LATENT FINGERPRINTS

Latent Fingerprints

ABSTRACT

Latent fingerprints should be admissible evidence in the court of law. Although there are cases in which latent fingerprint evidence was mishandled, such as the Brandon Mayfield case, latent fingerprint collection, enhancement and analysis is a reliable science. Because the field of latent fingerprint analysis is an integrative science relying on the same tenets of examination and process as other forms of admissible evidence it should be held to be as reliable as these unquestioned forms of admissible evidence in court. Latent fingerprint analysis requires manipulation and reproduction of the print at virtually all stages of investigation from collection to examination and finally to presentation and storage. The recommendation is made that a single set of uniform standard operating procedures or SOPs should be developed in relation to latent print collection, analysis, and presentation that are followed by all law enforcement agencies at all levels as well as by all forensic laboratories.

Table of Contents

ABSTRACT2

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION4

Problem Statement4

Research Hypotheses6

Rationale of Study6

Definition of Terms7

CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW9

Basis of Testimony20

Criticism of Fingerprint Evidence24

Sources of Evidence25

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY29

CHAPTER IV: RESULTS34

Data analysis38

Chi Square39

CHAPTER V: DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS47

Discussion47

Conclusions50

Recommendations51

REFERENCES53

APPENDICES56

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION

Latent fingerprints should be admissible in a court of law as evidence. However, latent fingerprints are inherently problematic in nature considering instances such as the Madrid bombing case in which they resulted in erroneous identification of Brandon Mayfield as that of the bomber (FBI, 2004). Yet, in spite of the inherent difficulties associated with accurately lifting and matching latent fingerprints as well as potential issues in artificially manipulating them during the enhancement process, to simply ignore them would be irresponsible. Technology has allowed criminologists and investigators to more accurately enhance latent fingerprints to the point that their reliability as evidence is valid.

Problem Statement

Latent fingerprints should be admissible in a court of law despite certain inherent issues with them relating to erroneous identification of suspects due to enhancement concerns.

Physical evidence at a crime scene can be present in an infinite variety of forms, materials, dimensions, etc. Few forms of evidence lead to the unquestionable identification of an individual and possess all the necessary qualities for identification. Fingerprints are one of the most valuable types of physical evidence and hence their detection plays a significant role in criminal investigation and forensic science.

As indicated by their name, latent fingerprints are normally not visible. Generally some chemical, physical or combinations of both are exercised to develop and visualize such fingerprints. The main drawback of such method is that it lacks a generic approach in lifting the latent fingerprints. One has to undergo a series of systematic procedures and use of chemicals, depending upon the substrate on which the print is formed. Moreover, these methods fail when detecting older fingerprints.

Detection of latent fingerprints with laser-induced fluorescence was initially explored as a non-destructive and non-invasive technique such that, in the case of failure, all other conventional procedures could still be applied subsequently. Fingerprint experts often encounter prints deposited on highly fluorescing substrates, but their separation is difficult ...