Interindividual variability, pathological changes and decomposition as an impediment to the morphological determination of human specificity of bone finds

Playing children discovered several teeth close to the wall surrounding a village church. A subsequent police search yielded further teeth, three neurocranial fragments, a metacarpal bone and the fragment of a long tubular bone. The circumstances along with the results of the investigation and the morphological findings suggested historical bones from a former graveyard. However, a large fragment of bone shaft from a long bone could not definitely be classified as being of human origin. The tibia of a deer was amongst the possibilities considered. Comparative tests run at the Institute of Veterinary Anatomy of the University of Giessen in addition to histological examinations, however, ultimately established the human specificity. Interindividual variability and decomoositional changes were determined as causes for the conspicuous macroscopic and microscopic findings for the tibia fragment. Pathological changes could not be demonstrated.     

Violent men: ordinary and deviant

This article deals with discourses of intimate partner violence and is based on interviews with professionals who meet violent men. The professionals emphasized the importance of men taking unreserved responsibility for their violent behavior. Intimate partner violence was viewed not only as "power and control" but as the result of complex situations and interplays. The discourses presented an ambivalent explanation of violent men as both ordinary and deviant. They were understood as having a strained background, but to be rather ordinary, often functioning well at work and in society. Yet, they have nonstandard views of women, act deviant in their communication and interplay with others, and cannot cope with certain situations in intimate relationships. Based on the interviews, men inclined to partner violence may be generalized as those who: attack immediately, explode unexpectedly, or ultimately become aggressive. The discussion challenges unreflected discourses as means for change when counteracting violence.     

The ideal subject distance for passport pictures

In an age of global combat against terrorism, the recognition and identification of people on document images is of increasing significance. Experiments and calculations have shown that the camera-to-subject distance - not the focal length of the lens - can have a significant effect on facial proportions. Modern passport pictures should be able to function as a reference image for automatic and manual picture comparisons. This requires a defined subject distance. It is completely unclear which subject distance, in the taking of passport photographs, is ideal for the recognition of the actual person. We show here that the camera-to-subject distance that is perceived as ideal is dependent on the face being photographed, even if the distance of 2m was most frequently preferred. So far the problem of the ideal camera-to-subject distance for faces has only been approached through technical calculations. We have, for the first time, answered this question experimentally with a double-blind experiment. Even if there is apparently no ideal camera-to-subject distance valid for every face, 2m can be proposed as ideal for the taking of passport pictures. The first step would actually be the determination of a camera-to-subject distance for the taking of passport pictures within the standards. From an anthropological point of view it would be interesting to find out which facial features allow the preference of a shorter camera-to-subject distance and which allow the preference of a longer camera-to-subject distance.     

Contrasting Strategies within the War Crimes Trials of Kesselring and Wolff

This article compares the different ways in which, during the post-war decades, the Allied war crimes trials programme responded to the war criminality of two prominent German officials: Field Marshal Albert Kesselring and SS General Karl Wolff. It explores the question of why Wolff, whose complicity was arguably much greater than that of Kesselring, received more favourable treatment, and the role of various political and geo-political factors, including those influencing the interventions of US intelligence officials, as explanations for this apparent legal discrepancy. Dr. Kerstin von Lingen is a researcher at the Centre for Studies on Experiences in War (SFB 437 “Kriegserfahrungen”) at Tubingen University, Germany; Dr. Michael Salter is Professor of Law at The Law School, University of Central Lancashire, United Kingdom.     

Sharing the Rewards,Dividing the Costs? The Electoral Consequences of Social Pacts and Legislative Reform in Western Europe

Do electoral pressures provide an explanation for why governments offer pacts to unions and employers rather than acting through legislation when faced with the need to pass potentially unpopular reforms to welfare policies, wages, and labour markets? This article addresses that question by analysing whether governments’ pursuit of pacts affects their vote share and increases the probability that they gain re-election for 16 West European countries between 1980 and 2012. It is found that the presence of social pacts has a significant and positive effect on incumbents’ vote shares at the next election and also results in a higher probability of re-election. These results are conditioned by government type: While all types of governments benefit electorally from pacts, the electoral penalties from the pursuit of unilateral legislation on policy reforms harm single-party majorities the most, minority governments moderately, and coalition majorities the least.