However, if an individual without any prior exposure or training in fingerprint identification,
However, if an individual without any prior exposure or training in fingerprint identification,
The search of the crime scene is the most important phase of any investigation. Decisions of the courts restricting admissibility of testimonial evidence have significantly increased the value of physical evidence in homicide investigations. Therefore, law enforcement personnel involved in the crime scene search must arrange for the proper and effective collection of evidence at the scene.The arguments the lawyer’s will make in the William’s case is: once an item is recognized as evidence it must be properly collected and preserved for laboratory examination. However, in order for physical evidence to be admissible, it must have been legally obtained. The courts have severely restricted the right of the police to search certain homicide crime scenes without a search warrant, (Mincey v. Arizona 437 US 385, 1978).…
That is why identical twins do not have the same fingerprints (Revermann & Media, 2015). They may have the same DNA but it is not just DNA that has factors in fingerprints. Identical twins share the…
A fingerprint, in the context of forensics, is an imprint left from the friction ridges of any part of a human hand. Friction ridges are raised portions of the…
Class characteristics pair a characteristic to a whole group, while individual characteristics pair a characteristic to a single person.…
1. What are some of the challenges with fingerprint evidence? What is science doing to make fingerprint analysis better?…
Houck, M. M., & Siegal, J. A. (2010). Fundamentals of Forensic Science (2 ed.). Burlington: Elsevier.…
My name is Joshua Belle and I am an expert in Hair Analysis for the purpose of forensics. I am here to present evidence to the jury. As you all know, several months ago a woman’s dead body was found in the local dump, with several markings which indicate a murder. As you will see, I have found substantial evidence linking the defendant to the crime.…
Tool marks evaluation arose out of the necessity to evaluate marks made at a crime scene without an academic basis. Tool mark identification lacks a scientific foundation. Examiners cannot determine the uniqueness of tool marks based on the comparison method because the lack of quantifiable data. Literature has explained that the NAS report has critiqued the reliability of tool mark examination in court. The subjectivity of the examiner is evident during analysis, which discredits the use of pattern evidence. These subjective observations lead to errors when determining uniqueness. The judicial system must discredit the validity of tool mark examinations until a quantifiable method is established. Researchers need to apply new research to proliferate the acceptance of pattern evidence.…
To efficiently asses , verify and record physical evidence from crime scenes and give detailed verifiable results…
Being accused of something you didn’t do is not only unfair, but also injustice. Although fingerprints are crucial evidence and data of a case, it’s not the only piece of information available. While trying someone for a case, it’s only lawful if the jurors understand the process and basic principles of the technique. However, the system of unskilled jurors can be improved.…
The most common strategy that forensic science experts uses is that fingerprints, bite mark and ballistics for the purpose of determining the real perpetrators of the crime. The reason is that when a person is involved in an offence and touches any of the items around the scene of the offence, the person's fingerprints are reflected on the item. Hence, the forensic team has a strategy of getting the fingerprints from all items found at the scene of crime regardless of the number of people that touched anything around the area. The most unfortunate thing is that the entire fingerprint-collecting process appears to be scientific in nature as it has a process that it is used to obtain the fingerprints. However, the process has over the time proved that the process is not entirely scientific a thing that has made the process to appear pseudoscientific. The reason is that a lot of biases have been noted to be emanating from the fingerprint process. A lot of inconsistencies, contradictory, and claims that the forensic team cannot prove has been…
The search for physical evidence at a crime scene must be done thoroughly and followed by the protocol. How the criminalist will decide to execute the crime-scene investigation depends on the size and the locale of the area, as well as on the actions of the suspect(s) and victim(s) at the scene. It must be considered that physical evidence can be anything, from a massive object to a microscopic trace, however, some evidence are clearly visible but others need to be examined in the laboratory in order to be detected. Physical evidence must be processed in a way so as to prevent any change from happening between the time that was collected on the crime scene and the time it is received by the laboratory. When collecting physical evidence from a scene, any criminalist must be aware of the fact that recovery of one type of evidence can destroy another.…
During the trial, the prosecution relied on the testimony of four individuals, three of which were found to be informants paid by police officers in exchange for their testimony at the trial. The fourth individual was a Charlotte Mecklenburg Police Department Crime Lab technician who erroneously testified as an FBI-trained hair analysis who wrongfully concluded that the hair found at the crime scene was, in fact, that of Timothy Bridges. The defense brought in two expert fingerprint analysts who testified that a bloody handprint found at the crime scene couldn’t possibly be that of Bridges or the victim, Modine Wise. After the conviction, to help cover any investigative wrongdoings that may have occurred in this case police officers illegally discarded the rape kit and hair fiber evidence that was later requested to…
Dror was not trying to challenge fingerprint analysis as a science or its reliability but instead its ability to be influenced by the many elements that can affect those who examine the data. The possibility of falling vulnerable to psychological and cognitive bias exists when evaluating fingerprint data. External influences can cause an expert to make an unintentionally biased decision. Similarly, context, motivation, and emotions can distort perception and judgments causing experts to make mistakes in their evaluations (Ladwig, 2017). People can be corned into a frame of mind that can affect how they view and interpret information. Of course, this occurs on a subconscious level but is significant in evaluating the issues in fingerprint analysis. Therefore, it is important to apply and learn the cognitive and psychological influences in the processing of fingerprint analysis. There are many errors that experts can make in fingerprint analysis whether intentionally or unintentionally. These errors may stem from negligence, incompetence, cognitive and psychological phenomena and even a lack of accountability on the criminal justice system. Even though these vulnerabilities exist, fingerprint analysis is more reliable than eyewitness testimony. In forensic science, much of the data evaluated can be susceptible to human bias and nothing is ever 100% accurate. However, eyewitness misidentification contributes to 75% of wrongful convictions (Schwartz, 2017). It is not always possible for an eyewitness to accurately recollect events from a past crime and provide testimony that is completely reliable. There is an extraneous number of factors that can affect eyewitness memory. Many of these factors are both within and not within the control of the criminal justice system but highly affect a witness’s testimony. To conclude, both fingerprint analysis and eyewitness memory can be reliable sources but are never 100% dependable. This can be seen by all the…
The current methods of fingerprinting that involve subjective comparison and matching of fingerprinting has led to disapproval of the method. Extensive testing has shown that the results of fingerprint testing are not valid (Schmalleger, 2011). Fingerprint matches are now being done by experts, those fingerprints that have been previously been examined to make identification of suspects were presented to the same experts in a different context and the results were different. Similarly, DNA evidence for identification of criminals has been marred by several problems. Surreptitious DNA collecting, presentation of partial DNA profiles, and fake DNA evidence; cast doubts on the DNA evidence presented in courts (Schmalleger, 2011).…