In 1991, 35-year-old Kim Ancona was found murdered in the Arizona bar where she worked. A bite mark identified on her left breast became the center of the investigation and Ray Krone, a regular customer with crooked teeth, became the prime suspect. During the trial, a forensic odontologist testified that Krone’s deformed teeth matched bite marks found on the victim’s body. Although Krone’s roommate testified that he was home at the time of the murder, and despite Krone’s clear record and the fact that his shoe size did not match the fourteen shoe prints found at the crime scene, he was convicted and sentenced to death. Ray Krone was dubbed the “Snaggletooth Killer” for the murder or Ancona.

 

After a decade of his family fighting for his innocence Krone received a third trial. Ten years after his initial sentencing, DNA evidence proved that Krone was not only innocent of murdering Ancona, but that the actual perpetrator was Kenneth Phillips, a man accused of assaulting a child only weeks following Ancona’s death. 

 

What went wrong? 

 

The dental analyst in Krone’s case admitted to forging evidence and lying to jurors about the certainty of the match.

​

​

 

However, the issue with bite mark analysis is much bigger than one or two corrupt experts in Krone’s case—the entire discipline of forensic odontology has been determined to be scientifically invalid.

​