NCJ Number
216052
Journal
Forensic Magazine Volume: 3 Issue: 5 Dated: October/November 2006 Pages: 22-24,26,29
Date Published
October 2006
Length
7 pages
Annotation
After reviewing the history of fingerprint identification in criminal investigations, this article discusses the detection of latent fingerprints at crime scenes, techniques for matching crime-scene fingerprints with the fingerprints of known persons, court acceptance of fingerprint evidence from expert witnesses, and the potential for error in fingerprint analysis.
Abstract
Based initially on Henry Faulds' investigation of the possibility of using fingerprints as distinctive identifying marks in the 1870s and Francis Galton's subsequent confirmation and elaboration of Faulds' work, U.S. police departments began to adopt fingerprinting systems in the early 1900s. Tools for detecting fingerprints at a crime scene have continued to increase in number. One newer method of fingerprint detection is the use of micro-X-ray fluorescence to detect sodium, potassium, and chlorine in sweat deposited from fingerprint ridges. Various methods have been used to compare fingerprints collected from crime scenes with those of known persons. The ACE-V comparison method is endorsed by the International Association for Identification. This method compares prints at three levels. In reviewing the acceptance of fingerprints as a scientific method for accurately identifying individuals, the article presents the 1993 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., which set guidelines for Federal trial judges in determining whether to allow scientific testimony before a jury. It also considers the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in "Kumho Tire," which requires that Federal judge's consider expert testimony based on technical knowledge as well as scientific knowledge. The author notes that the ACE-V method of comparing fingerprints has withstood all "Daubert" challenges so far. Another issue subject to court challenges is the perceptive and psychological influences that determine how a particular fingerprint examiner processes and evaluates information and makes decisions about fingerprint matches. 7 figures