Autobiography has been a hitherto underexploited resource for the history of science, technology and medicine, despite its importance as a means for the dissemination of knowledge to lay audiences. While precautions regarding authorial licence must be observed, autobiographies can provide the historian with a valuable insight into the public face of a scientific or medical field and its practitioners. This paper examines the memoirs of two leading figures in one of the early- to mid-twentieth century’s most visible disciplines, forensic medicine. The authors, Sydney Smith and John Glaister Jr., professors of medical jurisprudence at Edinburgh and Glasgow universities respectively, published their memoirs, 'Mostly murder' and 'Final diagnosis', in 1959 and 1964 after retirement. At the same time, they also contributed to newspaper serializations of the highlights of their careers, which had begun in the second decade of the twentieth century. In these works, they reflected on past cases, including dramatic courtroom clashes, as well as considering their discipline’s future. The paper will show that these books and articles presented an idealized picture of their authors, who were portrayed as fiercely impartial and sometimes iconoclastic defenders of justice. Similarly, their scientific techniques appeared to constitute an often inexorable force against the criminal. This was particularly apt at a time of uncertainty for the future in Britain of forensic medicine, which had been left out of the National Health Service. Glaister, in particular, used his book as a manifesto for his discipline’s place at the centre of the criminal justice system. The paper also considers the nature of authorship. Both Smith and Glaister’s books were ghost-written. This raises questions about the extent to which practitioners had control over their public images. In particular, the correspondence of the two men shows their concern over their portrayal in the press.