I was watching an episode of Columbo this evening (the one where he solves the murder on board the cruise ship), and he kept talking about “powder burns” or “powder marks” being on the hands of whoever fired the gun, or on the gloves he wore.
I know this is a television show made around 40 years ago, but would an experienced homicide investigator have used such terms for “gunshot residue” (GSR) back then (if ever)? Or was this just sloppy work on the part of the scriptwriters?
I learned about the Paraffin test in College studying criminal law.
I keyed in “paraffin” residue, and one hit was this.
“Dallas Police performed a paraffin test on Oswald’s hands at the time of his interrogation to determine if he had recently fired a revolver, and the results were positive, indicating the presence of nitrates from gunpowder residue on his hands.”
Interesting, thanks! But my question is really more “How could Columbo possibly confuse powder burns, which are left on the victim when the gun goes off in close proximity to his or her skin, and the powder residue left on the shooter’s hands?”
You have to remember, as pointed out, this is TV. I see some things on TV that are not the actual law on it. These types of shows do not have a police/law technical advisors to go over a script looking for things.
So it was sloppy writing, pure and simple. But I’m surprised Peter Falk, who undoubtedly knew the difference, went along with it. In his position, I would have corrected the script with a pencil slash on the spot.
No, it was not sloppy writing. From Wikipedia;
…Gunshot residue (GSR), also known as cartridge discharge residue (CDR), “gunfire residue”(GFR), or firearm discharge residue (FDR), is residue deposited on the hands and clothes of someone who discharges a firearm…
Falk was not a forensic scientist or policeman either.
One episode of the Rockford Files a captain or Lt. said to the patrol car, such as “Pick him up for suspicion of murder”. The patrolman said something like, “That’s not a charge”, and he replied such as “That’s what suspicion is, just suspicion”.
You can’t pick up a person and transport them to the jailhouse absent Probable Cause, suspicion will not cut it under the 4th AM.
Some cheap revolvers that have some gaps can spit a little fire out the sides so I suppose there could be powder burns. But more likely I think it’s just sloppy writing. Firing a gun can leave residue but it will not show up as burns or even be visible to the naked eye.
I’m not a policeman or a forensic scientist either, but I do know the difference between powder burns and GSR. I’m surprised that Falk, who was a very intelligent man and had been playing Columbo for seven years at that point, would allow such a goof to slide. He must have picked up some knowledge of the correct terminology by then.
He may have been “just an actor,” but good actors who play such roles spend a lot of time researching them in order to avoid things like this.
If Falk was going to worry about anything in the script, it should be how the feather from the pillow used to muffle the gunshot just happened to fall off Robert Vaughn outside his room in sick bay.
Just one of those lucky breaks cops on TV get every week.
Another thing I noticed watching this episode: One of the first things Columbo does after suspicion falls on the musician is to ask the Ship’s Surgeon if he has any paraffin (wax), so he can do a GSR test.
The Captain, Purser, and Surgeon are all British, and they seem to understand him perfectly, even though “paraffin” (IIRC) is what Brits call kerosene.
Probably something neither the writers nor Falk would have known, but the British contingent in the cast certainly could have pointed this out before filming began.