Ability of a coroner to detect poison in an embalmed body in 1920s?

Question

I'm studying a real-life possible murder case where a body was recovered in 1928 after it had been buried for about two years. It had already been embalmed. The coroner was looking for signs of poison, and detected none, so the suspects were set free. I'm curious, though, as to how effective such an examination would have been in the 20s? The examiner had no idea what kind of poison might have been used, and the body had been buried for a couple of years, and embalmed...was there really any possibility he could have found a poison in the remaining tissues? How advanced were forensics in 1928?

Answer 1

Since arsenic was still being used during this time for embalming fluid, I would guess that particular poison would be abundant!  As for the testing, I would assume that forensics were a far, far cry from today and that the testing was vague at best.  Embalming does and can alter the chemical composition of certain fluids, poisons and tissues.  Only recently have they been able to distinguish the effects of embalming on certain substances, thus establishing a comparable factor.

Answer 2

Forensics were well enough established that most heavy metal poisons such as lead, arsenic and antimony could be detected in small amounts. I believe those were the substances most poisoners used. They stay around for extended periods, so they could be detected.

Unfortunately, in the 1920s and even 3 or 4 decades later, the skills of individual coroners varied. Many jurisdictions did not even require a doctorate. Nor did they have easy access to crime labs. Nowadays, even though the coroner may not be a pathologist, he or she has access to experienced forensic pathologists. Smaller jurisdictions have access to state crime labs and even the FBI lab.