Evaluating legal age of 18 years through observation of third molars using Gambier et al. method in an orthopantomographic sample of subadults from South India.

In forensic practice, medicolegal physicians are often tasked with estimating age using dental evidence. This calls for an uncomplicated, reliable, and reproducible method for dental age estimation, enabling physicians to proceed without specific odontological expertise. Among various dental methods, third molar eruption analyses are less complicated and easier to perform.

Examination of the radiographic visibility of the root pulp of the mandibular second molars as an age marker.

Forensic odontologists often confront with conceptually simple medicolegal question of whether an individual is a juvenile or an adult. The demand for additional research into extending dental age estimation methods in late adolescence is never the less, especially in those who have passed 15 years and are suspected older than 18 years. The present research investigated the regressive dental characteristic, i.

A cut-off value of third molar maturity index for indicating a minimum age of criminal responsibility: Older or younger than 16 years?

Providing appropriate legal mechanisms, that evaluate the progression of development from the age of childhood innocence to maturity and full responsibility, considered one of the difficult areas of criminal justice policy. The minimum age of criminal responsibility (MACR) in children varies among countries and differs widely owing to history and culture. Due to rising and brutality of criminal offenses, particularly by juveniles, few countries have lowered the minimum age of criminal responsibility, and many have considered/considering to do the same.