tion of possible accidents that the individual may have suf-
fered and include the time period of the events.

In the section on “surgeries,” the description of the event, 
time period, and if in this intervention any kind of medical 
device was introduced to the individual’s body that may have 
been present when the person was buried (example of 
devices: pacemaker, colostomy bag, methods of reproduc-
tive control, among others).

In the section on “implants,” consider the time period 
and function of these devices.

In the section on “illnesses,” consider the formal diag-
noses, or without those, details regarding signs and symp-
toms for a possible diagnosis. Remember that if the focus is 
on the illnesses that might have some influence on skeletal 
tissue, in some cases, metabolic type illnesses can be asso-
ciated with skeletal injuries. If the possible consequences of 
the illness are not known, record everything that the inter-
viewee says.



226 Forensic Semiology

ANTEMORTEM INFORMATION INTERVIEW, FORENSIC SEMIOLOGY PROPOSAL

Date of interview: Date:
Name of interviewer: Sheet #:
1. INFORMANT AND PRIMARY CONTACT:
1.1. Informant information:
Full name of informant:
Sex: Female: (  ) Male: (  ) Date of birth: _____ / _____ / _______
Relationship with the deceased: Home address:
Telephone contact(s): E- mail:
Additional information: (Note below the names/relationship with the deceased/contact information if any other relative is 
present when the interview is conducted or if there is another relative whom might be contacted to obtain additional informa-
tion in the future).
2. INFORMATION ABOUT THE DECEASED INDIVIDUAL
2.1. General information
Full name of deceased:
Sex: Female: (  ) Male: (  ) Date of birth: _____ / _____ / _______
If the birthdate is approximate, explain why:
Place of birth:
Date of death: _____ / _____ / ________. Age at time of death: _______ years.
If date of death or age at time of death is estimated, explain why:
Cause of death:
Hospital where individual was treated:
Autopsy conducted: Yes (  ) No (  ) Location where autopsy was conducted:
If the individual is a woman, did she have children? Yes (  ) No (  ) How many?:
Block and cemetery niche where the deceased was located:
Were the remains disarticulated and placed in a smaller niche? Yes (  ) No (  )
2.2. Occupation of deceased
Main occupation:
Time, location in which he/she conducted the activity and until what age:
Other occupations that he/she performed in his/her life (include duration and age at which he/she performed the 
activity):
Other activities that could cause tension in the body (Sports, artistic activities, hobbies, games, etc. Include age when he/
she undertook each activity and its duration):
2.3. Physical description
Body size: Very thin: (  ) Thin: (  ) Medium weight: (  ) Large: (  ) Very large: (  )
Weight: ___________ kgs.
If this is an estimate, explain why:
Approximate weight at time of death: ________ kgs.
If this is an estimate, explain why:
Height: _________ cms.
If this is an estimate, explain why:
Hair color. (Include quantity, length, color, type, style, if it was dyed, if he/she used artificial hair or a wig):



Reyes Baeza 227

2.4. Specific physical features
Did the deceased have any characteristic feature (deformity or defect) in his/her body? Indicate the presence of defor-
mities or birth defects. Include Feature –  Location –  Laterality –  Age and duration –  General details.
Did he/she complain of pain or suffering? Indicate Type –  Location –  Laterality –  Age and duration –  General details.
YES (  ) NO (  ) UNSURE (  )
2.5. Medical History
Did he/she have fractures/accidents? YES (  ) NO (  ) UNSURE (  )
Indicate type of fracture/accident –  Location –  Laterality –  Age and duration -  treatment –  General description.
Did he/she have surgeries? YES (  ) NO (  ) UNSURE (  )
Indicate intervention type –  Location –  Laterality –  Age and duration –  General description.
Did he/she have amputations? YES (  ) NO (  ) UNSURE (  )
Indicate type of amputation –  Location –  Laterality –  Age –  General description.
Did he/she have implants? YES (  ) NO (  ) UNSURE (  )
Indicate type of implant –  Location –  Laterality –  Date of implantation –  General description.
Did he/she have an orthopedic prosthesis? YES (  ) NO (  ) UNSURE (  )
Indicate type of prosthesis –  Purpose –  Location –  Date –  Material and date of manufacture –   Details.
Did he/she suffer from an important illness during his/her life? YES (  ) NO (  ) UNSURE (  )
Indicate type of illness –  Indicate physical signs –  Duration of disease –  General details.
Other medical observations. Consider traditional/informal treatments. Objects related to the medical condition of the 
deceased (intrauterine devices, catheters for feeding or bowel movements, pacemakers, among others).
Include type, purpose, brand, quantity, description.


