NCJ Number
203735
Journal
Journal of Forensic Identification Volume: 54 Issue: 1 Dated: January/February 2004 Pages: 22-44
Date Published
January 2004
Length
23 pages
Annotation
This article discusses the effect of common fingerprint detection techniques on the recovery of DNA from fingerprints.
Abstract
DNA and fingerprints can often permit individualization and are valuable forms of evidence at crime scenes. It is in the interest of examiners to be able to exploit both forms of evidence on the one object. Fingerprints were placed on different surfaces in order to test the extent of variation in the recoverability of DNA, according to the surface. Five different surfaces were selected to reflect those commonly encountered at crime scenes. These surfaces were aluminum foil, polyethylene bags, paper, clear glass, and adhesive side of cellulose adhesive tape. After placement, the fingerprints were left for 2 days, then were processed using techniques routinely used for that particular surface. The results show that the recoverability of DNA from fingerprints is largely dependent on the surface upon which the fingerprints were placed. The enhancement techniques employed on the plastic surfaces did not significantly affect the DNA profiles achieved. Although the adhesive tape samples were largely successful, the profiles of one untreated control and one of the white light samples were incomplete. The powdering treatment did not prevent the recovery of DNA from the glass surfaces. The results indicated that negligible DNA was recovered from the paper surface and did not support the hypothesis that fingerprints on paper would be more likely to return DNA profiles than the smoother surfaces of plastic, foil, and glass. The aluminum foil was expected to attract and retain fewer skin cells than the paper surface, which was confirmed by the results. 13 figures, 16 references