Forensics

If a crime writer owns one forensics reference, this is probably the one. Forensics by D. P. Lyle, the cornerstone of Writer’s Digest’s Howdunit series, is the most comprehensive and authoritative forensic reference written specifically for writers, and it earns that standing through the rare combination of genuine expertise and a gift for explaining it. Lyle is a physician who has consulted for numerous television crime dramas and novelists, and the book reflects exactly the questions writers actually ask. Among the crime-writer’s references, it’s the standout.

The lens, as always, is craft: this review treats the book as the tool for writing believable crime fiction that it is, focused on what it gives a storyteller instead of on operational specifics.

Comprehensive and current for its time

The book’s first strength is scope. Across its substantial length it covers the full range of forensic science a crime writer might need. How investigators approach a crime scene. What evidence can reveal. The work of the medical examiner. The major forensic disciplines and what they can and cannot determine, all organized for a writer’s reference use.

Published in 2008, it’s considerably more current than the early-1990s forensic references it shares a shelf with. It reflects the modern forensic landscape, including the DNA-era capabilities that have transformed both real investigation and the genre, that the older books predate. For grounding a contemporary crime story, that relative currency matters enormously.

Written by an expert who can teach

What lifts it above a mere data dump is Lyle’s ability to explain forensic science clearly to non-specialists and, crucially, to address it from the writer’s angle. Having consulted extensively for crime fiction and television, he knows the specific questions writers bring, what’s plausible, what’s myth, how long things really take, what a given piece of evidence can and cannot prove, and he answers them in accessible language.

He’s also notably good at correcting the forensic misconceptions that television has spread, the instant results, the infallible techniques, so a writer can avoid the errors that knowledgeable readers and the genre’s own conventions have made commonplace. That writer-facing, myth-correcting expertise is the book’s defining strength.

What are the weaknesses of Forensics?

The caveats are mild and mostly about the passage of time. Even a 2008 reference is now over fifteen years old, and forensic science continues to advance, so a writer working on a contemporary story should still verify the latest specifics against current sources, though the fundamentals Lyle covers age well. It’s also, by design, a reference instead of a craft guide, it makes a crime plot accurate but doesn’t teach plotting or character, and its comprehensiveness means a writer consults it instead of reads it through.

These are minor marks against an excellent resource.

Is Forensics worth reading?

It’s the best forensic reference for crime writers, comprehensive, authoritative, notably more current than its older shelfmates, and written by an expert who knows how to teach writers and correct the myths the genre has absorbed. For any writer working with crime, investigation, or forensic evidence, it’s close to essential, the first reference to reach for. It loses only a little for the passage of time since 2008, which still calls for checking the latest specifics, and for being a reference instead of a craft guide.

The standout of its category and a deserved staple of the crime writer’s shelf.

Frequently Asked Questions