Final answer:
The detective's conclusion that the decedent with defense wounds is the victim may not be accurate, as both parties in a mutual combat can have defense and offensive wounds. Perimortem trauma analysis is vital in understanding the injury context and cannot be determined solely based on visible wounds.
Step-by-step explanation:
The detective's assertion that the decedent with defense wounds is the victim is not necessarily correct. Defense wounds on the hands could indicate that this person was trying to defend themselves, but it does not automatically mean they did not also inflict lethal wounds on the other individual. It's important to consider that in situations of mutual combat, both parties could have defense wounds as well as offensive wounds. Furthermore, the lack of visible defense wounds on the other decedent does not exclude them from being a victim as well.
Perimortem trauma analysis, including the evaluation of stab wound patterns and the involvement of forensic experts, is crucial to understanding the context of the injuries. Studies such as those looking into skeletal remains and injury patterns from violent encounters suggest that the presence or absence of defensive injuries alone cannot definitively label one party as the victim or perpetrator. Each case must be carefully analyzed for evidence of how the wounds were inflicted and the dynamics of the altercation.